3 ms·

> Most of us pay a premium for "security checks" with a bunch of microprinting and other bullshit. That's utterly useless once you push it through a cellphone c

by tdeck 1y ago

> Most of us pay a premium for "security checks" with a bunch of microprinting and other bullshit. That's utterly useless once you push it through a cellphone cam! If I recall correctly, you can order checks from a check printing company with any account and routing number you specify. Walmart sells them, and it was cheaper than getting more from my bank. So even an authentic check with the security features intact doesn't seem worth much. The only real security feature is the signature.

ThrownOffGame 1y ago
Sure, I could order plain "insecure" checks, but those aren't the one I'm depositing by image. My checks are written to others and I've got no idea how they deposit them. I've received checks with watermarks, temp-sensitive ink, you name it, and I almost never walk into a branch anymore. As long as the mobile app works, the image is the negotiable instrument, and I can't change what others give me.
- patch_cable 1y ago
  I think they’re saying anyone could order “secure” checks with your account number on them.
  - ThrownOffGame 1y ago
    That is certainly an attack vector of concern! I've had friends where the attacker just exfiltrated a single check from their own checkbook and cashed it as legitimate somewhere else! It seems that a third-party check printing service could run off checks for the attacker instead. The attacker would need to cover their tracks insofar as payment methods, and then intercept a package which would be mailed to my home address listed on the checks they ordered. That seems elaborate, but doable, if they want a whole stack of legitimate checks. It is possible that there are even disreputable "security check" printers who aren't Walmart, but just counterfeiters in a 1BR, running off bogus checks for anyone who asks? But who needs/wants a whole stack of them, anyway? It only takes one or two. It is so strange, too, that we rarely hear of check fraud in the States. It would seem so easy, so is it widespread or rare?

by tdeck 1y ago

ThrownOffGame 1y ago

Sure, I could order plain "insecure" checks, but those aren't the one I'm depositing by image. My checks are written to others and I've got no idea how they deposit them. I've received checks with watermarks, temp-sensitive ink, you name it, and I almost never walk into a branch anymore. As long as the mobile app works, the image is the negotiable instrument, and I can't change what others give me.

patch_cable 1y ago
I think they’re saying anyone could order “secure” checks with your account number on them.
- ThrownOffGame 1y ago
  That is certainly an attack vector of concern! I've had friends where the attacker just exfiltrated a single check from their own checkbook and cashed it as legitimate somewhere else! It seems that a third-party check printing service could run off checks for the attacker instead. The attacker would need to cover their tracks insofar as payment methods, and then intercept a package which would be mailed to my home address listed on the checks they ordered. That seems elaborate, but doable, if they want a whole stack of legitimate checks. It is possible that there are even disreputable "security check" printers who aren't Walmart, but just counterfeiters in a 1BR, running off bogus checks for anyone who asks? But who needs/wants a whole stack of them, anyway? It only takes one or two. It is so strange, too, that we rarely hear of check fraud in the States. It would seem so easy, so is it widespread or rare?