4 ms·

My Visa Debit card was suspended because of Digital Ocean

3 points by obilgic 14y ago

Hi hackers, Digital ocean now requires you add a credit card to activate your account and they make a test transaction ($1.23) to verify it. A day later, I got a call from my bank telling me that my cc is suspended to protect me against credit card fraud, and they wanted me to verify that transaction. I was not able to use my cc for 2 days. I don't know what triggered their protection system, or which gateway they use to make these transactions, but just wanted to let you guys know.

dangrossman 14y ago
Most likely, this has nothing to do with Digital Ocean. Saying it's because of them is misleading and libelous. Credit card issuers all have risk management systems that flag transactions for review like this. It could be something like distance between you and the merchant, time of day you made the charge, or some other change in your buying patterns. Having to call and verify a transaction to release the hold on the card takes just a minute and happens tens of thousands of times a day. I've never owned a credit card that I didn't have to do that with at least once, and it was never the merchant's fault or anything they had control over. It's also misleading to say your card was suspended when it was merely temporarily locked until you called.
- obilgic 14y ago
  Well, It does not change the fact that my cc was suspended because of that transaction. And I am not saying it's DO's fault. Though for me, this is an indication of trust issue between payment gateway and bank. Edit: I am sure that DO's transaction fits perfectly in my spending patterns.
  - dangrossman 14y ago
    The primary purpose of these systems is to detect when a card has been stolen before you do, so that the bank (and you) can avoid the costly and time-consuming chargeback process, and you can avoid temporarily being out the funds the thief used. If they believe something about the transaction or series of transactions might indicate that your card is being used by someone other than yourself, then they flag it. It doesn't indicate anything about trust of the merchant or their gateway. If you live in New Jersey, a purchase at Wal-Mart in Idaho will probably trigger a review. That's because the card issuer doesn't trust that the card is in your hands. It does not indicate, in any way, that they don't trust Wal-Mart or Wal-Mart's payment gateway. There would have been nothing Wal-Mart could do to avoid triggering that hold. To then go and warn people not to shop at Wal-Mart because it'll get your credit card suspended would be, well, unhelpful to say the least. I doubt your bank knows what internet gateway the merchant uses at all, so that can't even be part of the equation. The bank is far separated from that during an authorization transaction: Merchant submits transaction: -> Payment gateway, i.e. authnet, paypal pro -> Front-end network, i.e. global payments east, tsys -> Back-end network, i.e. first data omaha, fnbo -> Association network, i.e. visa, mastercard -> Card issuer

3 points by obilgic 14y ago

dangrossman 14y ago

Most likely, this has nothing to do with Digital Ocean. Saying it's because of them is misleading and libelous. Credit card issuers all have risk management systems that flag transactions for review like this. It could be something like distance between you and the merchant, time of day you made the charge, or some other change in your buying patterns. Having to call and verify a transaction to release the hold on the card takes just a minute and happens tens of thousands of times a day. I've never owned a credit card that I didn't have to do that with at least once, and it was never the merchant's fault or anything they had control over. It's also misleading to say your card was suspended when it was merely temporarily locked until you called.

obilgic 14y ago
Well, It does not change the fact that my cc was suspended because of that transaction. And I am not saying it's DO's fault. Though for me, this is an indication of trust issue between payment gateway and bank. Edit: I am sure that DO's transaction fits perfectly in my spending patterns.
- dangrossman 14y ago
  The primary purpose of these systems is to detect when a card has been stolen before you do, so that the bank (and you) can avoid the costly and time-consuming chargeback process, and you can avoid temporarily being out the funds the thief used. If they believe something about the transaction or series of transactions might indicate that your card is being used by someone other than yourself, then they flag it. It doesn't indicate anything about trust of the merchant or their gateway. If you live in New Jersey, a purchase at Wal-Mart in Idaho will probably trigger a review. That's because the card issuer doesn't trust that the card is in your hands. It does not indicate, in any way, that they don't trust Wal-Mart or Wal-Mart's payment gateway. There would have been nothing Wal-Mart could do to avoid triggering that hold. To then go and warn people not to shop at Wal-Mart because it'll get your credit card suspended would be, well, unhelpful to say the least. I doubt your bank knows what internet gateway the merchant uses at all, so that can't even be part of the equation. The bank is far separated from that during an authorization transaction: Merchant submits transaction: -> Payment gateway, i.e. authnet, paypal pro -> Front-end network, i.e. global payments east, tsys -> Back-end network, i.e. first data omaha, fnbo -> Association network, i.e. visa, mastercard -> Card issuer