Talk:Money

Archived discussions Talk:Money/Archive 2004-2012

Can data be intercepted whilst transmitting between ATM and bank?

The following text seemed absurd to me so I removed it. Are there seriously any security concerns that data is intercepted between the machine and the bank by third parties in any country? Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:25, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

In addition, "official" ATMs placed in such areas by major local banks tend to better protect your data as it is transferred between the ATM and your bank's account.

Andrewssi2, am not familiar with text you removed. However:

• Whether usable data can be intercepted between an ATM or store cashier and servicing bank(s) depends greatly on the total design of the system used...including the card. As you may have noticed, several major retailers in the U.S. recently had their credit card data massively compromised. The data was stolen largely due to lack of modern card technology now widely enjoyed in Europe and elsewhere, i.e., embedded chips on cards that immediately (on insertion in a modern/secure card reader or ATM) set up a strongly encrypted session between the card and servicing bank(s). In contrast, cards with only magnetic stripes have their data read "in the clear" by machines with obsolete system software offering little or no security for data captured or transmitted. These same problems can apply to debit/ATM cards without security "chips" used in ATMs without highly-effective security measures built-in...typical in the U.S.
• As mentioned elsewhere in the article, placement of "official" ATMs outside a bank's premises, and in areas without bank surveillance, can still leave them at risk of professional criminal actions to make them unsecure, e.g., by insertion of data skimmers. ATMs need controlled premises, highly public locations and/or secure surveillance that variably make criminal modifications risky.

Sad but true. Regards, Hennejohn (talk) 19:05, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

The text I removed was: In addition, "official" ATMs placed in such areas by major local banks tend to better protect your data as it is transferred between the ATM and your bank's account.

This could give the impression that there are criminal gangs waiting to 'intercept' your financial details between the ATM and the bank. As you suggest, credit card fraud has a wide variety of methods, but none seemingly 'on the wire' between an ATM and the financial institute in question. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:36, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Prepaid cards

The good discussion does not mention if any or all have embedded security chips...a bit of clarification as to if they do and special procedures for adding to their value. Regrets, am unqualified. Hennejohn (talk) 01:31, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Chip cards

I have green card, I can stay in country, is legal no?

Previous discussion referenced/was complemented by a photo example. Don't see one now. Can it be restored? Regrets, don't know how. Regards, Hennejohn (talk) 18:33, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Noticed photo had copyright issues, so deleted reference to it a few days ago. Perhaps someone can find another that's usable. Hennejohn (talk) 02:19, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

commons:category:smart cards may have some candidates, as may the WP articles on w:smart card, w:EMV w:debit card and the like. K7L (talk) 18:17, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

check or cheque

If I don't misunderstand policy, this whole article should be spelled in American English... However, the word "cheque" still crops up quite a few times instead of "check". What should we do about this? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:37, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

My spell chequer says it's fine. K7L (talk) 22:17, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Regardless of policy, I like 'cheque' because it is unambiguous whereas 'check' in ambiguous. If we are to follow policy to the letter then I guess 'check' it should be.... --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Signatures lessening security?

I removed a sentence from the US paragraph:

"Chipped" credit and debit cards will initially generate a sales slip for your signature, a step that somewhat reduces the excellent level of security obtained by "pure" chip/PIN operation.

I fail to see how a signature, in addition to the PIN, would reduce the level of security. Unless the PIN is not needed, the signature should add an independent way to recognize a false transaction. To my understanding skipping the signing is only a way to get the transaction faster. --LPfi (talk) 11:42, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Well I have only ever been asked for PIN or signature, never both. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:41, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

OK. Probably the sentence was just less carefully worded. I'll put it back in modified form. --LPfi (talk) 19:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert. Mr. "Schuster" is right about the U.S. still lagging in security measures. Merchant's card readers here don't ask for the PIN; instead, they just print a sales slip for signature. I continue to be amazed at how often you all improve articles. Many thanks, Hennejohn (talk) 21:16, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Too technological?

It seems we have different stands on what is too encyclopedic and what is indeed useful for the traveller, in the case of credit/debit/ATM cards with a "security chip". I, personally, have a desire to understand any technology I rely on, and in this case understanding the technology may help avoiding some rather unusual but still realistic problems.

The most important thing is realising when a card may have been copied or abused. In an area where some ATMs and other devices allow using the magnetic strip of chip cards, making a useful copy of the card is as easy as were there no chip. I suppose those with equipment to copy the card also can read the information to make the copy elsewhere, where the strip can be used, although this requires some more work and international contacts. Thus the chip does not prevent making and using chipless copies. This info was deemed too encyclopedic, as was "they eliminate some of the security issues" [my italics].

I detest statements that make people believe in some magic; talking about "security chips" without some explanation on how (technically) the chip affects security furthers technological helplessness, which is all too common nowadays. The explanation does not need to be long and involved, but saying "master keys never leave the card, and their use without PIN is limited" late in the section is not too much in my not so humble opinion.

I also do think it is important to mention the possibility of unauthorized transactions being hard to deny. There was e.g. an incident of hackers demonstrating modifying a ("stolen") card in such a way that any PIN would make the logs tell the PIN was successfully entered (using a breach in the protocol). It seemed this explained some transactions the banks had refused to treat as abuse. If somebody looses a big amount of money, they should know there may be such problems.

--LPfi (talk) 07:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

The whole section is of very marginal use to the traveller right now, and by the end of the year it will have none. The security issues are the same, whether you use your card across the world, or at your local newsagent. At the moment, there is the need to explain the difference, because some people in the USA may be unused to chip cards. However, that is rapidly changing, and soon 99% of people across the planet will have chipped cards. People should understand the risks associated with their card use. But, if we really want to devote a section to the technicalities of a chip card, and how it works, it should be some section down the bottom of this article. Leading an article on travel money with how a chip card works is all wrong. I'd support a section on 'tips on using a credit card safely to avoid fraud' --Inas (talk) 08:08, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I've just read through the article again, and I tried to give the start a little more structure. I think there are a fair few things in this article that don't rise above the obvious bar. --Inas (talk) 08:47, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

OK. If the risks are the ones people are accustomed to and we do not make an impression of discussing or comparing the security, then not much need to be said. I'll wait and see how the article is developing. --LPfi (talk) 11:39, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I now removed the remaining references to chip card security; if we do not want to have security information, let us not pretend to. I would prefer to have a short discussion pointing the interested reader in the right direction (I suppose that would mean adding only a few sentences), but it should be quite easy to add/reinsert, probably together with other security issues. --LPfi (talk) 23:13, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I think security should be discussed. As well as the why and how of it... Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:38, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

This is nominated for featuring - what remains to be done

I have argued in the discussion of its feature-nomination that this should only go live once it is "settled" and requires only a few edits if any. So what remains there to get this into that state? If I don't misinterpret the debates, there was some disagreement as to the amount of technical and technological detail we should provide... Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I just think in a travel guide we should try and keep the guide primarily pertinent to travel. In the case of Money, this is primarily overseas travel - because if your just travelling from New York to Boston you generally just use Money the way you do at home. I think we need to tease out the information that is actually relevant to the a person travelling. What do you have to consider before leaving home? What additional fees do you have to think about? How do ATMs and point of sale facilities vary in different countries? --Inas (talk) 21:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

The article is far from ready. There is still confusion in the structure, e.g. using the cards, the fees involved and the security trade-offs have separate sections, but some discussion is spread around. Some of it should perhaps go into Before you leave home (why is that section placed as it is?). Should the fees be discussed together with the benefits and drawbacks on different cards? And so on. The confusion is natural during and soon after a rewrite, but should not remain into June.

The disagreement on technical detail is just a disagreement. We may find a compromise or either version could be written well with little effort. Figuring out a good structure and implementing it is much more work. On the other hand, only little new material seems to be needed.

--LPfi (talk) 21:47, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Inas, your example of Boston New York travel would of course not necessitate reading our article, but if someone from e.g. Managua were to go to the Rio San Juan Region (which, for all the talk of how the Rio San Juan is some kind of sacred river, hardly anybody ever does), they would have to know whether ATMs exist there (and of their network) and if not what realistic alternatives there are to bringing a huge wad of cash. And some scams are not run everywhere with the same efficiency; take for instance a doctored ATM in a sketchy location - easy to evade if you are in a city with hundreds of ATMs. But what if you don't trust the one ATM for hundred kilometers in either cardinal direction? But yes, on the whole your point does of course stand. Our focus should be travel and at that long distance travel. But say you take the Acela from New York to Boston and usually take the Metro all around New York yet for some reason don't have a credit card - the obvious question would be: How do I get around Boston without a (my own) car and who will take cash? Due to things mentioned in the article, a rental car would probably not be a good idea, unless you have a credit card. But I don't know whether everybody knows that. Okay I am getting hypothetical, I know. Point is, there appears to be a lot of work still to be done... Let's try and make a bulleted list, shall we? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:06, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Well, I'd say if they want to find out if there is an ATM in a particular place, they will need to look at the local guides.

As start to list would be

• Look at the information that is duplicated, like much of the information on exchange rates, and decide if we should pull this info to the start of the article, because it is applicable to all forms of currency.
• Maybe use a table, or some other structure to compare the benefits of different cards/cash
• Extract security advice advice into a separate section. Think about how much security info can be assumed. Not writing down your PIN would seem obvious to me, and isn't really related to travel.
• Remove the remaining parts of the article that are outdated, or simply not true any more.
• Work out what can be assumed knowledge. We need to tell people that not all ATMs have letters on the buttons, but perhaps not how to key a PIN into an ATM.
• Update the images, so they are more instructional and illustrative. What do different styles of ATM look like close up.

--Inas (talk) 08:28, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

I think it would be good to include some things that should be obvious but are not. If using your card at home, in a safe environment, you can type the numbers carelessly (even read them from a note) without anything bad happening for years, but if you do the same in the wrong location and get robbed, your situation is miserable. Same with most other security advice. A line about checking your banks security advice might cover most of the most obvious things, but those most people do not think of should still be mentioned. --LPfi (talk) 11:05, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Absolutely no problem with this, but I think you'll agree in the article as it was, this advice was placed many times throughout the article. That's why I think extract the basic security tips into a section. That way, people who actually know how to use a credit card and and get money out of an ATM can get the travel advice without reading advice to not write down your PIN five times, which is really true everywhere. --Inas (talk) 08:18, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Fine! Yes, there is probably enough common security issues to be handled in one place for all the cards. Whether the fees should be handled in a common section is less clear, but doing it that way instead of for the specific cards makes a comparison easier. We probably still need a comparison section, but much less detail would be needed there (and most fees and expenses are similar). --LPfi (talk) 10:49, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

As a substantial but less-gifted contributor to this article, I'd like to thank all for making this better organized and readable. Discussions here made many good points. Unfortunately, one appears hoped-for but unlikely, .e., chip cards in the U.S. are not receiving needed support. Very recent articles on Infosec indicate (1) less than 40 percent of U.S. merchants have or plan to have the necessary terminals to use any form of chip card, and (2) almost no chip card banks/issuers have any plan to soon transition to pure chip/PIN cards where no magnetic stripe or signature is involved. We can only hope. Best regards, Hennejohn 00ː06 28 March 2016 (UTC) (Regrets - keyboard suddenly disallows entry of duplicate symbols.)

The whole field is very interesting, and whether chip cards take over in the states or if the whole field will be dominated by phones first is one that many financial institutions and technology companies are betting on. However, because it is all so interesting and speculative, we need to be careful we don't dive down too many rabbit holes, and focus on the parts just relevant for travel. --Inas (talk) 01:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Euronet ATM transactions

Swept in from the pub

Euronet Logo

Wrong map!!! Sorry.

In Italy I encountered ATM's of the brand Euronet, not a European but a US-based company. I tried to get money from it, but was confronted with a fee. Happily I could abort the transaction. My Dutch bank card has the Maestro logo, and in countries that have the Euro as their national currency, banks may not charge costs for getting money from the ATM's. Is the different way of Euronet a reason for adding a warning? A map I found using the search function, suggests that they are active in Italy, Poland and The Netherlands. In The Netherlands I never encountered one, but I have my regular ATM to get money, so maybe they are there but I never noticed. --FredTC (talk) 11:01, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

It may be worth putting a note about this in the Money article and in Europe#ATM section. --Traveler100 (talk) 11:36, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

The language in Europe#ATMs seems to suggest this, although it could be less vague, if somebody knows for sure. The JESC map seems to be about the Junior Eurovision Song Contest, according to description, although I do not know why the Netherlands and Belarus (not Poland) are shown. --LPfi (talk) 12:41, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for the wrong map, it was a result from a search for euronet, but I did not check it well enough. --FredTC (talk) 14:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

I vaguely remember that the thing is that teller machine companies may not discriminate: if getting money from an account in one bank is free, getting money from another EU account must also be. As getting money from your own bank's ATM is usually free, those ATMs are free for all. I do not know how foreign cards and currencies other than the euro are handled. As the Euronet machines probably take fees from everybody, they would be allowed to do so. I do not know whether the warning is explicitly required, but silently taking money from you is hardly allowed. --LPfi (talk) 12:55, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

I guess Euronet has a legal construction that allows it to ask money for the transactions with their ATM's. The may not discriminate is for banks in Europe, so I guess Euronet simply is not a bank and therefore allowed to operate ATM's without the rules that apply to the banks. For people from non-euro countries it is even worse I fear, because the exchange rate is very bad. See here for some experience information. --FredTC (talk) 14:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

It is not only banks. Over here the banks do not run the ATMs (but a company running them). But yes, if you take money from everybody, that is not discriminating (except against the poor, but let's not go into that). --LPfi (talk) 19:58, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

PayPal in emergencies

In the section on emergencies the first bullet is about getting money wired by friends or family – but there is just one sentence on doing this from a bank and the rest is devoted to doing it via PayPal. The text does not explain why you would do that other than that it "can be done online by computer" – that is how everybody (except children and some elderly) handles their bank accounts over here.

I understand the banks are working worse in some parts of the world, so that some non-bank services are needed to get the transfer run smoothly, but it should be clear for what travellers this applies and I suppose other services could be used instead of PayPal. In any case, I think the instructions could be a lot clearer.

(Also the other options have odd focus: why is there a long paragraph on Moneygram, a second one on Western Union and the others – and a third on Zoom. It is not clear how these differ one from another so that they could not all be handled in one paragraph (with caveats and bonuses shortly mentioned where appropriate, perhaps as subbullets).

--LPfi (talk) 09:46, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Bolivar fuerte.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:05, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

PIN code letters

We now say "Choose numbers, as not all ATMs have or accept letters." Do ATMs in any country have a keyboard? I assume it is just the number pad that has letters on it, and what you enter is the corresponding number. If so, you may still use letters for remembering the PIN, given that you remember the logic of the letter-to-digit bounding. Does it start with ABC being 1, 2, 7 or 9? Are there three letters to every digit? Any missing letter? Any other oddness? Not that the number pad might not have digits in ascending or descending order, but rather 789 456 123 or the like, and you should still be able to type correctly. If you are used to letter codes remembering numbers may be hard (especially now, when nobody remembers phone numbers any more). Hm. The explanation seems to easily be a bit convoluted :-) –LPfi (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Funds payable outside the country?

In Money#Carrying or sending money across national borders we say:

If you or one of your travelling party could exchange [the monetary instruments] outside the country for cash, you should declare. This typically does not apply if you are abroad, but not the funds or the party to be paid (e.g. domestic online payment, internationally mailing a cheque both drawn and payable exclusively in your home country, etc.)

Several points make little sense to me.

1. Does "outside the country" mean outside your home country? I'd assume what is relevant is whether they are payable in the country you are entering.
2. "If you are abroad"? You are crossing an international border (the paragraph isn't relevant to domestic travel), so it seems the phrase seems redundant or misleading (it doesn't matter whether the office is before or after the crossing).
3. If you need to declare cheques you are going to mail later (in case they are payable locally) that should be said explicitly. And why would the customs have anything to do with domestic online payment?

The last point should be handled in its own paragraph, not a parenthesis. I see that the section header includes sending money. Such money probably needs to be declared when sent or received, not at border crossing, and we need to tell when that declaration has to be done, not when it doesn't. –LPfi (talk) 07:09, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Empty an account by card?

The article said:

• If card and PIN are compromised, ATMs will dispense currency only in the general locations, dates/times and amount limits you arranged with your bank/credit union before travel.
• If card and PIN are compromised, thieves can promptly empty the entire account, and may gain ability to use or steal other assets by examining account details."

The former is my experience (trying to get money myself). How do you promptly empty an account by card? I assume emptying the card in the latter bullet will be done by means other than ATMs. But aren't single purchased by debit card also limited to specified amounts? Getting access to other assets should not be possible through sales terminals, and online banking requires other codes. So what is this about.

There is also this bullet:

• If a debit card number is lost or stolen, thieves can use it (with a "cloned" card and phony identification) anywhere to buy goods or services less than a certain amount [...].

Can you do anything with just the number? Are there magnetic-stripe debit cards?

I know there are frauds, but I cannot see them done in this way. I did some copy editing of these points, but I am not removing them (or rewriting them as to facts), as there might be something I don't know about this.

–LPfi (talk) 10:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)