Check fraud and bulletproof ink....

[markh]

Attached is an article from the WSJ Wednesday 11/20/2024. I have included both a link, and attached a pdf of the article if you can't get through.

We Can’t Give Up Paper Checks, and That’s a Gold Mine for Scammers

Suspected fraudsters congregate anonymously on message boards and social media, figuring out which banks to target with altered checks

 

I will summarize the main points:

 

-- Americans apparently write more checks than anywhere else.

-- People have figured out how to steal money, using other people's checks. Doesn't seem that hard to do, can make a good living, and probably tax free.

-- The technique (at least one technique) is to steal checks, wash off the amount and modify to a much larger amount, deposit the modified check, and withdraw cash before anyone figures out what's happening.

 

The article makes no mention of a typical interest in these parts - is there an ink that would prevent the modification. Great question.....

 

https://www.wsj.com/finance/banking/paper-checks-fraud-scam-banks-9e4fb940?st=HiPWYC&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

 

 

 

 

Americans Can’t Quit Paper Checks. It’s Costing Banks Millions in Fraud. - WSJ.pdf

[Mercian]

If I were in a country still using lots of cheques, I would be writing the payee and the amount payable in bulletproof/pigment/iron-gall inks.

 

And signing my cheques in Parker Quink Washable Blue.
Good luck attempting to alter the name of my intended payee, or the amount I'm telling the bank to pay out, without completely erasing the signature!

😁

[rickap]

Noodler's Inks fit the bill. The bulletproof and Wardens inks are the ones to get.

 

   Rick

 

[markh]

39 minutes ago, Mercian said:

If I were in a country still using lots of cheques, I would be writing the payee and the amount payable in bulletproof/pigment/iron-gall inks

 

I guess the real question is who is smarter - your choice of ink (even if the marketing on the label says bulletproof), or the people who want the money.

All of the ink reviews that test fp ink permanence just wash with water. The article says the bad guys have more effective chemicals.

I certainly don't know the answer.....

 

 

[Monophoto]

Interesting subject. Wife and I were in Scotland last year, and had dinner one day with a couple from New Zealand.  I mentioned writing checks, and he said "You guys still do that?".  Got me thinking, so I checked the details: In 2000, wife and I wrote 304 checks.  In 2023, we wrote 29, and the number for 2024 will be lower.  The decline has been driven by convenience although the security issue is out there. 

 

Unfortunately, there are a few businesses who still don't have provisions for convenient on-line payments.  Some (such as taxing agencies) offer to accept credit card payments but only with a hefty service charge, or in the case of our water utility, we would have to physically to to their office to make a payment.

 

I use mostly  waterproof/bulletproof Noodler's inks.  There is a different between waterproof and bulletproof.   As others have noted, sophisticated check washers don't use water, but instead use solvents or lasers.  Most people use ballpoint pens which are reasonably resistant to water, but can be washed using solvents that you can easily purchase at most any hardware store.  Noodler's Bulletproof inks (including Warden series inks) have been tested to resist water, solvents and various laser techniques used by checkwashers.

[welch]

The answer is to use safety checks. All banks offer them. They turn funny colors if someone tries to wash off the writing. 

 

Otherwise, Americans do more and more banking electronically. I haven't written a check in years, although I have a few checks just on the off-chance that a vendor does not accept a credit card or PayPal. 

[inkstainedruth]

Whereas I write checks paying bills all the time.  

I'm less concerned with the possibility of check-washing than I am with hackers getting into my bank account or some credit card company's system.  And when I AM writing checks (usually for paying credit card bills or utility bills or for signing up for something I'm going to) one of the Noodler's bulletproof line of inks, or a pigmented ink like Sailor Souboku.  

I may (if I'm signing the check in person, rather than sticking a check in the mail) also might use an IG ink -- but I've found that those tend not to be all that light-fast when it comes to stuff like addressing envelopes.

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[welch]

44 minutes ago, inkstainedruth said:

Whereas I write checks paying bills all the time.  

I'm less concerned with the possibility of check-washing than I am with hackers getting into my bank account or some credit card company's system.  And when I AM writing checks (usually for paying credit card bills or utility bills or for signing up for something I'm going to) one of the Noodler's bulletproof line of inks, or a pigmented ink like Sailor Souboku.  

I may (if I'm signing the check in person, rather than sticking a check in the mail) also might use an IG ink -- but I've found that those tend not to be all that light-fast when it comes to stuff like addressing envelopes.

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

 

I can't think of a time when hackers got inside a bank's system. The cases we read about have been against non-bank sysrtems, and in nearly all cases, the hackers got names and addresses. At the worst, that might allow a hacker to open a credit card account in your name, but no bank will press you to pay. 

 

Further, if you choose to write a check, say to pay your electric bill, the check goes into the power company's account at some bank, and you are just as at risk of hackers compromising that bank's system. By paying by check, all you have done is add a few days of post office time and a step to your payment process.

 

Over all, just use safety checks.

 

 

 

[inkstainedruth]

3 hours ago, welch said:

 

I can't think of a time when hackers got inside a bank's system. The cases we read about have been against non-bank sysrtems, and in nearly all cases, the hackers got names and addresses. At the worst, that might allow a hacker to open a credit card account in your name, but no bank will press you to pay. 

 

Further, if you choose to write a check, say to pay your electric bill, the check goes into the power company's account at some bank, and you are just as at risk of hackers compromising that bank's system. By paying by check, all you have done is add a few days of post office time and a step to your payment process.

 

Over all, just use safety checks.

 

 

 

The point I was making is that hackers are MUCH more likely to try to get into a credit card system.  Heck, I was reading someone's post on FB earlier that said that he got "friend" requests from TWO people who spoofed the names of people he actually *knows*.  So KNEW they were bogus.  Oh, I should have told him to report them to FB (whether FB will actually DO anything about it, of course, is dubious -- any more than they did when some creepazoid was hitting on me on a business's page and had swiped the avatar image of some guy in Florida AND changed one letter of that guy's last name -- so if you KNEW the guy in Florida and didn't look carefully you could CLEARLY get scammed.  I reported the guy and got told "Oh, he didn't actually say anything "OFFENSIVE...."  And my response was, "So, what you're saying is that identity theft  is *PERFECTLY* OKAY then?  YUCK!"

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth 

[Dillo]

For checks, I use either a ferro gallic ink in a fountain pen or india ink (in a technical pen). They have some resistance to water and solvents. I mark all my post-its in india ink because neither hand sanitizer or acetone can wash it off or cause it to smudge. Ballpoint pen cleans out with alcohol or acetone. That's why these solvents and some others are used by check washers.

[welch]

14 hours ago, inkstainedruth said:

The point I was making is that hackers are MUCH more likely to try to get into a credit card system.  Heck, I was reading someone's post on FB earlier that said that he got "friend" requests from TWO people who spoofed the names of people he actually *knows*.  So KNEW they were bogus.  Oh, I should have told him to report them to FB (whether FB will actually DO anything about it, of course, is dubious -- any more than they did when some creepazoid was hitting on me on a business's page and had swiped the avatar image of some guy in Florida AND changed one letter of that guy's last name -- so if you KNEW the guy in Florida and didn't look carefully you could CLEARLY get scammed.  I reported the guy and got told "Oh, he didn't actually say anything "OFFENSIVE...."  And my response was, "So, what you're saying is that identity theft  is *PERFECTLY* OKAY then?  YUCK!"

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth 

 

Yep. I've seen that on FB. If I already know the person, I ignore the "be my friend" fake person. 

[welch]

13 hours ago, Dillo said:

For checks, I use either a ferro gallic ink in a fountain pen or india ink (in a technical pen). They have some resistance to water and solvents. I mark all my post-its in india ink because neither hand sanitizer or acetone can wash it off or cause it to smudge. Ballpoint pen cleans out with alcohol or acetone. That's why these solvents and some others are used by check washers.

 

If it makes you happy, then go ahead. 

 

My point is that check-washing is no threat when you make your payments on-line, and that mailing a check just adds risk to your payment. In all, a safety-check is less bother than finding an ink that no one can wash off. 

 

Anyone using FPN has a computer and a network connection. It is easy to send a payment from our bank to our vendor, no matter whether it is the electric power company, or a PayPal to an EBay pen-seller. 

 

The WSJ article goes about its research backwards. It claims to have penetrated a dark site where crooks gather to share tips on which banks have checks that need to be attacked. We should be a little suspicious of that: how would a group focus on checks written on any one bank? There are about 1,000 banks in the US. Crooks get at checks by tearing open a mailbox; the article says that crooks selll each othe mailbox keys. How can a crook know which mailbox has checks from their target bank? 

 

The WSJ article skips from chit-chat that it saw on a crook's dark site to general talk -- a claim that we Americans send an average of 30 checks a year. My hunch is that people without internet connections or without computers bulk up the number of check-users. That's a limitation in the spread of internet connections, not an indication that bank security leaves holes for hackers.

[markh]

22 hours ago, welch said:

I can't think of a time when hackers got inside a bank's system. The cases we read about have been against non-bank sysrtems, and in nearly all cases, the hackers got names and addresses

 

We have accounts (checking, savings) at Patelco, a large credit union. About 6 months ago some type of hack shut their systems down. Public facts are somewhat limited, but I don't know of anyone whose accounts were compromised, or any money stolen. But for about 2 weeks, the time it took them to rebuild their systems, everyone's accounts were closed. They made some limited availability for people to get cash.

 

Nothing to do (that I know of) with washing checks, except to say that people who would rather steal than work have as much time, energy, and smarts as everyone else. Nothing is absolutely safe, and everyone needs to exercise care and diligence full time.

 

It's sad that that the world is that way, but it is.

 

 

[Dillo]

5 hours ago, welch said:

 

If it makes you happy, then go ahead. 

 

This is not a "make you happy" situation.

 

I don't use checks because I'm happy to use them. There are a lot of backwards things in the United States and this is one of them. Some places do not take electronic deposit or take other means of payment, so I have use them in those cases. If I can pay in some other way without being levied additional fees, I would do so.