Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Are Signature Pads Dangerous to Privacy?

Posted by Cliff on from the stuff-to-think-about dept.

WildHunter asks: "While making a foray into a local retailer today I paid using a credit card and was asked to sign a paper receipt on top of a digital pad. Being cautious I asked what it was for and I was assured that it was 'fully secure and safe to use'. Being a typical paranoid Slashdotter I offered to sign off of the pad but refused to sign on the pad. Was I over reacting or can someone back up my paranoia with some facts?" Think about it, some deceitful vendor has one of these, sells you something, gets your signature, and can then ring up loads of charges on your card using a digital copy of said signature over, and over, and over... you get the idea. Do the current crop of signature pads prevent against this and other similar kind of deceit?

4 of 85 comments (clear)

  1. I doubt there's more of an opportunity by leviramsey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...than the physical signatures.

    Think about it. All the retailer gets is a digital copy of your signature. Now, they could conceivably sign your name to contracts with them and such. But in order to actually sign your name, the person with the copy of your signature would have to actually write it out with a pen. Now, even the most braindead clerk would get suspicious if you had to use a stencil to sign the credit card receipt.

    Yes, they could learn your signature from digitial printout, and if they're adept enough at forging, could do it that way. But they could do exactly the smae thing with old fashioned receipts (making copies of the receipt if necessary).

    In addition the credit card companies do maintain large anti-fraud departments to investigate this sort of thing (as under US law, you'd only be liable for up to $50 of the purchases the retailer would make without your actual signature; it he buys a brand new rig from AlienWare with your signature, several grand will be eaten by AlienWare (which doesn't help their relationship with the CC) or it gets eaten by the CC. Either way, they see a pattern of people who have transactions disallowed, all of whom made purchases at the same store, and the retailer gets in big trouble.

    There are more important risks with CC's.

    1. Re:I doubt there's more of an opportunity by rehannan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...as under US law, you'd only be liable for up to $50 of the purchases...

      Many cards now have $0 liability (such as my Citibank card). Anyone with the standard $50 liability may want to consider getting a new credit card.

  2. Usual paranoia by blankmange · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Yeah - I don't like giving out my credit card info to questionable people behind the register either, but what are you going to do? Start using cash in all of your transactions?

    Digital signatures can be used by less-than-ethical sods just like your credit card number by the same people. Make sure your credit card company has fraud protection and be done with it....

    This is similar to the people who will willing give their credit card to a person behind the counter but refuse to shop online because 'it isn't secure enough'..... Get over the paranoia and get on with your life... it is too damn short to take up your time with menial crap like this....
    --
    ...we are from the government - we are here to help...
  3. Re:Amen by bsane · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My guess is that they are just trying to avoid paper records. They probably want/need a signature on file to cover their ass, but they don't actually want thousands of small slips of paper. If I had to deal with auditing reciepts I'd probably kill to have it all digitized.