Android App Lets You Steal Contactless Credit Card Data

mask.of.sanity writes "An Android application capable of siphoning credit card data from contactless bank cards has appeared on the Google Play store. The app was developed by a security penetration tester for research purposes and will steal card numbers and expiry dates, along with transactions and merchant IDs. It requires a near field device capable phone, or accessory."

Comments

Anyone surprised?

[dyingtolive]

Really. Broadcast data can be intercepted by anyone with the ability to receive?

Re:Anyone surprised?

[Inda]

I'm not the AC.

Without the Card Security Code (CSC) on the back, all that information would be useless. The CSC is not stored digitally on the card.

Cloning wouldn't work either. My Chip 'n PIN would stop that.

Tard.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[oPless]

Not entirely true.

Not all merchants in the world have Chip+Pin (which is terribly broken anyhow) and CSC is not taken by all merchants in the world either.

Card numbers and expiry dates are all you need.

Yes, outside Australia, the UK and (I think) the EU the uptake of CSC and Chip and Pin is rather low.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[dyingtolive]

Okay, you couldn't use it for online purchases, but at a brief glance, you can get magnetic card encoders for 150+ USD. Not sure about whatever tech they use for the contactless style ones, but here's what I'm thinking:

Step 1: Steal contactless CC data.
Step 2: Burn semi-realistic magnetic card with CC data. Emboss the number on the front. 99% of all retail employees will not look twice at the card.
Step 3: Profit.

You don't need the security code for purchases made in person, and if you're doing this in person, you can probably speculate what the zip code is for the few places that even ask for that. Granted, this requires making purchases in person, so you're subject to video surveilance for anyone who REALLY wants to come after you, but since you can repeat this process, it's essentially a use one, throwaway kind of thing.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[dyingtolive]

The problem with that is that you have no guarantee they do, short of getting one of these cards and doing this yourself to see just how the data is encoded.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[Thanshin]

Yes. Pleasantly surprised.

It proves that the Android app store is not strongly censored.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[kelemvor4]

Yes, outside Australia, the UK and (I think) the EU the uptake of CSC and Chip and Pin is rather low.

As are nfc capable phones.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[AuMatar]

I received a new credit card about two year ago, my old one expired. 3 months ago, a website denied my card. After a few double checks, I found out the problem. The new card had the same number, but a different code. The code I had entered was th one from the old card, 2 years old. Every single place until then I had tried it at had accepted the old code, for two years.

Oh, and many places, including most pay by phones and about 1/3-1/2 of websites I go to don't ask for it. So not only do you not need it to bilk someone, but you don't even need the right one most of the time. I'm not even convinced that a random 3 digits wouldn't work for most of them if a 2 year old code did.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[Anonymous Coward]

Better yet send him the article and bill it to his card. Then he will be impressed.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[plate_o_shrimp]

Okay, you couldn't use it for online purchases, but at a brief glance, you can get magnetic card encoders for 150+ USD. Not sure about whatever tech they use for the contactless style ones, but here's what I'm thinking:

Step 1: Steal contactless CC data.

Step 2: Burn semi-realistic magnetic card with CC data. Emboss the number on the front. 99% of all retail employees will not look twice at the card.

Step 3: Profit.

You don't need the security code for purchases made in person, and if you're doing this in person, you can probably speculate what the zip code is for the few places that even ask for that. Granted, this requires making purchases in person, so you're subject to video surveilance for anyone who REALLY wants to come after you, but since you can repeat this process, it's essentially a use one, throwaway kind of thing.

Or,
2a: Burn numbers into some other magnetic card (even a customer loyalty card will work, so I'm told). Use cloned card at self-checkout, gas pump, or other unattended POS system. No need to emboss or even disguise the card.
3: Profit!

I know this works, because my CC info has been stolen twice in the last year and used to make cloned cards (the cloned cards were used at a brick-and-mortar store which is how I know the card was physically cloned). The first time was February, the second time was yesterday. Still don't know where the breach is occurring. I don't shop anywhere sketchy....

Granted the numbers were probably not stolen via the mechanism this story is about, but once you have the numbers the procedure is the same.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[Joce640k]

Here in Spain (and rest of Europe?) all physical stores require a PIN when you pay with plastic. Most online stores send a six digit code to my mobile phone which I have to enter on the web site to authorize the transaction.

Even if you find my card in the street it won't help you much. You need my PIN and/or cellphone too.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[L4t3r4lu5]

Are contactless cards shipped in Faraday cage envelopes? If not, can the card numbers be lifted before the card reaches the recipient?

Re:Anyone surprised?

[petermgreen]

The criminals don't have to use the stolen details in the country they stole them from.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[History's Coming To]

Chip 'n PIN is easy to defeat anyway, steal the card, put a few volts through the chip to fry it, then it will automatically fall back on the signature, which is handily represented on the card so you can learn to copy it in an hour or so. It's almost as if the bank companies can make money from their customer's accounts being insecure.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[cdrguru]

In the US credit card fraud is essentially not prosecuted. Which means you can be in line next to a uniformed police officer and hand the clerk a card that the clerk is told (phone, terminal, cash register system, whatever) to confiscate the card. Nothing happens.

I suppose you could hand the clerk an obviously hand-forged credit card and again, nothing would happen. Video surveilance is meaningless for this because it is a non-prosecuted crime. Which is why there is so much of it.

But the important aspect of this is that it is pretty much a victimless crime today in the US. OK, so I drop my card on the street and some enterprising youth picks it up and decides to renew his five different World of Warcraft accounts. My credit card company sees this and flags it as fraud. Sorry, no renewals. Oh, Blizzard gets dinged for a chargeback but they have insurance for this or they just write it off. Same thing happens if the card gets used in a store and the person walks out with $1000 flat screen TV. The fraud might not get caught immediately, but it probably does. Even if it doesn't I can dispute the charge and it comes off immediately and is charged back. The merchant is out the TV (probably cost them $500) and the chargeback but again, they certainly have insurance for this or they have no business operating a retail store. The same insurance covers them when someone fakes a slip-and-fall and wants to sue for millions of dollars.

As far as I know, no card holder has ever had to pay for fraudulent use of a credit card or credit card number. Also, as far as I know nobody ever in the US has been charged with any crime using a credit card or credit card number in a fraudulent manner. Heck, I had a card stolen from a relative's house and the police refused to pursue it even when we knew who had the card and they were trying to buy stuff with it.

Couple this with the fact that you can sell credit card info for about $0.50 each today and you can see where this goes. I am not sure if the situation is the same in other countries - clearly with debit cards it is not - but the situation in the US is very much like the justification for bank robbery - you aren't stealing anything except some insurance money. And if insurance companies didn't have to pay out once in a while nobody would buy the insurance. So it is a win-win for everyone.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[History's Coming To]

This is an additional system which allows you to pay small amounts (typically less than $20) without having to insert the card into a machine. This is required because customers and retailers are spending several seconds per transaction inserting cards and typing PINs, which is clearly unacceptable and there is no alternative for small purchases, such as small fixed value tokens in paper or metal form.

I'm not at all surprised it's been cracked, the obvious application is to set up a merchant account with an offshore company and then walk through a crowded place (bar, sporting event) stealing a few dollars from those standing around you. A few hours work should net a decent living and most people won't question a $5 charge in a bar. This has been obvious since the system was introduced.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[cdrguru]

This is clearly not really the case, although you might think it is.

One obvious fallacy is if I (from the US) come in with my PIN-less credit card and want to make a purchase. No PIN exists, so what are they going to do? Telling me to go away is not a winning strategy. So someone comes in with a re-striped card without a PIN and they are going to be able to pay just like I can.

I suspect the store isn't sending the code but the card issuer. Great for validation but it sucks for the folks trying to use stolen credit card information.

You see, in the US the card holder, the card issuer and the card organization (VISA or MasterCard) don't care about fraud. For everyone but the merchant it is meaningless and the merchant just has insurance to cover their losses due to fraud. So it is important for things to be as easy as possible for people getting stuff with stolen credit card information. Well, I guess you would need to call it "borrowed" because they really haven't stolen anything - just made a copy.

And nobody is ever prosecuted for this sort of stuff, unless you do something wild and crazy with a million credit card numbers.

I do not see this situation changing, ever. Why would it? It doesn't really affect anyone except the cardholder who has to get a new card with a different number. Yes, some people get away with buying stuff that nobody ever pays for, but the merchant is covered by insurance so they lose nothing. Certainly the insurance companies don't want it to change because then nobody would buy the insurance.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[Ariven]

Do you check all atms, gas pumps, etc that you use for card skimmers? http://krebsonsecurity.com/all-about-skimmers/ , http://www.thelocal.de/national/20110818-37041.html and http://boston.cbslocal.com/2011/11/17/atm-skimming-device-found-at-eastern-bank-in-taunton/

They are getting pretty good at making realistic ones. And in some cases have gotten them inside gas pumps.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[MrAngryForNoReason]

Chip and pin is ridiculously easy to defeat.

Now all they need is an RFID reader

Chip and pin has nothing to do with near field devices or RFID. The chip and pin system uses an exposed chip on the surface of the card. This chip is read by a chip and pin reader when the card is inserted. The user must then input their pin. You can't read them at a distance, the exposed chip needs to be in contact with the reader circuitry. This article isn't about chip and pin it is about near field devices used for contact-less payments.

they can pick up every fucking card in your wallet from 6-10 feet away

The near field communication devices used for contact-less payments have a range of about 4cm. I guess if you slapped someone on their ass you might be able to get a read on a card in their back pocket but reading them from 6 feet away is fantasy.

have your pin with a camera that could be set up with a good zoom up to 100ft away

I don't know how you type your pin in but ATMs are designed so that the body of the user blocks line of sight to the keypad. Most people also cover the pad with their other hand as they type in their pin to stop anyone in the queue from seeing. If you choose to expose your pin by standing right to the side of the ATM and not covering the pad then that is hardly a failure of the technology.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[MrAngryForNoReason]

Chip 'n PIN is easy to defeat anyway, steal the card, put a few volts through the chip to fry it, then it will automatically fall back on the signature, which is handily represented on the card so you can learn to copy it in an hour or so.

I don't know where you are posting from but certainly in the UK most retailers will refuse a card if the chip doesn't work. If they choose to accept a signature then according to the terms of their contract with Visa/Mastercard they take full liability for the transaction. Meaning that if it is deemed to be fraudulent the money comes out of the retailers pocket rather than from the credit card company. The vast majority of retailers don't want to assume that risk, so they don't accept signature authorised payments.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[MrAngryForNoReason]

Are contactless cards shipped in Faraday cage envelopes? If not, can the card numbers be lifted before the card reaches the recipient?

I don't know about elsewhere but in the UK credit cards can't be used until they have been activated either online or over the phone. Not sure if you could skim the card and then wait until the card was activated to use the details but I am fairly sure that NFC connections are a one off deal, you can't store the information and use it over and over again.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[spectral]

RFID cards are pretty insecure, since there's no requirement that the user do anything before you can steal the data. I don't even know why they bothered with them. Once you have multiple cards with identical NFC systems in a physical wallet, you can't even use the excuse that it lets you tap your wallet without taking out the card. Most people have more than one credit card.

NFC in phones is neat. You don't have to use it for wallet-like stuff, you can use it for things that previously people would use IrDA (infrared) for: moving contacts, etc. It's only on when your screen is on, their antennas are pretty awful so they really only work rather close, and every thing I've seen that reads from the phone has an action the user of the phone has to take (i.e. google wallet: you have to enter a pin, android beam you have to 'tap to beam' from the source phone, etc.) NFC in phones isn't scary, but yes it can be disabled easily if you'd rather not have the rather minimal battery drain.

Electronic wallets will be nice, because it will hopefully let you get rid of all of those 'loyalty' cards: http://tomfishburne.com/2012/01/loyalty.html

Using credit cards, *if you have the money to do so and pay it off every month* is a no-brainer. Get a rewards card and an interest-bearing checking account, and you get some more interest collected in the checking account until the credit card bill is paid, and the rewards from the credit card, even at 2%, are rather nice. Plus usually credit cards have other perks (if someone steals my wallet, I'm not responsible for the charges. I am out all of the cash they just stole though), often there's complimentary travel insurance, etc.

Now, credit cards charge fees to the merchants, so using them at stores you really like, or smaller chains might not be a 'nice' thing to do. But at large chains which have likely 1: negotiated lower fees and 2: have such a high percentage of people paying with cards that they already have adjusted their pricing of goods to accommodate for the likelihood of someone paying with a card, I don't feel guilty at all.

So in conclusion:
RFID (NFC) physical credit cards (without any second factor): dumb
Credit cards vs. cash: credit cards all the way.
Actually carrying a balance on credit cards: exceedingly dumb
Different mentality for cash vs. credit card: well, just know that it exists and intentionally go against that behavior, if you like. I'm very lucky to have a job and to not live paycheck to paycheck, so I can afford to have the 'credit card mentality' of comparing benefits before comparing price.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[Lev13than]

And there needs to be more uproar about this. Chip and pin is ridiculously easy to defeat. They used to steal data from the mag strips and get your pin before the banks made ATMs that were resistant to the type of tampering required to get an additional mag stripe reader into them.

Now all they need is an RFID reader and a camera set an an ATM anywhere and they can pick up every fucking card in your wallet from 6-10 feet away plus have your pin with a camera that could be set up with a good zoom up to 100ft away. You can literally throw an RFID reader into the plastic trash can with a wireless transmitter on it and get every single card that passes the atm that day, then have the evidence (the RFID reader) destroyed for you because the banks incinerate their garbage.

Pretty much everything in your post is wrong.

PIN plus RFID interception = SFA. With an EMV-compliant transaction the message is encrypted and the key can't be pulled off the card. EMV encryption has not been broken, and that's not for lack of effort. You could take the entire EMV message and post it on the Internet with your PIN, and nobody would be able to do anything with it.

Plus, very few fraudsters use pinhole cameras any more - it's generally done with tampered PIN pads.

Older contactless cards emulate a mag stripe transaction, but if the bank is too stupid to catch someone putting the contactless info on a mag stripe then it's their own fault. The message here is that the US needs to get its act together and get on with the EMV conversion.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[jjhall]

There is so much wrong with that comment that I don't even know where to start...

First of all, most retailers do not have "insurance" that covers fraud. Yes accidental liability insurance for legit (or less than legit) accidents. As far as merchandise goes they simply "write off" any loss of products in whatever form (shoplifting, credit card fraud, bad checks, damaged, etc.) in the retail industry we call this "shrink." In that aspect you are correct. Insurance is a gambling game, the insurance company is betting they'll pay out less than the insured has in claims. Something like shrink, which is all but guaranteed to happen, is not something an insurance company is going to be offering. They may have some policies on individual high-ticket items in some cases, but I don't know of any "umbrella" shrink insurance available.

Where you really go astray is in saying this "write off" is a "victimless" crime. Let's take your example of walking into a store and buying a $1000 TV with a stolen card. Right off the bat, the merchant will pay somewhere in the 1-3% range to take that card, depending on its card processing volume, card brand and type and other factors. Let's just say 2% to make it easy and call it $20. Anywhere from 1-90 days later (more in some cases) the merchant receives a chargeback request from the card processor, saying the cardholder is disputing the charge. Merchant sends all required information, but since the cardholder wasn't actually the one using the card, the dispute is successful. Merchant now has $1000 removed from their account, along with a $25 chargeback fee. They've now spent $45 out of pocket, plus they're out the merchandise which probably cost them closer to $800 (electronics themselves don't have that high of a markup rate, unlike accessories like cables.) All said and done the merchant lost $845 tangible costs, plus intangible costs like the employee time required to stock that item on the shelves, the cashier's time to run that transaction, etc. Where the retailer would have made $200 on the item, they now have to sell 5 of them to make up for the one lost item and have a little profit.

Now do you think the merchant is just going to accept that loss and move on? Of course not, they have sales numbers and profit margins they expect to maintain. If they have no control over whether that item left, which at the time of the sale they had a card approval and no reason to suspect otherwise, what can they control? They can control the price they charge for all of their items. Retailers expect to have a certain percentage of shrink, so that percentage of profit is added back into every item they sell in the form of higher prices. When shrink goes up over time, retail prices go up accordingly. If the retail market won't support higher prices, then costs must be cut by means of reduced personnel and other means, or they close their doors completely.

What this means in the end is that you and I, along with every other honest customer, are the victims. Because of this credit card fraud, we pay higher prices and deal with reduced service levels at the stores. Even if there is a shrink insurance that some retailers may have, the money to pay for the premiums and deductibles would be passed down to us in the same way.

Enforcement for any retail fraud, including shoplifting, seems to take a back burner for police. Unless the retailer has the person detained (which can be a whole new can of worms) police are very unlikely to pursue the case, even if the retailer has positive identification and video of the person leaving the establishment with the merchandise. Even if they do, prosecution is likely to plea it down to a lesser charge so the person gets a slap on the wrist and is free to go do it again, learning from the mistake of getting caught. Credit card fraud is even worse because it involves coordinating with out-of-state organizations such as the card processor, the actual cardholder if it wasn't a local theft of the card itself, etc.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[sjames]

That insurance is not free. Businesses pay for it and pass the costs on to the consumer. Because of the way merchant agreements are done, the costs are even passed on to cash only customers so that you get dinged for the bank's laxity even if you do not have and do not want a relationship with the bank.

Re:Anyone surprised?

[tehcyder]

Also, as far as I know nobody ever in the US has been charged with any crime using a credit card or credit card number in a fraudulent manner.

I might be missing the point here, but doing a quick google search on "us credit card fraud convictions" would suggest otherwise.

It was only a matter of time

[Quick Reply]

I mean really, how idiotic do these companies need to be to make a system where the full Credit Card information is TRANSMITTED over the air with no authentication. Even a token would be more acceptable.

The Credit Card system is quite happy to take a loss on all the money they have to pay back with protection guarantees when consumers get scammed, instead of actually tackling the problem by inventing a SECURE SYSTEM that is impervious to skimming methods.

This app does not add any additional functionality that scammers don't already have, but a good highlight of how damn simple it is to do, while Mastercard/Visa and the financial institutions who use them do nothing.

Re:It was only a matter of time

[Shoten]

There is authentication, it's just not done by a computer. Do you hand your credit cards out to people at random? Pass them around in a club for everyone to play with, regardless of whether you know them or not? Of course not...and why not? Because the simple act of doing so authorizes them to access the information on the card. Looking at it will give them your name on the card, the number, expiry date and CVV number on the back. With a $40 device, they can get the read direct off the magnetic strip as well (which is the exact same vulnerability as this). So I really don't see what the big deal is here. It's just skimming, using a new kind of reader.

Re:It was only a matter of time

[forand]

I think you have one major flaw with your conclusions: Credit Card processing companies have absolutely no reason to make their systems secure if there are any costs associated with it. The main reason for this is that they pass all the liability onto the retailer. Their goal is the provide the most convenient method to pay a bill on the part of the card holder. Until there is a disruption in this market they will continue to ignore security and pass the costs onto the retailer.

Re:It was only a matter of time

[AuMatar]

It's the ease with which it's done, and the fact that physical security is no longer enough. If the card isn't NFC capable, you have to physically hand the card to someone. With an NFC reader, bumping up against them in a crowded club/street may be enough. I can protect against handing my card to people who don't have a legit reason for it, and I can prevent it leaving my sight when not at home. I'm not capable of preventing anyone who wants to from brushing against me. So yes, this is a big deal.

Re:It was only a matter of time

[Joce640k]

You contradict yourself.

It's skimming while the card is still in your pocket. It's exactly the same as handing your card to random people for them to play with.

Re:It was only a matter of time

[Joce640k]

It is a token of sorts, the CVV code is one-time use

Is that why they print it permanently on the card?

Re:It was only a matter of time

[MrAngryForNoReason]

Nonetheless, the credit-card companies want them to pay for a quarterly "network penetration test" on their website, and to provide detailed technical information on the website set-up. Since their web-site is hosted by a big ISP, they have no access to the necessary technical info, and the ISP doesn't really want network penetration tests pounding on their infrastructure all the time. This is a mess.

It is called PCI-DSS Compliance and it has been standard practice for years. If you don't store any credit card details then the compliance process is relatively straight forward, it takes a couple of hours and only has to be done once. The security scans are to verify that the web server is secure. If you use a web host that is already PCI compliant then the scan is just a formality.

On the other hand if you choose to store credit card details on your server, which there is no valid reason to do then it does becomes much more complicated. You also open yourself up to huge liability and a PR nightmare if you ever have a security breach and those credit card details are stolen.

Either use a third party processor and pass the credit card details straight on to them, or if you want your customers to be able to re-order without having to put in their credit card details again then use a token system. There is no reason to store the card details yourself even for a short period of time. Why doesn't the retailer you work with just store a transaction id to show the transaction has completed successfully?

Re:Funny...

[Stavr0]

Nope. Contact-less is a US thing. Europe uses chip and PIN.

Re:Disaster waiting to happen

[oPless]

So I can buy an NFC reader for $60ish and connect it to my computer and read the cards that way instead?

The problem is with the protocol, not the hardware.

Hate broadcasting CC

[AwesomeMcgee]

I am so mad that every one of my CC's/Debit cards that has expired has been replaced by the banks with ones that do this broadcasting shit. Has anyone been able to get them to replace with one that doesn't do this shit? There's absolutely no reason I would want my CC to broadcast its info for devices to read, and swiping the thing is just as easy as passing it over an NFC device.

Or perhaps can anyone name a national bank who has allowed them to get a debit card that doesn't do this?

Re:Hate broadcasting CC

[fsulawndart]

You could always just drill a hole through the chip. That's what I do.

Test this

[SmallFurryCreature]

Because I have had to implement credit card payments where the field was marked as required but never checked or stored anywhere. So, if you didn't fill it in or put in a random value, it worked perfectly fine and this was on sites doing millions in transactions per year.

There is also nothing in the contracts with processors that this is required, it is recommended but not required.

A lot of web companies are terribly afraid to turn away any customer because they might have to think for a second while making a purchase.

Re:Test this

[SJHillman]

I've had a few cases where a card went through even though I thought I made have typoed it, but wasn't sure. However, I have had more than a few cases where it was rected because I put in the wrong code.

I confirm this in another response

[SmallFurryCreature]

I can vow that this is true, have had to implement it like this myself. It is often marked as required but never actually checked.

Three reasons, the web master is afraid of putting up any hurdles to a purchase.

During testing, the CVC check is often disabled, so its proper functioning can only be tested on a live account.

And lastly not every card has it and so the idea exists with web shop owners that if they enforce it, they might loose X% of customers.

IF you happily filled in your number correctly for years, that is no proof it was ever checked. Welcome to the online purchasing!

That's Unpossible

[Anonymous Coward]

The NFC card proponents and credit card companies said that this could not happen.

They said that the data was encrypted and virtually impervious to interception.

They said we could trust them.

They said that the people saying otherwise were clueless Chicken Littles.

Obviously this app is the product of highly sophisticated terrorists, or possibly an enemy state. /s

This is (partly) BS!

[Anonymous Coward]

I have an NFC-enabled Android smartphone and tried out this app (and several others with similar claims).

They simply do not work as advertised. Most cards I tried use encryption and the app wasn't able to break it (as a matter of fact it didn't even try...).

All that these apps can do consistently is detect if there is some kind of RFID chip nearby (as in "less than 10 cm away from the phone").
Some can read part of the information stored. But none of them could read the hidden data on any of the cards I tried that had encryption.

As for playing the info back, the success rate even with unencrypted cards (like for instance my company's door sensors) is quite low.

So don't panic. It's not nearly as bad as the summary and article (and most comments to TFA) imply.