Della's street

[BT]

Della's street   [Mark Steyn]


I mentioned earlier that "Della Ware" of "12345 No Way" had managed to make a campaign donation to the fraud-friendly Obama website but not to the McCain site, and that the Obama money was whisked out of her account and into Barack's swollen coffers moments later. "Della" - real name Erika - emailed The New York Times and managed to persuade them to cover the story, if only on their blog. We'll see if the news is fit to print tomorrow morning. The headline is unusually robust - "Obama's Online Site Accepts More Fakes" - although the story continues:

To be fair to the Obama campaign, officials there have said much of their checking for fraud occurs after the transactions have already occurred. When they find something wrong, they then refund the amount.

If they'd really wanted "to be fair", the Times would have pointed out that, in order to accept donations from "Della Ware" and "Saddam Hussein" et al, the Obama website had, intentionally, to disable all the default security settings on their credit-card processing. I took a look at the inner sanctum of my (alas, far more modest) online retail operation this afternoon and, in order to permit fraud as easy as that which the Obama campaign is facilitating, you have to uncheck every single box on the AVS system, each one of which makes it very explicit just what you're doing - ie, accepting transactions with no "billing address", no "street address" match, no "zip code" match, with a bank "of non-US origin" (I've got nothing against those, but a US campaign fundraiser surely should be wary), etc. When you've disabled the whole lot one step at a time, then you've got a system tailor-made for fake names and bogus addresses.

So the Times seems to have missed the point - which is that this cannot be an unfortunate accidental side-effect of the unprecedented tsunami of enthusiasm for Barack the Spreader, but has to be something far more calculated. As Jim notes over in Geraghtistan:

The press has been telling us about Obama's amazing online donations for more than a year now. There is absolutely no excuse for not digging into this story.

[UPDATE: A reader adds:

The New York Times said:

?To be fair to the Obama campaign, officials there have said much of their checking for fraud occurs after the transactions have already occurred. When they find something wrong, they then refund the amount.?

So how much do you think they make in the float?  On $5 or $10 not much, but add it all up, what do they make in interest by keeping $10 millions in bad money for a month?  It must be nice to be able to rent money for such a cheap rate.

Indeed. Who says there's a credit crunch? Not at Obama Central.]

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTI5OTdiZWI1YmZkNDViMmQzYWE2ZDIyMTBlMDhjYjQ=

[Plane]

What happens if they have spent more than they have in actual money?

[hnumpah]

I mentioned earlier that "Della Ware" of "12345 No Way"...

Della is, I believe, a perfectly legitimate female first name. Ware is a legitimate surname. I used to live at 12354; down the street and across the road from us was 12345. And there is a No Road right here in Jacksonville; I shoot at the gun club there.

...the Obama website had, intentionally, to disable all the default security settings on their credit-card processing...

Presuming they use the same software the writer does.

I'm glad there's only a week of this crap left.

No, wait - then we'll  have the endless challenges.

Kill me now.

[Amianthus]

It's interesting that the McCain site refused her information...

The question really is not whether that name and address are possible, but whether or not the name and address match the CC used to donate. Apparently, McCain's site does those checks and Obama's site does not.

[hnumpah]

Is it mandatory to do the checks right away, or is it acceptable to do them in batches? Really, I have no idea. When I worked for a locksmith, we had to run every credit transaction as soon as it was presented. Seems to me you can't get the money until you do so, though you might be able to put a hold on the account for the amount of the transaction; then once you run the card with the incorrect information, you wouldn't get the frozen funds anyway, they would be returned to the account. Are the checks required to be run? If they are getting away with not running them, apparently not.

Wouldn't "Della" - real name Erika - be liable for credit card fraud?

As far as the float, I have seen businesses that also take advantage of this. It used to drive me nuts when I'd order parts, only to be told the vendor refused to send them because the company I worked for wasn't paying their bills until they got their second or third notices - in order to leave the money in their account longer and make more in interest. As far as I know, it's not illegal, nor even unethical, just annoying as hell when you're the one trying to get parts you desperately need.

[Amianthus]

Is it mandatory to do the checks right away, or is it acceptable to do them in batches?

There are two checks. The one for the FEC can be done later, and the money returned at that time (which is what Obama is apparently banking on, interest free loans in those cases).

The one for the CC company is not required if the CCV number from the back of the card is submitted. That is similar to an "electronic signature". If just the number, expiration date, and CCV are submitted, the CC processor will just go ahead with the transaction, even if the name and address info are not submitted. It just that they'll be on the hook for the amount if the transaction is reversed (but they have insurance that covers that anyway, if they can't find the actual culprit).