Harmonic Aftershock

Credit card theft isn’t an online issue.

I’m always a bit, admittedly, taken aback when I hear someone resisting e-commerce for fear of what could happen when they enter their credit card online. My general response usually includes a reminder of the days when carbon imprints used to be made of credit cards for each physical-world transaction.

While there are many clever ways that cyber thieves can steal an individual’s identity online, it’s easy to forget that old fashioned bricks-and-mortar credit card exchanges are as (if not more) risk-fraught.

I was reminded of this while in NYC earlier this week when, starting at around 5am Tuesday morning, my debit card # was being used for purchases I did not make in the suburbs of New York City. While I still physically had my card, somehow someone stole my information. The only two times I used it between when I arrived in NYC and before it was compromised was in a cab ride and when I checked into my hotel Monday evening.

Fortunately I noticed the theft before too many purchases were made (unlike when this also happened to me 7 years ago) – what clued me in was when I saw transactions from Burger King and McDonalds. It’s kind of funny actually as for those that know me well, will understand ;-)

The issue here isn’t a debate of e-commerce vs. “traditional” commerce, it’s about basic credit card safeguards regardless of the channel it’s transacted in. I’m baffled by how my debit card could have been used by someone who didn’t physically possess my card to make “in-store” purchases at a gas station, a grocery store, and two fast food restaurants. But it was…and quite easily at that.

 

LinkedIn: Permission-based stalking exposed.

I recently noticed that LinkedIn updated its who’s viewed my profile feature with enhanced stats. BUT there’s a tradeoff to access them: When you view someone else’s profile, you must allow LinkedIn to show your identity (name, title & company) vs. the standard  “Someone in the ____ function in the ____ industry from ____ Area.”

 
What you get in return by, more or less, “outing” yourself is also the full identities of those who have viewed your profile (who have also given permission) plus some helpful trend-based charts.

I’ve often used Mitch Joel’s phrase of “permission based stalking” to refer to the insights you can get about people (and brands) from the real-time social web.

I admit it, I like seeing exactly who has looked at my profile as it spawns a whole host of questions as to why that individual looked me up – especially depending upon if that person is a business relationship from the past, present, or future.

Given that LinkedIn is a professional community, I am more-or-less “okay” with their transparent & open approach to profile views. It’s most likely linkedIn’s way of increasing networking and communication. But, admittedly, I do think twice, now, before I click over to someone’s profile. It brings the whole concept of the Facebook Poke to a new level -- Just view their profile and you’ve, essentially “poked” them.

[So what if Facebook were to do this, too?]
Just imagine the implications. How many times (admit it) have you looked people up on Facebook out of sheer curiosity? Would you want nothing less than anonymity?  After all, it’s not stalking (even permission-based) if the other person knows who you are ;-)

Some things are best kept private, even in a world where, technically, there is no longer privacy.