> the people signing up for them are more often "bad guys" than tech professionals looking for privacy -- and they're signing up with stolen payment information
That's a bold claim. Do you have any evidence of that?
That's a bold claim. Do you have any evidence of that?
If you drink that koolaid, Sounds like you would also believe megaupload was used 'primarily for non infringing use'
However, I don't like drawing conclusions without evidence, and I don't think it should be considered naive to ask for evidence before making up one's mind. In fact, I'd consider it extremely foolish to do otherwise.
When researching the various scoring mechanisms, we generally find that the VPN was generally just used for masking purposes, so we'd see multiple attempts go through using multiple names and addresses.
Also, the chances of getting a stolen card response back from the bank was much higher.
This isn't to say that a VPN means you are a thief. What it does mean, however, is that the risk far outweighs the potential benefits.
Bad guy gets CC details
Uses stolen CC to sign up to VPN
Goes on a shopping spree via the VPN so law enforcement can't trace him
So you're going to see more use of VPNs by fraudsters trying to hide than you are genuine users... hence the ban.
The problem isn't the majority. The problem is just a significant amount. Keep in mind how low the chargeback rates need to be to avoid serious penalties. Also, keep in mind the number of people isn't the issue, but it's the number of fraudulent transactions that occur. One person can attempt many.
It's an attack vector, and one person can cause problem for many, many customers.
The phrase "bold claim" is usually reserved for cases where the claim seems unlikely.
Examples are claims of majority (A majority of people are suffering from sickness A, B, or C), Or claims of superiority (My car is the fastest in the world).
As I see it there are three main customer groups for VPNs; people using it to circumvent copyright protections (either location based or outright theft), tech savvy people who want privacy, and bad guys.
The original said more bad guys than tech savvy people, I assumed that excluded copyright circumventors (the largest group) and you assumed they were included.
So we're left with anecdote and personal opinions to base our decisions on. There's plenty of opinion in this thread - a few anecdotes won't hurt.
Chargebacks are bad for the VPN company. They cost $15 each.
Even if they cost nothing, a high ratio of chargebacks is not in the best interest of the credit card companies, who are at the top of the value chain. So chargebacks are bad for anybody along the chain.