Which issuers allow you to use your mobile wallet when your card is locked?

[crystal626]

---

@Varsity_Lu wrote:

@crystal626 

I'm not suggesting anything and I believe you when you say it's not a person with access to the safe. It just seems weird to me. I highly doubt Children's Place would allow a transaction to go through without a CVV. It seems like it would have to be an inside job rather than brute force bot attack. But I'm not an expert.

Would your issuer be able to give you a new card number? Wouldn't that solve this particular card problem? Are you having this problem on more than one card?

---

I've had to replace 4 or 5 cards in the past few years. It's much less of a headache if I'm getting an email about a declined transaction I didn't authorize rather than having a dollar amount charged to the card and then having to jump through the hoops with the issuer. Some of them, like Synchrony, make you file police reports. It's all just very annoying and I would rather have it not be a possibility at all.

[crystal626]

---

@TG101 wrote:

---

@Varsity_Lu wrote:

Capital One lets you create virtual numbers. 

---

Citi does too, and you're able to set spending limits on them and they can be set to expire as early as a month away. 

---

Citi VCCs are locked when the card is locked and again don't address the main point of wanting to prevent fraud on the actual card. 

[UncleB]

---

@TG101 wrote:

---

@Varsity_Lu wrote:

Capital One lets you create virtual numbers. 

---

Citi does too, and you're able to set spending limits on them and they can be set to expire as early as a month away. 

---

Beware of virtual numbers with Citi... if the vendor runs the charge as a recurring payment it can blow right past your settings.

I found this out the hard way, and there are plenty of folks over on Reddit who have reported the same.

[TG101]

---

@crystal626 wrote:

---

@TG101 wrote:

---

@Varsity_Lu wrote:

Capital One lets you create virtual numbers. 

---

Citi does too, and you're able to set spending limits on them and they can be set to expire as early as a month away. 

---

Citi VCCs are locked when the card is locked and again don't address the main point of wanting to prevent fraud on the actual card. 

---

If a new card is going straight from your mailbox to your safe then either it is being obtained internally though your bank or your mail carrier is somehow opening your mail, making a copy, and resealing the envelope. Some banks let your view your card number though the app and/or website which can be a security hole. Also are you adding it to google/apple pay before placing it in the safe? If your phone has some kind of malware it could be getting intercepted that way. I personally would not use any of my cards though a google/android device and a iPhone I would have in lockdown mode and verify that NO configuation profiles are installed. 

[TG101]

---

@UncleB wrote:

---

@TG101 wrote:

---

@Varsity_Lu wrote:

Capital One lets you create virtual numbers. 

---

Citi does too, and you're able to set spending limits on them and they can be set to expire as early as a month away. 

---

Beware of virtual numbers with Citi... if the vendor runs the charge as a recurring payment it can blow right past your settings.

I found this out the hard way, and there are plenty of folks over on Reddit who have reported the same.

---

Even past the expiration date? What would they use as the new one since the card is not being remade with a new expiration? 

[Varsity_Lu]

---

@crystal626 wrote:

I've had to replace 4 or 5 cards in the past few years. It's much less of a headache if I'm getting an email about a declined transaction I didn't authorize rather than having a dollar amount charged to the card and then having to jump through the hoops with the issuer. Some of them, like Synchrony, make you file police reports. It's all just very annoying and I would rather have it not be a possibility at all.

---

Man, that sucks for you. Do you really think they are all BIN attacks? The chances of multiple BIN attacks on different card issuers is probably super low. As someone mentioned above, have you considered that there is something else going on to cause this?  I think the root cause needs to be found before you can really find a solution.

[crystal626]

Look, I'm not going to continue to debate this. I know that I'm not doing anything to cause this problem. My devices are secure (and contrary to some conspiracy theorist beliefs, mobile wallet is the most secure way in existence to use your cards because those tokens can't be used without the device). My cards are secure in my wallet and my safe. Anything else is out of my control but if I can lock the card, it won't be a concern at all anymore, and to do that, I just need to know which lenders allow you to lock your card and still use it in your mobile wallet.

62 million Americans had fraud on a credit card last year. I've got more exposure to that possibility than the average American by having 10 times the cards they do. It makes sense it would happen more frequently to someone who has more cards.

So back to the original topic - anyone have any insight to give? I'm going to have to start testing this with the cards that I use frequently and see which ones allow it I guess.

[bs1234]

---

@crystal626 wrote:

Look, I'm not going to continue to debate this. I know that I'm not doing anything to cause this problem. My devices are secure (and contrary to some conspiracy theorist beliefs, mobile wallet is the most secure way in existence to use your cards because those tokens can't be used without the device). My cards are secure in my wallet and my safe. Anything else is out of my control but if I can lock the card, it won't be a concern at all anymore, and to do that, I just need to know which lenders allow you to lock your card and still use it in your mobile wallet.

62 million Americans had fraud on a credit card last year. I've got more exposure to that possibility than the average American by having 10 times the cards they do. It makes sense it would happen more frequently to someone who has more cards.

So back to the original topic - anyone have any insight to give? I'm going to have to start testing this with the cards that I use frequently and see which ones allow it I guess.

---

I get your use case (and from what you say, so does Chase!) but I would be surprised if a lot of issuers support it.   I think the default mentality is  "If you lock the card, you don't want it used, so we'll block ALL avenues that allow it to be charged"

[Seatac]

I set all my accounts to notify me of ALL transactions with as low a dollar amount as the allow. 1 dollar in most cases.  Also to notify if card not present transactions are made.

I also use virtual cards whenever possible. 

It is not perfect for every situation like brute force attacks but I get near immediate notifications so I can call and stop whatever mess is happening. 

As a side note I refresh my phone OS every 2 months and on my laptop I have a secure virtual image that is the only way I do banking or buy on line  even if my devices are stolen no one can get to the data. Good luck. 

[UncleB]

---

@TG101 wrote:

---

@UncleB wrote:

---

@TG101 wrote:

---

@Varsity_Lu wrote:

Capital One lets you create virtual numbers. 

---

Citi does too, and you're able to set spending limits on them and they can be set to expire as early as a month away. 

---

Beware of virtual numbers with Citi... if the vendor runs the charge as a recurring payment it can blow right past your settings.

I found this out the hard way, and there are plenty of folks over on Reddit who have reported the same.

---

Even past the expiration date? What would they use as the new one since the card is not being remade with a new expiration? 

---

Yep, apparently on recurring payments Citi will "conveniently" update the merchant with a new expiration date just as they do with your regular card number.    (I hate the updater service(s) with a passion, but that's a discussion for another thread.)

I had a magazine subscription billed this way; thankfully the vendor agreed to process a check refund, but it was a wake-up call about the limitations of virtual card numbers (at least with Citi).