this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
104 points (96.4% liked)

News

23305 readers
3754 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
rjc@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
dezmd@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
JonsJava@lemmy.world
gedaliyah@lemmy.world
Blackbeard@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
jeffw@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
104
JPMorgan Plans to Report Customers Who Exploited TikTok ‘Glitch’ to Authorities (www.wsj.com)
submitted 1 month ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
36 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Bypass paywall: https://archive.ph/TBaGa

all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 month ago (4 children)

They should be - but they should also have some leniency from lacking clear intent. The people who spread this "hack" obviously knew it was check fraud and some of these folks may have known it... but some others may just be rubes. Obviously it'll come down to the actual trials but it'd be good to let most of these folks off with just returning the stolen funds with no additional punishment. There isn't really any deterrence value from punishing people who knew no better for exploiting a now closed loop hole - there's no possibility to copy cat the check fraud now.

I'd also love to see the FTC go after JP Morgan for such a fucking large security hole - this hack was only possible because of their negligence.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 38 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I'm sorry, but no. Anyone who did this knew it was ~~theft~~ fraud. And if they didn't, ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the law. I'm not usually on the side of the justice system, but this was clearly wrong. Maybe they don't need to fill up our jails, but some community service is deserved.

Edit: more accurate this way.

[–] Hydra_Fk@reddthat.com 31 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Idk I hate corporations but this one is 100 percent on the dumb fucks who thought by pretending that "money glitch" defined what they were doing instead of the reality "check fraud crime".

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

In this case, though, what's the damage? These attacks happened in a spike and all the accounts overdrawn are tied to social security numbers and real life folks through provable links (assuming Chase did its fucking job during account registration)... Chase can recoup the losses pretty trivially and they should have a literal bank ledger of every transaction. So direct monetary damages seem nil assuming people haven't lost the money (and I'm only advocating for no additional punishment if the parties can make Chase whole).

Then what about deterrence - we punish people to discourage future criminal actions... this loophole is closed and nobody can exploit it in the future. Additionally, given the flash mob nature of this, I don't think any bystanders would see the response to this and think "Fuck, I'm going to check fraud myself" the event is over, the window has passed.

So I feel like any additional punishment (again, beyond reclaiming the fraudulently withdrawn money) would just be vengeful - and I don't think vengeance based punishment is moral.

[–] Hydra_Fk@reddthat.com 4 points 1 month ago

Until the next free shopping glitch where I just transcend the door without paying. You are correct this problem is with parenting, society in general,and education.

[–] mint_tamas@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

I’m not sure all that cash was just kept in the pockets of the perpetrators. I would be surprised if even half of the stolen amount was trivially recovered.

[–] norimee@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ignorantia juris non excusat - "Ignorance of the law excuses not"

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Except in the cases where it explicitly does.

[–] norimee@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Which are?

I don't mean to be confrontational, I genuinely want to know where it "explicitly does".

I'm not in the US and my countries criminal code has a § (§17 german stgb) that as long as you are legally competent you are responsible for your actions even if you were ignorant of the law.

If you are pointing at those that are not legally competent/ non compos mentis, I think the point there is not so much the not knowing of the law, but being unable to understand a law.

[–] davad@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

I assume some variation of this exist for other jurisdictions, but in the US, some crimes require prosection to prove "intent" (mens rea) Depending on the crime, you might have to know that it's illegal for mens rea.

In US Tax Court, there's precedence that ignorance of tax code is a defense for criminal tax.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea#Ignorance_of_law_contrasted_with_mens_rea

[–] emax_gomax@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Agree on all points. Like these people clearly committed fraud but if you're careless enough to get suckered into this you probably weren't the most financially savvy person to begin with. Balancing the scale should be enough. On the other hand the banking sector really needs to modernise. So much is built on archaic legacy systems and there doesn't seem to be any motivation to modernise and foolproof them. The economies too busy chugging along to care about how secure the foundations of it are.

[–] mwproductions@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Users on the social-media platform began sharing videos that showed a so-called glitch at Chase Bank that was allowing customers to deposit big checks and withdraw funds from ATMs immediately, even if sufficient funds weren’t available.

[–] Lavitz@lemmings.world 2 points 1 month ago

I mean I get it these people should be charged but seriously Chase? Aren't you supposed to be like a bank that's all about security? So we're pissing away a bunch of gov't resources to track down and charge these criminals cause Chase can't roll out a remote deposit system that works properly? Seems like the gov't should investigate how tf this happened in the first place

[–] rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 month ago

lol, GenZ discovers check kiting?

[–] Cort@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

To all the idiots in the thread saying the bank should never have let this happen: this is cashing a check and you want this to be possible so you don't have to wait 3 days after depositing a check to access the funds.

A bank that's done business with you trusts that you wouldn't deposit a fake check and believes that the amount on the check is going to be available to be transferred.

Anyone abusing that trust makes it likely that the feature will be taken away from the rest of us, and they should see at least a week of jail time.

[–] sumguyonline@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

People are literally running out of money. This is expected.

[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago

Bypass asks for a captcha in a different language…