Didn't receive the verification code was turned away: several investment banks claim-in the user bank cards, China Merchants Bank, fraud-IT information

"My status on my phone, computers, fishing sites, such base stations very well, also study for Trojans and viruses. So this kind of thing happen to me, almost unbelievable. "Experienced bank cards being 4, March of 200,000, worked for years as IT now pay architects for a treasure Guo, still do not understand is how could criminals do. Yesterday afternoon, Mr Guo told China Merchants Bank Beijing Branch chaowai 200,001 claimed trial in the Chaoyang Court, banks is naturally think that they have no fault, does not agree to compensate. This time, criminals use NET silver secretly means to transfer the head back to the met, people really scratching their heads.

Events

China Merchants Bank accounts of inexplicable encounters an offsite transfers

Phone number at the same time speak to Nanjing

22:11 on October 20, 2015 to 19 points, Guo has received 4 China Merchants Bank micro-transactions from public reminders, he has been used as a salary card of China Merchant Bank "card" savings account is 4 by people using online banking, and transferred a total of 200,000 yuan-50,000 yuan. And this is China phone Internet banking daily allowed maximum transfer amount.

Transactions to remind the payee name are displayed as "Zhao", a name that looked less like the name. Mr Guo said he does not know what Cho la, did not operate the 4 transfer. Cell phone at his side. According to the transfer of the experience of Mr Guo, launched an online bank transfer application, mobile phones should receive a Bank sends the SMS verification code, enter the verification code to complete transfer deals. Day 4-transfer occurs, his cell phone received a SMS verification code.

Guo initially thought that the banking system may have malfunctioned, he immediately picked up the phone to call 9555 xingke service query, confirmed after the bank card was 200,000 less. In order to keep the rest of the 60,000 yuan, Guo asked banks to freeze the accounts, after which he received phone banks to freeze accounts of SMS alerts. Tongzhou, Guo was then made to the police.

Catch is that Guo mobile call list displayed, his cell phone cards on the same day in 22:09 in Nanjing to produce up to 11 minutes and 31 seconds of calling time just covering 4 time the transfer occurred. But Guo was home in Tongzhou district, Beijing. Therefore, there is reason to suspect, during Mr Guo's cell phone card was controlled and used by people in different places.

In April, the end of CCTV code of Telecom fraud scam. Criminals pretend the victims to subscribe to mobile phone service, unsubscribe replies required validation code, deceived the victims cell phone USIM card verification code. Then use China Mobile's "self card" online service generates a new cell phone SIM card and use this to "hijack" to receive the SMS validation code phone card, ransacked the victim's account. But in this case, the new card once in force, the victim of the old cards will also void cannot be used. According to the truth should be so.

But Mr Guo's situation is not the same. Not only can he use a mobile phone to call the customer service phone, also received the freezing of accounts SMS alerts. However, plays a key role in the transfer confirmation code text messaging seems to be being "cut" away.

In addition, China Merchants Bank online banking log, login IP address is 138 4 transfer operation begins by professional IP address query, displayed as Chongqing.

Controversy

China Merchants Bank think that revealing personal information of others unless I cannot get

Yesterday, the Bank pointed out, this case is not a counterfeit card transaction dispute involved trading channels for online banking transactions, transactions throughout does not require entity cards.

Bank inquiry system found that the case involved the transfer of remittances through Bank personal banking on the public version of the network platform operations, and had record phone number sent a verification code to your bank. According to the Bank, during the whole transaction process, operators need to enter the card number, social security number, query log on password, additional code, then interface to enter the dynamic SMS verification code, your ATM card PIN before you can complete the transaction. Which belong to the plaintiff's personal information kept by him, if I enter or I leak, third parties could not be obtained.

Judges asked if Mr Guo told the password to others. Mr Guo confirmed that no, "because it is my pay card, passwords don't even know my wife. "This gallery a snicker.

Bank doubts may be Guo in the daily transactions of the Trojan virus, result in personal information being stolen. Mr Guo's mobile phone SIM card was copied, so information leak may also exist, so the Bank is not responsible. But the plaintiffs believe that phone card are copied just a conjecture, a savings contract dispute in the present case, the defendant should prove that money was Mr Guo drawn, or should be considered a defendant's improper, to bear the responsibility. Yesterday, the case was inconclusive.

After visiting

Over time similar methods is similar to the Nanjing victims phone

A day after the incident, Mr Kwok has just transferred a sum of money to this bank card account, ready to give parents buy a house in Yanjiao pension plan goes, Mr Kwok has not told parents that. In order to let parents see, Guo has registered a new Twitter account, will have made a tweet, but received a number of messages. It turns out that Guo was not the only victim.

Last night, our reporter according to Guo's contact, getting in touch with victims of 4 in Beijing, found some similarities and odd places.

4 of them are bank customers, and enrollment is the salary cards. 4, 3 bank cards were fraudulent transfers and Mr Kwok occurred on the same day, focused on the 20th at 7 o'clock that evening, lost 39,300, 50,000 yuan and 100,000 yuan respectively, payee name are "Zhao."

Another Wu is to be at 21st, at 1 o'clock in the morning-4, March to 200,000. Payee name not Zhao La La, but contact with him outside a bank customer's money was transferred to the same account.

What's unpredictable is, as with Mr Guo, 4 phone number during this period were in Nanjing calling records, calls for various periods of time, but people are just covering their own accounts for transfer operations. Did not know such a procedure in the criminal process can play to help or hide? In addition, somebody pass the login IP address displayed is in Chongqing.

4 per capita told reporters, were fraudulent transfers during the phone send to any verification code message was received from the Bank, they are even customized the service account change reminder text message has not been received. Two men are after 2 days with the fraud of pretending to be a bank staff telephone and one found in a timely manner, will not be by someone else into "surplus" account of 50,000 yuan in back in time, no new losses. That Mr Wu is found 200,000 has been turning left, panic God found in accounts nearly more than 90,000 in themselves cannot be transferred out of the case, fooled again, inform each other of the CAPTCHA, resulting in increased loss of nearly 90,000 yuan.

Another two women were discovered by accident, dullest one in 10 days wages received after the recorded message find the account balance is wrong, a check to know being transferred 50,000. At present, 3 out of 4 people have sued China Merchants Bank, and into the proceedings.

Suspicion is a phone issue, Guo is using a Samsung mobile phone, more people are using iPhone. Mr Guo told reporters that he had stolen this bank card is equipped with USB, but the public version of the China Merchants Bank online banking does not need USB transactions. Victim Mr LEE also told reporters that his card also had USB, but China Merchants Bank online banking public Edition without. In his view, this is a very big loophole.

Police say

The "code" message is intercepted in the Trojan virus

Reporter had an interview with the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau criminal investigation Corps and network security professional anti-fraud Police Corps. Police believe that the "code" message is intercepted after Trojans and viruses is a very typical performance, Guo and other parties should be in when you didn't know about Trojans and viruses. "The Bank must send a verification code, and the victim must be received, that is to say in this time period, the victim's mobile phone text messaging was blocked, it was like having someone bring you home delivery, but by someone in the elevator with your ID card and cell phone ' collection '. ”

According to the police's judgment, before the Trojans, the party in China Merchants Bank online banking user names, passwords, and other related information, as well as cell phone number must have been leaked, the criminals to complete the transfer, only need to cross the obstacle is the verification code sent by the Bank. They provide those accurate phone number put on the Trojans and viruses, once caught, would Mr Guo and other people involved in the situation.

According to the police of criminal investigation Corps, Trojan horse is divided into a variety, but the more common trojans and viruses messages will be completely blocked, makes the phone owner is not received. "It is through the ' keywords ' to intercept, such as criminals set keyword is usually the ' verification code ', usually text messages with the word, they all go to the cheats there. Mr Guo said he quickly received the account freeze message, this is because of the freeze on message does not contain the ' verification code ' keywords, Trojans and viruses will not be intercepted. ”

Reporter from City Public Security Bureau network Ann Corps understand to, victims face of actually is full a article fraud industry chain, was through purchase or hacker means gets Bank internal information, but and no capacity implementation fraud behavior, these people was called "material main", and real implementation fraud of people, capacity General also will has limit, for example, someone only implementation for a province ICBC customer of fraud, another a people only implementation for somewhere make line customer of fraud, they will in online to "material main" purchase has targeted of information. Thus, a bank customer in some cases collective, which is not surprising.

Best to use USB

Bank try not to keep too much money

According to the police, compared with SMS verification code, using physical separation such as USB, password will be better. But since u shields need to be installed on your computer, mobile phone password and USB device needs to be carried separately, many people in order to facilitate, or is willing to select a validation code.

Contact reporter this morning a number of banks, was told that as mobile payments is now too widespread, if criminals who invaded the victim's cell phone, even if not by way of bank transfer, victims properties can also be transferred out. Such as the use of micro-credit, third party payment platforms such as PayPal, and can be used without the USB, password case will go. Banks not all payments, transfer functions, separate sets a very low limit for the customer's business.

Reporters learned from the Bank, as the public is concerned, if you are concerned about money in the Bank after the Trojans in ourselves without being turned away, then you can not use SMS verification code, and mobile phone use USB. Mobile USB is relatively convenient, and because it is a physical isolation, greater security. Associated with the phone card try not to keep too much money, to meet everyday mobile payments.

没收到验证码钱被转走：多名招商银行用户中招索赔 - 银行卡,招商银行,诈骗 - IT资讯

“我对我手机的状况、电脑、钓鱼网站、伪基站等非常了解，对木马病毒也有研究。所以这种事发生在我身上，简直令人难以置信。”经历了银行卡被人分4笔转走了20万，做了多年IT、现为某宝支付架构师的郭先生，至今也没弄明白犯罪分子究竟是怎么做到的。昨天下午，郭先生告招商银行北京朝外大街支行索赔20万一案在朝阳法院开庭审理，银行方面自然是认为自己没有过错，不同意赔偿。这一次，犯罪分子利用网银偷偷转账的手段也是头回遇到，着实让人摸不着头脑。

事件

招行账户莫名遭遇异地转账

手机号同时段现南京通话

2015年10月20日22点11分至19分，郭先生先后收到4条招商银行微信公众号发来的交易提醒，他一直作为工资卡使用的招商银行“一卡通”储蓄账户被人用网银分4次、每次5万元总计转走了20万元人民币。而这也是招行手机网银每日允许的转账金额的最高限。

交易提醒显示的收款人姓名均为“赵啦啦”，一个看着不太像名字的名字。郭先生说，他不认识什么赵啦啦，也没有操作过这4笔转账。当时手机就在他身边。根据郭先生以往转账的经验，每发起一笔网银转账申请，手机都应该收到银行发送的短信验证码，只有输入验证码，才能完成转账交易。但当天4笔转账发生时，他的手机没有收到过一条验证码短信。

郭先生起初以为银行系统出了故障，他当即拿起手机拨打9555招行客服查询，后得到确认，该银行卡里果然少了20万。为了保住剩下的6万元，郭先生让银行冻结了账户，之后他手机收到银行发来的冻结账户的短信提醒。郭先生随即向通州警方报案。

蹊跷的是，郭先生的移动通话详单显示，其手机卡于当天22时09分在南京产生了长达11分31秒的主叫通话，时间刚好覆盖4笔转账发生的时间。但此时郭先生正在位于北京通州的家中。因此，有理由怀疑，在此期间郭先生的手机卡被人在异地控制并使用了。

今年4月，央视起底电信诈骗之验证码骗局。犯罪分子谎称事主订阅了手机报服务，退订需回复验证码，骗得事主手机的USIM卡验证码。然后利用中国移动推出的“自助换卡”在线服务，生成一张新的手机SIM卡，并利用这张“劫持”来的手机卡接收各类短信验证码，洗劫事主的各种账户。但在该案中，新卡一旦生效，事主的旧卡便同时作废，无法继续使用。按道理来讲也应当是如此。

但郭先生的情况却又不太一样。他不但可以使用手机拨打银行客服电话，还收到了冻结账户的短信提醒。只不过，起到关键作用的转账验证码短信似乎是被人“截”走了。

此外，招行网银日志记录，4笔转账操作登录的IP地址为138开头，经专业IP地址查询，显示为重庆。

争论

招行认为若非本人泄露个人信息他人无法获得

昨天，招行方面指出，本案并非伪冒卡交易纠纷，涉案交易渠道为网银交易，交易全程不需要实体卡片。

招行查询系统发现，该案涉及的转账汇款均是通过招行网络平台上的个人银行大众版进行的操作，且确曾给银行备案的手机号发送过验证码。银行称，在整个交易过程中，操作人需要先输入卡号、身份证号、查询密码、附加码进行登录，继而在交易操作界面输入动态短信验证码、取款密码后才能完成交易。而这些信息均属于原告个人信息，由其本人保管，如非本人输入或本人泄露，第三方无法获得。

法官询问郭先生是否将密码告诉过他人。郭先生非常肯定地表示没有，“因为是我的工资卡，密码连我媳妇都不知道。”这个回答引得旁听席上一片窃笑。

招行怀疑，可能是郭先生在进行日常交易时中了木马病毒，导致个人信息被窃取。郭先生的手机SIM卡也像是被人复制了，因此相关信息也存在泄露的可能，故责任不在银行。但原告认为，手机卡被复制只是一个猜想，本案是储蓄存款合同纠纷，被告应证明款项是郭先生本人支取的，否则应视为被告保管不当，需承担相应责任。昨天，此案没有结果。

追访

多人受害时间相近手段相似均现南京主叫电话

事发一天前，郭先生刚转了笔钱到这张招行储蓄卡户头，准备给父母在燕郊买房养老，计划因此泡汤，郭先生至今不敢跟父母说。为了不让父母看到，郭先生新注册了一个微博账号，将遭遇发了条微博，没想到收到若干留言。原来，郭先生不是唯一的受害者。

昨晚，本报记者根据郭先生提供的联系方式，先后与4名在京的受害者取得联系，发现了一些共性及蹊跷之处。

4人都是招行客户，且中招的都是工资卡。4人中3人银行卡被盗刷转账与郭先生发生在同一天，集中在20日当天晚上7点多，损失金额分别为3.93万元、5万元和10万元，收款人姓名均为“赵啦啦”。

另外一位吴先生是在21日凌晨1点多被人分4笔转走了20万。收款人姓名不是赵啦啦，但与他联系上的外地一名招行客户的钱被转入的是同一账户。

令人捉摸不透的是，与郭先生一样，4人的手机号在此期间均发生过在南京主叫通话的记录，通话时间长短不一，但均恰好覆盖了各自账户被人进行转账操作的时段。不知这样的做法在犯罪过程中能够起到怎样的帮助或掩饰作用？另外，有人查过对方登录IP地址，显示是在重庆。

4人均向记者表示，被人盗刷转账期间，手机未收到过银行发来任何验证码短信，甚至他们均定制了服务的账户变动提醒短信也没有收到过。两位男士是在事后2天左右接到了冒充银行工作人员的诈骗电话，一人及时识破，将已被他人转入“朝朝盈”理财账户中的5万元及时转回，未新增损失。那位吴先生则在发现20万已经被转走后，慌了神，在发现账户内近9万余额自己无法转出的情况下，再次上当，将验证码告知对方，导致又增加了近9万元损失。

另外两位女士则是偶然间发现，最迟钝的一人是在10天后收到单位工资入账的短信发现账户余额不对，一查才知道被人转走了5万。目前4人中有3人已起诉招行，并进入诉讼程序。

有人怀疑是手机的问题，郭先生使用的是三星手机，更多人用的是苹果手机。郭先生告诉记者，他所失窃的这张招行卡配有U盾，但招行网银的大众版本是不需要U盾进行交易的。受害者李先生也告诉记者，他的卡也有U盾，但招行网银大众版用不上。他认为，这是一个很大的漏洞。

警方说

“验证码”短信被拦截是中木马病毒

记者为此采访了北京市公安局刑侦总队和网安总队的专业反诈骗民警。民警们认为，“验证码”短信被拦截，是一种非常典型的中木马病毒后的表现，郭先生等多位当事人应该是在自己并不知情的时候中了木马病毒。“银行肯定是发送了验证码，而事主们肯定没收到，也就是说在这个时间段内，事主们的手机短信被拦截了，这就好比有人给你家送快递，可是在电梯口被人拿着你的身份证和手机‘代收’了。”

根据民警的判断，在中木马之前，当事人在招商银行的网银用户名、密码等相关信息以及手机号肯定已经泄露，犯罪分子若要完成转账，惟一需要跨过的障碍就是由银行发送的验证码。对方会向这些手机号精准投放木马病毒，一旦中招，就会出现郭先生等人遭遇的局面。

据刑侦总队民警介绍，木马分为多种，但比较常见的木马病毒会将短信完全拦截，使手机机主根本收不到。“它是通过‘关键词’进行拦截，比如犯罪分子设置的关键词通常就是‘验证码’，凡是短信中带有这个词的，就全到了骗子那里。郭先生说他很快又收到了账户冻结短信，这是因为冻结短信里不含有‘验证码’的关键词，木马病毒不会拦截。”

记者从市公安局网安总队了解到，受害人面对的其实是整整一条诈骗产业链，有人通过购买或黑客手段获取银行内部信息，但并无能力实施诈骗行为，这些人被称作“料主”，而真正实施诈骗的人，能力一般也都会有限制，例如，某人只能实施针对某省工行客户的诈骗，另一人只能实施针对某地交行客户的诈骗，他们会在网上向“料主”购买有针对性的信息。因此，一些案件中出现某家银行客户集体中招，并不足为奇。

最好使用U盾

银行卡尽量不要存太多钱

据民警介绍，相比于短信验证码，使用物理隔离的U盾、密码器等会相对好一些。但是由于U盾需要在电脑上安装使用，手机U盾和密码器也需要单独携带，很多人为了方便，还是愿意选择验证码。

记者上午联系多家银行咨询，被告知，由于现在手机支付太过普遍，如果犯罪分子侵入了事主手机，即使不通过银行转账的方式，也一样能够将事主的财产转移出去。如利用微信、支付宝等第三方支付平台，可以在无需使用U盾、密码器的情况下将钱弄走。银行暂时还没有将所有支付功能、转账功能合并处理，单独为客户设置一个非常低限额的业务。

记者从银行了解到，对市民而言，如果担心中木马之后银行资金在自己毫无察觉的时候被转走，那么可以不要使用短信验证码的方式，而使用手机U盾。手机U盾相对便捷，而且由于是物理隔离方式，安全性更高。与手机关联的银行卡尽量不要存太多的钱，能满足日常手机支付即可。