[fingerprinter]

> Keep in mind that this is about chargeback risk,

First, I do not think this is about chargebacks, at all. I don't know what it is about, but it's not chargebacks. This looks like a blanket revocation of anonymizing/VPN services. That isn't how fraud/risk engines work (note: I wrote several fraud/risk engines for ecommerce/banking/travel industry as well as passive device fingerprinting).

Sure, make this a riskier transaction, flag it for review. Uh oh, CC info is from Ohio, but IP is from Russia? Up the risk. Same device that is trying to conduct this transaction also tried 30 others in the past two days? Flag for review, up the risk (several hundred more etc etc).

Second, I can't think of a single thing that is legal to buy that is blanket revoked by some company like this.

Third, adult sites, online pharmacies, ticket brokers and the others are NOT treated the same way. They are treated as higher risk transactions that A. need more/closer review B. have a more comprehensive/exhaustive/deeper risk rules engine run on them. and/or C. have a special set of rules that apply specifically to that domain. The CC companies don't just turn off buying an entire domain of goods (adult, online pharmacies, ticket brokers....or VPNs), that isn't how they work.

If true, this smells of something different.

[ceol]

> blanket revoked

Not blanket revoked. You can still purchase VPN services other than IPREDator.[0]

I'm surprised people here are taking TorrentFreak as an actual journalistic entity and not a website devoted to enticing a knee-jerk and vehement subset of tech users into clicking their articles.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5988527

[fingerprinter]

This, then, is generally fine. CCs often shut off merchants with high chargebacks etc.

Though, it is not without warning. 2 days, if that can be trusted from the original article, is not sufficient warning.

[randallsquared]

> I can't think of a single thing that is legal to buy that is blanket revoked by some company like this.

Firearms.

https://www.paypal.com/webapps/helpcenter/article/?solutionI...

https://payments.amazon.com/sdui/sdui/about?nodeId=6023

https://squareup.com/legal/seller-agreement

Also, at least two of those have prohibitions on "occult materials". I'm not quite sure what that means, but it doesn't sound illegal.

[brownbat]

A year back, eBay had to ban spells and potions, "as transactions in these categories can be difficult to verify and resolve."

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2012/08/17/ebay_bans_mag...

[rdl]

I checked with Simplify (the MC Stripe clone), and they're cool with firearms and accessories sold online, and firearms sold in-person with card swiped. They're going to get back to me on whether an FFL could sell online MOTO -- I'm pushing them to allow it IFF the FFL ships to another FFL, which is federal law anyway.)

[xkidug]

> First, I do not think this is about chargebacks, at all.

This case may also have other motives (the pirate bay related?) but chargeback is the issue and the story is more complex than it sounds: http://www.securitykiss.com/resources/roboblog/credit_cards/