[HN Gopher] PayPal shuts down long-time Tor supporter ___________________________________________________________________ PayPal shuts down long-time Tor supporter Author : tirz Score : 260 points Date : 2021-06-02 17:51 UTC (5 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.eff.org) (TXT) w3m dump (www.eff.org) | c01n wrote: | Paypal is a scam. Use crypto-coins!!! | lostgame wrote: | So I can pay with crypto on Amazon? Etsy? Discogs? | | I don't understand why there are so many posts here saying | 'just use crypto', like - PayPal is a scam and needs a | replacement but the problem is until sites start _accepting_ | crypto as simply as PayPal works then things will stay the | same. | | What you're saying to do in your comment - on most major online | retailers - is not yet possible, and it will probably take a | long time even if it can find critical mass. | | Crypto is another _currency_ - it's not another payment | processor and while those are starting to exist we are nowhere | close. | | I believe the laments here are more so related to PayPal's | dominance - for most websites it's that or your credit card. | readflaggedcomm wrote: | >This is the first time we have heard about financial persecution | for defending internet freedom in the Tor community. | | But they don't know that. Paypal refuses to give details. He | describes a second recipent, the hosting company, and there could | be more. Paypal's fraud and crime detection is pitiful*, and | their silence can cover both incompetence and malice. | | [*] https://slate.com/technology/2020/02/paypal-venmo-iran- | syria... | lsaferite wrote: | > they don't know that | | Isn't that already covered by | | > first time we have heard about | tssva wrote: | Paypal has denied that funding of Tor nodes is the reason for | closing the account so the EFF is making claims without any | proof. | whizzwr wrote: | No. Paypal denied giving any details. It could be 100% | because of Tor, could be 100% unrelated to Tor. Who knows, | that's what EFF is disputing. | smoldesu wrote: | Whoever made this call must have been pretty inebriated. All of | the bad actors here are willing to pay for their Tor nodes with | crypto, which really only sabotages the legitimate users on the | platform. | tyingq wrote: | I don't understand how it's legal for PayPal to hold his money | for 180 days because they don't like the nature of his | transactions. Kick him off their platform, sure...that's their | prerogative. But why do they get to hold the money hostage? | lynndotpy wrote: | I believe that's in the ToS. At least in the US, they have a | quite restrictive binding arbitration agreement. | tyingq wrote: | Interesting. I wonder if a small claims court (assuming the | balance wasn't too large) would help. | | Edit: found the text in the TOS: | | _" Holds based on PayPal's risk decisions | | We may place a hold on payments sent to your PayPal account | if, in our sole discretion, we believe that there may be a | high level of risk associated with you, your PayPal account, | or your transactions or that placing such a hold is necessary | to comply with state or federal regulatory requirements... | | Risk-based holds generally remain in place for up to 21 days | from the date the payment was received into your PayPal | account. We may release the hold earlier under certain | circumstances ..., but any earlier release is at our sole | discretion. The hold may last longer than 21 days if the | payment is challenged as a payment that should be invalidated | and reversed based on a disputed transaction as discussed in | the following paragraph below. In this case, we'll hold the | payment in your PayPal account until the matter is resolved | (but no longer than 180 days)."_ | | https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/useragreement-full | judge2020 wrote: | In general it might be there to ensure no fraud is happening - | when my account was flagged for being under 18 (at the time), | they held my money for the 180 days before letting me take it | out. I imagine they do (or used to) experience fraud from | people signing up for accounts using the identities of | children. | slownews45 wrote: | Uh - because he may be ripping people off or people may file | claims for a refund, and if they give it to the scammer it's | hard to give get it back to make folks who got ripped off | whole? | | This is 101 stuff. Credit card companies do this routinely as | well. I'm hearing fyre festivals will be harder to get | immediate payout on. | | Travel does this when businesses are near bust - credit card | companies will hold funds. | dahart wrote: | > because he may be ripping people off or people may file | claims for a refund | | This is a reasonable argument in general, but it falls apart | here because there was a human in the loop who knows why the | account was disabled, and knows that it wasn't for suspicion | of scammy behavior, nor for suspicion of insufficient funds. | tyingq wrote: | It's a 20 year old account, and this activity doesn't seem to | be new, or associated with fraud, etc. What aspect of what | he's doing seems similar to Fyre? I don't understand the | flippant tone. | slownews45 wrote: | The tech companies are not analyzing things at this level. | They close a number of accounts each month. A certain | number of those were engaged in fraud and will generate | chargeback activity. Others were legit but accepting | payments in advance. Once the business is out of business | those too will generate chargeback activity. Some are legit | but had bad service, lost key employees resulting in | complaints. Once the account is shut those also often | generate chargebacks. | | So they sit on the money for 180 days, it doesn't cost them | anything and saves them a big pain in trying to claw money | back from any of these folks who may not look at them that | fondly after being cutoff for what may have a been a silly | reason. | syshum wrote: | The problem here is that is sounds like he was SENDING | money not RECIEVING money, | | They can trace where the money came from, if I put money | into the account so I could pay someone they find | objectionable and then shut me down they should not be | able to hold that money because it is not a fraud issue, | i did not receive from a 3rd party, it is 100% my money | | yet they also hold these funds for the 180 days | teclordphrack2 wrote: | Something tells me, "read the fine print"? | [deleted] | sofixa wrote: | And his account can be taken over by someone else, or his | behaviour could change. Account age shouldn't be a huge | determining factor. | xvector wrote: | News like this is proof that cryptocurrencies like Monero are | necessary. | | It's proof (not that we needed any) that centralized finance does | not have your best interests at heart, and they can and will | abuse their power. | teclordphrack2 wrote: | Nothing keeps an exchange from taking your money and running or | not receiving the goods/service you pay for. | xvector wrote: | Businesses are legally obligated to deliver your goods, so | they will do that anyways, just like if you pay in cash today | and go back to the store asking for a refund. | richardwhiuk wrote: | Paypal are legally obligated to hand back the money after | 180 days. | | Nothing stops an exchange refusing to do business with you. | swensel wrote: | Why Monero specifically though, with all the options in crypto | available? | | If you want privacy there are also Zcash shielded transactions. | Or if all you want to do is eliminate central parties then why | not just Bitcoin? | | My understanding with Monero is if you don't run your own node | there's not that much privacy guarantee anyway (otherwise you | have to trust the third party node you point to). Someone | please correct me if I'm mistaken about that. | xvector wrote: | Monero is much more private than Zcash. | | The issue with Zcash shielded transactions is that something | like 14% of transactions are shielded, but only 1% are truly | private. Optionally shielded transactions make chain analysis | much easier and immediately make said transaction suspect. So | you cannot comfortably use Zcash for private transactions. | See the report by Chainalysis [1]: | | > 14% of the ZCash transactions use a so-called "shielded | pool", but in only 6% of all cases both the sender, recipient | and the number of transactions are fully encrypted. The | report states: "So even if the concealment on Zcash is | stronger due to the zk-SNARK encryption, Chainalysis can | still provide the transaction value and at least one address | for over 99% of the ZEC activities." | | Clearly, optional privacy is not privacy at all. It needs to | be on by default, which is the philosophy behind Monero. | | Re. Monero nodes - if you're using a remote node you can just | use Tor, which I believe is soon to be baked in by default. | Otherwise, Monero is still quite private. Your transaction | history, transaction amounts etc are not revealed to nodes. | Some metadata like restore height is, but that's not a big | deal. | | [1]: https://www.kryptokumpel.de/en/kryptowaehrungen/chainaly | sis-... | reedjosh wrote: | Arrr or Pirate is Zcash, but with always on privacy BTW. I | like it a lot, but it's relatively new. | | Also, the ZKSnark method that provides the privacy requires | that the devs threw away their initial PKs. If you trust | they did, then it's a great option. | Wistar wrote: | I _think_ VRSC is similar to ARRR and Pirate. | Wistar wrote: | "IRS offered $625,000 bounty to anyone who could 'crack' | Monero; no one succeeded" | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25752042 | R0b0t1 wrote: | You can analyze the dust spend in transactions to | deanonymize Monero users. You need to be processing a lot | of transactions to do this, or have the ability to spy on | the processing of a lot of transactions. | reedjosh wrote: | Even if someone could _see_ the transaction and identify | the user behind the wallets, at least a crypto still | prevents fund holding and transaction blocking. | pessimizer wrote: | If it were government crypto (or centralized government money | transfer), you'd have recourse in the courts. | [deleted] | reedjosh wrote: | But if it were just crypto, nobody would be able to hold your | funds. I don't think transferring the power to an even more | inscrutable bureaucracy makes this problem any better. | | Most people already acknowledge that the little guy doesn't | have the funds to hire the lawyers for a protracted court | case. | skrowl wrote: | Monero + Distributed Exchanges will go a long way to fix these | kinds of online payment problems. | | Unfortunately, at least near term you'll still need fiat-tether | "on ramps" to convert your local currency back and forth to | tether before you move them to a distributed (or at least a | non-KYC) exchange to Monero, then sending to your local wallet, | then use online. | xvector wrote: | Yup. It's worth checking out LocalMonero [1] and the Haveno | DEX [2]. The former already works and lets you buy Monero | without relying on a KYC exchange. | | [1] https://localmonero.co/ | | [2] https://github.com/haveno-dex/haveno | Ekaros wrote: | Paypal being Paypal? Nothing new on Internet. And this sort of | action is exactly why I will never accept money via Paypal. | unethical_ban wrote: | "We don't like what you are doing, and are going to hold your | money for six months. I hope you don't subsist on it, or have any | business obligations to attend to. We'll call you." | | This should be illegal for Paypal to do, period. Absolutely | illegal. | | And if it is on behalf of a government or banking/fraud | regulations, then the person should be referred to relevant | agencies. | | Let's be clear and drop the pretense: They are confiscating his | property. | [deleted] | slownews45 wrote: | Are you sure it is being confiscated? He will have a claim | then. | | What can happen is when your credit card / other payment | providers cuts you off is that you go out of business. You | might fail to provide services to users - so they do a | chargeback / ask for a refund from payment provider. | | So when a payment provider is shutting you down, they usually | want to hold onto some money to be able to handle those refund | requests. Very common in travel situations as well. | mdoms wrote: | So PayPal is holding onto his money in case he incurs | expenses as a result of going out of business due to PayPal | cutting him off? And this seems normal and good to you? | wearywanderer wrote: | The beatings will continue until morale improves. | slownews45 wrote: | This is the way many providers that offer recourse | settlements handle things. | | They have data showing when they cut off a business from | processing credit cards etc they may receive claims from | customers who have already paid whose money they are either | holding or have forwarded. | | If they are holding it they refund that customer, and | business can ask for payment using another method. | | If they are not holding funds, they run into an issue of | asking merchant for money (which is difficult to collect). | | So most providers of this type when making a decision to | end a business relationship hold onto the funds for a while | to let everything settle. This is not unique to paypal. | | Some providers don't hold funds if payor has no recourse. | You usually need to be settling with what are called "good | funds" for that to be the case, then merchant is paid out | usually within 1 day under all circumstances. A fair number | of B2B wire type clearing operations work like this. | | I'm just explaining what happens. They don't generally | closely evaluate the reasons or likely outcomes of account | closures, and there is enough fraud and profit motive / | cost cutting in system that the rules tilt pretty heavily | against merchant. | | That said, if OP is not lying and they really do confiscate | the funds there will be an issue for them. Especially | individuals, they'll send the unclaimed funds to the state | generally even if not claimed by the person. | heavyset_go wrote: | PayPal has been doing this for more than a decade now. I | wouldn't be surprised if its part of their business model to | hold funds indefinitely and to collect interest on them. | astrange wrote: | There's hardly any such thing as interest in the US and there | hasn't been for at least a decade. | | Besides, if that was their business it'd be in their S-1 and | it isn't. (IIRC it says they keep customer funds in interest | free accounts) | [deleted] | krisroadruck wrote: | Way back in 2011 they did this to me. My marketing agency had | been running most of our customer payments through PayPal for | several months, and we were growing fast. At some point they | took the $50K we had in the account and froze it for 180 days | with no recourse, claiming it was to protect against charge | backs (despite us never having a single chargeback). | | I explained to them that if they didn't release the funds they | would most certainly have charge backs because we'd be out of | business and thus unable to deliver on the work promised for | the money. | | Nothing we said did any good. That is until I looked up the | laws in Washington State about money transmitters. Turns out | based on the specific license they had in Washington State at | the time, it was illegal for them to hold funds for longer than | 7 days. | | Me telling them this did nothing at all, but when I sent a | letter to my state governor explaining my predicament and | someone from that office sent a letter to the folks at PayPal, | suddenly my funds were released and a note was placed on my | account to never withhold funds on that account ever again. | Been smooth sailing ever since :-D | tomjakubowski wrote: | > a note was placed on my account to never withhold funds on | that account ever again | | Did PayPal just tell you this or did you find out another | way? | helios_invictus wrote: | Stop using paypal. They neither pay or are your pal. | Jiocus wrote: | Pals don't let pals pay with _Paypal_. | johndevor wrote: | Who pays for pals anyway. | Jiocus wrote: | You'd be surprised. | | My thinking was, if a friend confide in me about their use | of PayPal for online payments, then it's a moral obligation | to inform them of the risks their taking and treatments | available such as alternative providers. | nonbirithm wrote: | I remember having my PayPal account locked for no specified | reason, and they said because too much time had passed since it | had been locked they would only reopen it if I physically mailed | them a check with my bank information. Of course I refused such a | ridiculous request and vowed never to use PayPal again. | | Yet I was still forced to use PayPal for another retailer because | the retailer's credit card processing was broken, so I had to | create a new account. It's frustrating when you have to go | through a middleman or external company that treats you like | garbage instead of being able to use an established payment | system that works. | fsflover wrote: | Many stories how PayPal kills FLOSS projects: | https://web.archive.org/web/20191011190010/https://minifree.... | danlugo92 wrote: | #BitcoinFixesThis | [deleted] | xvector wrote: | I wonder where all the people that complain about | cryptocurrency's energy consumption went. | | It may be a problem, but it's a hell of a lot better than | situations like this. Cryptocurrency was created precisely for | this reason - giving financial freedom back to the individual | in a censorship-resistant manner, because it was obvious as day | to the cypherpunks that created it, that governments and | corporations would abuse our financial freedom where possible. | richardwhiuk wrote: | This problem is utterly immaterial to crypto. | [deleted] | toss1 wrote: | At least I'm not being held hostage, but PayPal has just had | their last interaction with me. | | After few sales of an un-marketed old product for most of the | pandemic, someone tracked me down and wanted to purchase. Agreed | on options and I said I'd have an invoice out in minutes. | | Should be easy, right? Login to PayPal, fill out invoice info, | hit [Send] . . . . Nope, something wrong, contact support. Phone | w/half-hour+ wait times, support ppl 'cant hear' and line drops, | repeat, send email, both put me off, took a bit of info and said | a specialist would get back to me quickly. Yeah, right. | | While I was waiting, I apologized to my customer and checked out | alternatives. I'd worked with Stripe on a previous project, and | they now have manual invoices (i.e., not only code-generated from | website=>API). | | Signed up, got authenticated, setup invoicing, sent invoice, got | paid, and the money is in my account, and the product packaged | and on the loading dock -- all within an hour or so. | | More importantly, Stripe did a setup and execution from scratch | in less time than I squandered even getting to initial PayPal | help, and more than an order of magnitude faster than PayPal even | began to send a useful answer my issue. | | Done with PayPal - strongly recommend not using them -- and never | store money there. | bobthechef wrote: | You know this sort of thing is going to become more common, | right? I guess we just have to accept it and obey. Anything else | might make life less comfortable. | tr3ntg wrote: | I know I'm preaching to the choir as everyone here is aware of | how terrible PayPal is, but I too have been burned by them. They | shut down access to my personal account with no warning and no | option for recourse. | | Thankfully I didn't have any funds stored there, but it was | inconvenient and ruined any trust I previously had in them. | | Overall a terrible experience. | the_optimist wrote: | Far from being illegal, this type of engagement has been | historically preferred by US regulators. | | Perhaps someone can kindly check if this is a quiet reincarnation | of Operation Choke Point? | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point | freedomben wrote: | I've been burned by Paypal a number of times. But until recently | I hadn't yet been held hostage. Now I have. I wish I'd listened | to people on the internet. DO NOT USE PAYPAL. | swiley wrote: | If you don't like cryptocurrency stop making it necessary. | dandanua wrote: | At this point I believe crypto whales will intentionally ruin | conventional financial institutes and systems. | xvector wrote: | The systems are ruining themselves. Time and time again, | "conventional financial institutes" have abused their | positions of power wherever possible. | | It's no surprise that people are looking towards crypto, | which was created explicitly for the purpose of taking power | back from these institutes. People finally have another | option. | dandanua wrote: | Aha, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dI3MARgU0s8 | shkkmo wrote: | It isn't really clear what happened here, and that is a | significant part of the problem. I think we are well past the | time that we pass a law mandating the companies that provide | public services do what the EFF has suggested: | | > Provide meaningful notice to users. If PayPal is choosing to | shut down someone's account, they should provide detailed | guidance about what aspect of PayPal's terms were violated or why | the account was shut down, unless forbidden from doing so by a | legal prohibition or in cases of suspected account takeover. This | is a powerful mechanism for holding companies back from over- | reliance on automated account suspensions. | | > Adopt a meaningful appeal process. If a user's PayPal account | is shut down, they should have an opportunity to appeal to a | person that was not involved in the initial decision to shut down | the account. | croes wrote: | This IT company bans are always like out of a Kafka novel. We ban | you for your wrongdoing, you can't do anything about it and we | won't tell you what you did wrong. | seaourfreed wrote: | PayPal doesn't care about Tor. An intelligence service probably | wanted to force this shutting down of Tor enter/exit nodes, so | the percent of Tor enter/exit nodes were mostly the intelligence | service. (For the best Doxing) | gruez wrote: | >An intelligence service probably wanted to force this shutting | down of Tor enter/exit nodes, so the percent of Tor enter/exit | nodes were mostly the intelligence service. (For the best | Doxing) | | It's a nice conspiracy, although I'm not going to believe it | unless there's more evidence corroborating it (ie. mass reports | of people getting their paypal banned or increased churn in tor | relay nodes). | livueta wrote: | > increased churn in tor relay nodes | | There actually was something kinda close to that recently: | https://nusenu.medium.com/tracking-one-year-of-malicious- | tor... | | But that's an increase in known-malicious relays and exits | and doesn't speak to churn in existing, non-malicious nodes. | The attribution efforts made in that article also suggest a | different motive, though if I was a three-letterer attacking | Tor I'd probably also try to look as if I was a Russian | criminal bad at hiding my tracks. | timdaub wrote: | Biiiiitttccoooonnneeecccttttt | richardwhiuk wrote: | My bet would be that he's done non-Tor stuff with his account, | and that's why it's been shut. | [deleted] | StanislavPetrov wrote: | Perhaps you should read the linked article which states that | the EFF examined his paypal history and found nothing remotely | suspicious. | richardwhiuk wrote: | From what he shared. | wydfre wrote: | Why would anyone support Tor? I mean, really, it allows for | absolute evil. I would rather read about terrorist attacks in | foreign countries because of discontent than read about a tor | site, okay? | convery wrote: | Holding the money hostage for half a year on a 20 year old | account? Not surprising. Paypal and their other entities like | Ebay are pretty shit when it comes to nuance and their impact on | others. | | Had a 15 year old Paypal business account (parent started it and | I took it over ~7 years ago) and last year they shut it down | because I, as the new owner, was not 18 when the account was | created. Nothing from the support but "computer said you bad, | nothing we can do". | | In Ebays case I sold an item, got the regular email from Ebay | (DMARK/SPF/IP verified) that they had received payment and was | holding it until the item had been delivered. Then a week later I | got another email from them saying they had blocked the buyer for | abuse (i.e. a fraudulent transaction to them) and that I | shouldn't ship the item they told me to ship a week ago. After 2 | months of trying to get through to the support they just claimed | that someone spoofed their DMARK, SPF, and servers IP. After | explaining how impossible that would be their 'proof' that it was | 'spoofed' was that there should be a copy of the message in the | Ebay inbox where, after the reply, all messages about the auction | ever existing were suddenly gone. | syntheticnature wrote: | Not that it really matters to your points, but eBay and Paypal | split in 2015. | Qub3d wrote: | Not only did they split, they just forced all sellers to move | from PayPal to direct deposit: https://gizmodo.com/ebay-and- | paypal-finally-break-up-for-goo... | FridayoLeary wrote: | That sounds like good news. I don't see why i should have | to give PP a cut of everything i sell on Ebay. | Qub3d wrote: | I am ambivalent, but the reduced fees are nice. | gene91 wrote: | The cost to seller is mostly the same. eBay is now taking | the cuts (the cut they have always taken plus the cut | that used to be taken by PayPal) themselves instead. | FridayoLeary wrote: | Oh. That's nasty then. | exporectomy wrote: | I know that's mean of them but is it possible the account still | had your parent's identity attached to it? You certainly | shouldn't be access an account as if you're someone else. For | example, did you provided Paypal with all the identification | documentation to prove you're your real self and not still your | parent? | baybal2 wrote: | Personal experience: | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23506276 | | https://fairshake.com/paypal/how-to-sue/ | | http://www.screw-paypal.com/resources/small_claims_court.htm... | astrange wrote: | It's easier to file a report with the CFPB: | https://www.consumerfinance.gov | | I did get my PayPal account back by doing this, after I sent | out an eBay order so fast they decided I was a scammer | because the tracking info already said it arrived when I | added it to the invoice. | [deleted] | joe_momma wrote: | Doge to a dollar, then crash, then reset | theknocker wrote: | I removed all of my payment information from paypal when I | noticed they would readily engage in what amount to political | sanctions. | arvindrajnaidu wrote: | Long-time Tor supporters are model citizens. How does PayPal not | get this? | Dah00n wrote: | Evil is always fighting against good. | swayvil wrote: | Sounds like Paypal got one of those secret government demands | that we aren't allowed to talk about on pain of imprisonment. | amaccuish wrote: | We turned off PayPal for certain countries, because the "buyer | protection" found too often in an obviously fraudster favour. | (reinjection of label into UPS network, forged label for return | address etc. PayPal doesn't care as long as there is a tracking | number... who cares where it goes to right?). | | Anyone who has ever had anything to do with PayPal as a Seller | will tell you the same thing, as a buyer, always order with | PayPal, and you'll always win. | theturtletalks wrote: | Everyone is locked-in to PayPal at this point. Buyers have | their credit cards on it and get buyer protection. Sellers have | to support it since buyer's use PayPal as the default and don't | trust companies with their credit card info. | mpol wrote: | So, what is the alternative for PayPal? | | I sell only small-time. I don't want to do Creditcard, no Stripe | either (I don't have a registered company) and iDEAL is only | working in the Netherlands. So what is the internet alternative | for international selling. And, please, no crypto-currencies :) | | I am off to sleep, see you tomorrow. | kenniskrag wrote: | why not a traditional bank? You can open the account on your | name or the company (depends on the legal form). The advantage | is, that you can reach them by phone or in an office. Cross | country cash transfer are usually no problems and you can | manage your account on an e-banking website or sometimes on an | app. | adamcstephens wrote: | I'd even say go one step better and join a credit union. Less | to worry about when you're a member-owner of an organization | that is focused on its members and community over corporate | shareholders. | mattnewton wrote: | Sounds like you are aware of many alternatives to Paypal. Why | not register a company and use Stripe? ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-06-02 23:00 UTC)