cardshop – TOR Scam Report (1)
Onion Link: http://s57divisqlcjtsyutxjz2ww77vlbwpxgodtijcsrgsuts4js5hnxkhqd.onion
Scam Report Date: 2024/01/03
Client Scam Report Breakdown
Original Report Summary:
The client reported placing an order on January 2nd (referred to as 1/2) for a selection of credit card details with known balances from a carding site specializing in U.S. CVVs and international CCs (credit card numbers). According to the client’s account, despite the passage of time, the order status remains stuck in “in progress,” suggesting the service provider has not completed the transaction or delivered the purchased product. The client’s primary grievance lies in the extended delay and lack of communication or updates from the vendor, which has led to suspicion of fraudulent activity.
The products listed on the carding site offer detailed credit card information, including card numbers, CVVs, and account balances. The term “known balance” means that the user purchasing the cards would be aware of both the available credit and the current balance on the card, which allows for careful exploitation without risking overcharging and rendering the card useless. In addition to this, the site emphasizes the cards are designed for usage with specific payment platforms like PayPal, Stripe, Venmo, and others. The promise of being able to hit “first time guaranteed” implies that the cards are marketed as functional and usable immediately, adding to the user’s frustration when their order status remained stagnant after payment.
Analysis of Scam Elements
The client’s report highlights a common issue in fraudulent marketplaces – the delay or outright non-delivery of purchased items. Carding sites like this often lure buyers with promises of “high quality” products and services, but their lack of accountability often results in scams. In this instance, the scam could be in the form of a false promise of product delivery. The client mentions the “second status” being stuck “in progress,” which is part of a typical multi-step order processing system where a product is paid for, processed, and delivered. However, the scam in this case appears to center around the vendor stalling at the processing phase, leaving the buyer without the product or a refund.
Terminology like “non-AVS” (Address Verification System) and “non-verified by Visa” is also significant here. AVS refers to a system used to verify that the billing address provided matches the address on file with the card issuer, and its absence indicates that the card data is more likely to succeed in bypassing fraud detection systems. By promising non-AVS cards, the vendor essentially markets the cards as easier to use for fraudulent activities. The client’s expectations are shaped by these promises, which makes the lack of delivery even more suspect. Furthermore, since the client specifically ordered cards with “known balances,” they were expecting fully usable cards, yet they received nothing in return.
Conclusion and Terminology
In the context of this scam, the site’s claims of providing “high quality” cards with precise information and immediate usability served as a marketing tactic to reassure buyers like the client. However, the significant delay in processing and the complete lack of communication indicates the high likelihood of fraudulent activity. Key terms like “CC” (credit card), “CVV” (card verification value), and “balance” are central to the scam. A CC refers to the credit card number, while CVV is the security code on the card, and “balance” refers to how much money is currently available to spend. The guarantee of “available credit” further lures buyers into thinking they are making a safe, calculated purchase when in reality, they are being scammed.
By segmenting the client’s experience and analyzing the vendor’s claims, it becomes clear that this carding site operates as a typical scam, preying on users who believe they are receiving valuable, usable financial information. The promise of non-AVS, high-quality cards is deceptive, and the failure to deliver the order shows that this is likely a bait-and-switch scheme. The client, having expected timely delivery and full product transparency, has instead been met with an unresponsive and fraudulent vendor.
