Yawn.....Another multi-million dollar data breach

[classicman]

My card was not replaced. I was not notified of any breach or possible breach. Additionally, when I called there was no admission by them either.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

My card was not replaced. I was not notified of any breach or possible breach. Additionally, when I called there was no admission by them either.

I don't see the necessary statement, "The security of my card was breeched". Without that fact, the entire post is meaningless. How do you know a security breech of your card even existed?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Mine hasn't been replaced.

Originally Posted by tw

I don't see the necessary statement, "The security of my card was breeched". Without that fact, the entire post is meaningless. How do you know a security breech of your card even existed?

So I suppose mine is meaningless also? And Wolf's was meaning less because she was only speculating hers was replaced because of the security breech?

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

And Wolf's was meaning less because she was only speculating hers was replaced because of the security breech?

Classicman said his card was not replaced. Completely different from wolf whose card was replaced.

Wolf said a card was replaced due to a security breech. classicman suggested his card was not replaced due to no security breech. classicman is invited correct his post to make it relevant. For example, he could add the missing sentence "My card security was breeched". Obviously his post is currently ambiguous.

[xoxoxoBruce]

No, Wolf said her card was replace and she SUSPECTED is was because of the publicized security breach, but they wouldn't confirm it.

I said my card was not replaced after the publicized security breach.

Classic said his card was not replaced and although they wouldn't confirm whether his card was breached or not, he was assuming it wasn't because it was not replaced.

If you didn't tail post you would have know that.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Classic said his card was not replaced and although they wouldn't confirm whether his card was breached or not,

Which is exactly what I posted. So your complaint is what? That you did not comprehend what was posted? Or that you now admit classicman's post as ambiguous?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Oh stop it. None of the posts were ambiguous, you're just stirring shit.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

No, Wolf said her card was replace and she SUSPECTED is was because of the publicized security breach, but they wouldn't confirm it.

To clarify ...

My card was replaced after the 12/06 TJ Maxx breach. Citibank admitted that it was because of TJ Maxx that they were replacing the cards. Funny thing was, that I pretty much NEVER shop at TJ Maxx, except that was just after momwolf came home from the nursing home and in the midst of making Christmas extraspecial for her, I bought two nightgowns at TJ Maxx, which I then had to return. So ... had I not done a good deed, I wouldn't have exposed that particular card to that particular store.

So anyway ... it was just about three or four months ago that I received two new Citibank cards on that same account in fairly quick succession. The explanatory letter admitted to a security breach on the part of a large vendor. They did not, in the content of that letter, reveal the name of the vendor. They also would not, when I contacted the Citibank Security Department directly, reveal the name of the vendor, but they did confirm that a breach had occurred.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Then where ever it was, it's someplace that Classic and myself don't shop, so he was right in assuming his card had not been compromised*.




*That they know of.

[tw]

Originally Posted by wolf

So anyway ... it was just about three or four months ago that I received two new Citibank cards on that same account in fairly quick succession.

New cards on the same account - or new account numbers?