Visa Accidentally Charges People $23 Quadrillion

from the yes,-that's-a-real-number dept

I saw a couple of days ago on Consumerist that a teen had apparently discovered a debit of $23,148,855,308,184,500.00 on her debit card for a purchase at the local drug store. That’s $23 quadrillion — or 2,000 times the national debt. CNN is now reporting that a bunch of folks were hit with this charge (the identical number). Most are also dealing with insufficient funds charges. Visa, not surprisingly, is apologetic, promising to sort things out and agreeing to get rid of any excess charges due to this. However, it does make you wonder… shouldn’t Visa’s debit cards have some sort of “reality check” included?

Filed Under: ,
Companies: visa

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Visa Accidentally Charges People $23 Quadrillion”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
46 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Easy Fix

On forums.christianity.com he has an icon somewhat similar to yours and he argues kinda like you (with the whole thing about Wal Mart and using the word “starve” because we had a discussion and Wal Mart was mentioned in the discussionand he used that very same word in a context similar to the context used here about the unions).

Anonymous Coward says:

CC companies can garnish wages and take you to court and stop you from buying a house under the right circumstances. But when they make a mistake (a pretty fucking big mistake at that excuse the french) they just have to apologize and take what they over charged away, I feel that they should be responsible for added compensation whether its additional monies, or a $20 gas card, something to try and prevent future mistakes like this from happening. Plus its good business…oh wait they don’t need a good business model cause everyone needs them I forgot

Gyroc says:

CC companies can garnish wages and take you to court and stop you from buying a house under the right circumstances. But when they make a mistake (a pretty fucking big mistake at that excuse the french) they just have to apologize and take what they over charged away, I feel that they should be responsible for added compensation whether its additional monies, or a $20 gas card, something to try and prevent future mistakes like this from happening. Plus its good business…oh wait they don’t need a good business model cause everyone needs them I forgot.

pegr (profile) says:

Obviously a data conversion error...

The processor submits the batch to Visa, let’s say. The file spec says “pad the digits on the left with nulls”, but the programmer pads it with spaces. Null in hex is “00”, but a space in hex is “20”. Now a five dollar transaction, instead of this: “000000000000500” now looks like: “202020202020500”… Whoopsie!

(Yes, I know I didn’t convert the $5 to hex, it’s just an example…)

Xanthir, FCD (profile) says:

Re: Re: Obviously a data conversion error...

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1133581/is-23-148-855-308-184-500-a-magic-number-or-sheer-chance

A comment there brings up an excellent point. All of the charges we’re seeing are the *same* value, 0x2020202020201250. After you remove the padding spaces that were put there you’re left with 0x1250, which is 4688 in decimal. Since these amounts are always sent in cents, that corresponds to a $46.88 charge. There’s no way that all of the customers I’ve seen (and the 13k supposedly affected, if we assume that they all have the same amount as well) purchased the exact same value of items. One guy bought a pack of cigs and incurred the charge, which is simply impossible to reach $46.88 with.

This is pretty clearly not *just* a padding issue. There’s a genuine bug behind this, or perhaps a hack attempt. This does sort of smell like a buffer overflow exploit…

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Obviously a data conversion error...

I think you nailed it. Time to fire the software QA folks and get some that know what they are doing. Software Engineers makes these kinds of mistakes all the time, testing should find them. This one should have been really obvious. Did they test thier code before putting into production? And, how did that transaction get approved by the bank? Some system, nice work Visa.

Hidden Force says:

(*Dr. Evil voice*) $23 Quadrillion Dollars

I tried to calculate how much this charge is compared to all the money in the world. Although it’s difficult to find an estimate of the total amount of money in the world, the CIA Factbook says that the estimated Gross World Product is $62.25 trillion (in USD). Therefore this charge is a “mere” 371.869 times larger than the entire GWP.

Anonymous Coward says:

I asked the same question...

About 3 years ago my debit card was charged $9,910. It turned out to be a mistake from a company that was supposed to charge me $99.10. I was hit with overage charges and it took over a week to resolve with the banks and company involved.

A few weeks after that incident, I used a credit card (not debit) to buy gas about 50 miles from my house. I immediately received a call from the credit card company alerting me to unusual behavior.

After that, I asked the same question: Why don’t debit cards have the same ‘check’ protection that credit cards have?

btr1701 (profile) says:

Re: Remember Y2K anyone?

> Basically the same situation here if you impose
> a modern day limit on a system that could end
> up being used well into the future.

You don’t have to limit the amount of characters allowed in the field, just put in a simple line of code that blocks any transaction over a certain amount. If that needs to be changed in the future, it would be a simple thing to go back in and eliminate that line of code and free up the block.

anymouse (profile) says:

Are we following the money? Where's the rest of the story?

I’m willing to accept that this ‘could’ just be a mistake, but has anyone looked closer at where the money is going? I’m not talking about the 23 quadrillion x however many customers were charged, but how much money VISA earned on the ‘float’ that would be involved in transactions of this size. My guess is that the interest earned by ‘someone’ on these funds over an hour or two would be more than most US families are likely to see in income in an entire year (including both spouses salaries and all their kids part time jobs).

The term ‘Gaming the system’ comes to mind, and I have a feeling that ‘someone’ ‘somewhere’ knew exactly what they were doing when they caused this to happen. And yes, my tinfoil hat may be a little tight today (with the recession and all).

Anonymous Coward says:

Reactionary much?

Wow, you all are ridiculous. I would think that this site, which routinely calls out politicians and businessmen for grandstanding and demanding changes based on issues that, truly, are not that significant, would not stoop to this level.

The error is obvious from the amount charged – the processor padded the amount with spaces instead of zeros, which when converted from hex resulted in an extraordinarily large number. As exciting as it may be to bluster about how many Libraries of Congresses or World GDPs the amount was, it’s a simple data error. No one embezzled trillions of dollars of interest, no one was ever at risk of losing their home, and no we don’t need a law requiring all credit card processing code to be kludged up with arbitrary limits that “we can just change later!”

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Reactionary much?

The error is obvious from the amount charged – the processor padded the amount with spaces instead of zeros, which when converted from hex resulted in an extraordinarily large number.

Hmm, I wonder if *I* could get away with that. Cash a check for, say, $10000 on an account with only twenty bucks in it and when it bounced say “That ‘10000’ was in binary!”, i.e. really only $16? No, I suspect my butt would wind up in jail.

btr1701 (profile) says:

Re: Reactionary much?

> it’s a simple data error… we don’t need a law requiring all
> credit card processing code to be kludged up with arbitrary
> limits that “we can just change later!”

We don’t need a law– and no ever suggested we need one. But it would seem prudent, especially when people suffer time and expense dealing with the fees and charges that typically come with these “simple data errors”.

If the companies’ reps weren’t so mindless and robotic and had the ability to use common sense in situations like this, rather than giving customers the run-around over something so obviously erroneous, then technical remedies wouldn’t be necessary.

As that is not the case, they are.

Xanthir, FCD (profile) says:

Re: Re: Reactionary much?

If the companies’ reps weren’t so mindless and robotic and had the ability to use common sense in situations like this, rather than giving customers the run-around over something so obviously erroneous, then technical remedies wouldn’t be necessary.

That’d be the issue. Visa should have had technological safeguards against charges this high in the first place, and then reps should have been sufficiently trained that they can decide by themselves that a multi-quadrillion dollar charge is obviously wrong.

Anonymous Coward says:

Not just Visa, but Bank of America for this gaff. The same BofA who decided, without asking, to do a merge of accounts that looked similar binding my card in Pennsylvania to my estranged spouse’s in California so I could not access the information about it online, but he could.
Their system was so well done that we couldn’t unentangle my account from his after the merge, and after countless contacts with customer service which included several expensive long distance conference calls, I had to abandon 24 years of perfect credit history on that card and apply for a new one. So now I have a canceled card on my record, a lower charge limit, and a new card, all lowering my credit rating.
Good thing I could trust my spouse. How horrible would it have been for all that data to be made available to someone who might have been an unscrupulous enemy?

John85851 (profile) says:

Apologies?

How come VISA and the banks just give a curt apology and act as if we’re talking about wanting a $10 service charge? This is a *quadrillion* dollars! Does any banker anywhere really seriously think anyone can charge this much? And if so, who in the world has that kind of a credit line? I don’t think Oprah or Bill Gates could spend that kind of money… okay, maybe if they bought the entire planet, but who would they buy it from? 😉

Seriously, though, why isn’t there more of an apology from the banks? Did someone get fired? Did the entire accounting department get fired? Did the bank give anything back to the people who were charged this amount, like maybe free premium-level services for a few years?

Leave a Reply to Techflaws.org Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...