• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Paypal Requiring a Cell Phone?

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Grandcheapskate

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2014
Messages
886
Location
New Jersey, USA
I tried to log into Paypal today and as usual it wanted to verify my ID. I selected the "Call Me" option but never got a call. I asked the system to send another call but got nothing.

I terminated the tab for Paypal and then started up a new tab hoping a restart would get Paypal to call. Except this time I wasn't given the option of a phone call. The only options were a text or a Whatsapp message.

So now I have to give them my cell number to get into my account? Nope. I am not opening up that number to being spammed with garbage.

Anyone else seeing this?

Thanks...Joe
 
Grandcheapskate said:
I tried to log into Paypal today and as usual it wanted to verify my ID. I selected the "Call Me" option but never got a call. I asked the system to send another call but got nothing.

I terminated the tab for Paypal and then started up a new tab hoping a restart would get Paypal to call. Except this time I wasn't given the option of a phone call. The only options were a text or a Whatsapp message.

So now I have to give them my cell number to get into my account? Nope. I am not opening up that number to being spammed with garbage.

Anyone else seeing this?

Thanks...Joe
Click to expand...
Not with PayPal, but on the rare occasion I have made use of this option with other companies that provide it. My impression is that verification by means of an automated voice phone call is a bit more complicated and less reliable when implemented.

PayPal only uses that cell number for the purpose of sending a verification text to secure your account login. PayPal never, ever, uses that number for any other purpose such as "spamming with garbage" nor do they share that number with anyone else. I have personally used PayPal since it started in 1998 and have never received phone or text spam that could be attributed to PayPal. Sure there are PayPal text scams - but those scammers have not gotten your cell number from PayPal.
 
Yeah, they're thoroughly scummy about trying to mine you for personal info. When they first rolled out the 2FA stuff I'd just have them send me an e-mail - then one day they just stopped listing that as an option, and the only ones available were call/text. Once they had my number, back came the e-mail option :/
 
I really hate the tendency to make the cell phone the centre of the digital life.

Why would I want to anchor my identity to a 90-gramme device that's made out of concentrated Fragilium, can easily be pilfered, and offers me clunky fat-fingered experiences, when there's a 25kg steel box safely located inside my house, and is completely customized to present a thoroughly baffling experience to anyone who might compromise it?
 
Yeah requiring a cellphone number is requiring a third party contract with a company that provides conventional telephone switching and routing. Hard pass. PayPal has no business forcing me into a contract with Verizon, AT&T, or anyone else. My business is with PayPal. Email should *always* be an alternative to anything requiring a telephone number.
 
segaloco said:
Yeah requiring a cellphone number is requiring a third party contract with a company that provides conventional telephone switching and routing. Hard pass. PayPal has no business forcing me into a contract with Verizon, AT&T, or anyone else. My business is with PayPal. Email should *always* be an alternative to anything requiring a telephone number.
Click to expand...
Are you saying you don't have a cell phone in this day and and age? Business is evolving and that's their current modus operandi. Almost all on-line services require a phone number for security. I don't see what the big deal is, especially with PayPal.
 
Then they need to take their modus operandi and stick it. A telephone does not identify me, and it is NOT ok.

Anyway, I just tried logging in to paypal, and it let me verify using e-mail, although at some point I had given them my voice landline telephone number. Interestingly in the verify options, it listed "call me", in addition to "text". So perhaps it will actually work with a proper landline.
 
SomeGuy said:
Then they need to take their modus operandi and stick it. A telephone does not identify me, and it is NOT ok.

Anyway, I just tried logging in to paypal, and it let me verify using e-mail, although at some point I had given them my voice landline telephone number. Interestingly in the verify options, it listed "call me", in addition to "text". So perhaps it will actually work with a proper landline.
Click to expand...
Wait . . . No the telephone does not ID you but the code you send back does.
 
To send the code, the sender needs to know the phone number which becomes an identifier. All other websites that have the same phone number or a related piece of information can simply put together a very detailed dossier for advertising purposes. In a lot of ways, the phone number doesn't make sense for internet use. People move a lot and the phone number will have to be changed in the process. Email can move with one.

Still, have to count the blessings that voting through Facebook was not legalized since concealing part of one's identity from Facebook would risk being charged with a felony on election day.
 
It used to be you got a new number every time you purchased a new cell phone but these days you can transfer your number. I guess you can pay cash for a burner phone and use that with your PayPal account. Ebay likes having a credit card or bank account attached to your accounts for verification which can be used to identify you.
 
Quagmire said:
No the telephone does not ID you but the code you send back does.
Click to expand...
Sadly, it often enough does not. SMS and phone calls are widely known to be one of the least secure methods of 2FA, so insecure that NIST tried to deprecate it in 2016, though that was shot down by some serious campaigning by the wireless industry.

The issue is that it's just far too easy to get access to someone's "phone" through various technical means (such as cloning the SIM) or, more often, social engineering of the carrier's support team. Any good service provider will be offering TOTP and time-unlimited one-time codes for 2FA, and will have no need of your phone number. (I generally remove my phone number of any service I can, not so much for privacy reasons as because I want to ensure that my phone cannot be used to access my account.)
 
cjs said:
Sadly, it often enough does not. SMS and phone calls are widely known to be one of the least secure methods of 2FA, so insecure that NIST tried to deprecate it in 2016, though that was shot down by some serious campaigning by the wireless industry.

The issue is that it's just far too easy to get access to someone's "phone" through various technical means (such as cloning the SIM) or, more often, social engineering of the carrier's support team. Any good service provider will be offering TOTP and time-unlimited one-time codes for 2FA, and will have no need of your phone number. (I generally remove my phone number of any service I can, not so much for privacy reasons as because I want to ensure that my phone cannot be used to access my account.)
Click to expand...
In the case of PayPal, and for the most part, it works. Anomalies are considered rare.
 
Quagmire said:
Are you saying you don't have a cell phone in this day and and age? Business is evolving and that's their current modus operandi. Almost all on-line services require a phone number for security. I don't see what the big deal is, especially with PayPal.
Click to expand...
Yes I am. I have many things to say about cell phones that involve words I don't wish to type on this forum. The closest cell phone to me is my work phone and it is strictly work except the outside circumstances where some service I need has decided those who do not subscribe to telephone service are persona non grata and refuse to accept my business without giving them a number. Generally I reject the notion but I have admittedly caved (for now) for the privilege of having a bank account and conventional utilities like power and running water.

A telephone number is a provision from any number of private corporations that are not the ones generating my electricity, purifying and pumping my water, nor holding my financial assets in an account, so the fact that a phone number is required for any of this is completely asinine. It is a product that did not exist prior to the 1870s, but communicating with businesses rendering you goods and services predates that date by several millennia. No, I do not require a cell phone to do these things, businesses just have a penchant for hating people who won't buy every last little convenience so they can put zero effort into effective customer communication. In other words, expecting every customer to pay for and maintain a telephone service contract is offloading the cost of communication in business to each individual customer in a way that isn't obvious from the number on a utility bill. If I didn't have this work phone and was required to hold a cell number to do business with these basic services, I would remind them every month what portion of the pie chart of the cost of my cell phone and service is their fault.

I don't want the things in my life at all and nobody can tell me owning a small computing device that didn't exist a few decades ago is a hard requirement for being a human being on the planet earth. End of story. The cell phone industrial complex has enough proponents trying to make that crap a requirement of basic livelihood, why you gotta carry water for them too?
 
Around here a landline is more expensive than a cell phone these days. If you don't browse the web on your phone much you can basically get a cell phone with unlimited phone and text for pretty much nothing (use your wifi for updates and don't even need a data plan). Tracfone still has a $49.99 1-year service add on when you buy data or a one-month plan. Much better than the 90's where you paid $50 a month and you paid for every phone call you made (and text wasn't a thing back then).
 
segaloco said:
Yes I am. I have many things to say about cell phones that involve words I don't wish to type on this forum. The closest cell phone to me is my work phone and it is strictly work except the outside circumstances where some service I need has decided those who do not subscribe to telephone service are persona non grata and refuse to accept my business without giving them a number. Generally I reject the notion but I have admittedly caved (for now) for the privilege of having a bank account and conventional utilities like power and running water.

A telephone number is a provision from any number of private corporations that are not the ones generating my electricity, purifying and pumping my water, nor holding my financial assets in an account, so the fact that a phone number is required for any of this is completely asinine. It is a product that did not exist prior to the 1870s, but communicating with businesses rendering you goods and services predates that date by several millennia. No, I do not require a cell phone to do these things, businesses just have a penchant for hating people who won't buy every last little convenience so they can put zero effort into effective customer communication. In other words, expecting every customer to pay for and maintain a telephone service contract is offloading the cost of communication in business to each individual customer in a way that isn't obvious from the number on a utility bill. If I didn't have this work phone and was required to hold a cell number to do business with these basic services, I would remind them every month what portion of the pie chart of the cost of my cell phone and service is their fault.

I don't want the things in my life at all and nobody can tell me owning a small computing device that didn't exist a few decades ago is a hard requirement for being a human being on the planet earth. End of story. The cell phone industrial complex has enough proponents trying to make that crap a requirement of basic livelihood, why you gotta carry water for them too?
Click to expand...
Got it! Do you have a TV at home and walk to work?
 
I have a 2000-ish Trinitron and work remotely. I walk, bike, and skate for all my transit except on inclement days that require hopping on the bus. I don't know what you're getting at but if you're suggesting that I can't criticize the society I participate in, know that is a distractionary fallacy in social discourse that only serves to shut down legitimate critique of classist requirements like owning and maintaining cellphone service by suggesting that the working class isn't really suffering because they enjoy a modern convenience from time to time.

Not trying to be a jerk but you're touching on sleepy surface level analysis of a matter that I have spent years of my life both experiencing personally as well as studying and exploring others' experiences with the same. Long story short you're not going to convince me, ever, that I am required to own a private device made by a private company to participate in our public civic society. To suggest otherwise is to suggest there is a certain amount of time, money, and or effort that is greater than $0 that an individual in a public, civic society owes to private commercial interest. Don't let them fool you, they don't own this world yet, but attitudes like "just go buy the convenience" don't combat the root cause.

Rant over, I don't mean to suck down the air but I wanted to make it abundantly clear I'm not just being a troll or making some uneducated BS commentary, there is more to it than not buying some thing.
 
segaloco said:
I have a 2000-ish Trinitron and work remotely. I walk, bike, and skate for all my transit except on inclement days that require hopping on the bus. I don't know what you're getting at but if you're suggesting that I can't criticize the society I participate in, know that is a distractionary fallacy in social discourse that only serves to shut down legitimate critique of classist requirements like owning and maintaining cellphone service by suggesting that the working class isn't really suffering because they enjoy a modern convenience from time to time.

Not trying to be a jerk but you're touching on sleepy surface level analysis of a matter that I have spent years of my life both experiencing personally as well as studying and exploring others' experiences with the same. Long story short you're not going to convince me, ever, that I am required to own a private device made by a private company to participate in our public civic society. To suggest otherwise is to suggest there is a certain amount of time, money, and or effort that is greater than $0 that an individual in a public, civic society owes to private commercial interest. Don't let them fool you, they don't own this world yet, but attitudes like "just go buy the convenience" don't combat the root cause.

Rant over, I don't mean to suck down the air but I wanted to make it abundantly clear I'm not just being a troll or making some uneducated BS commentary, there is more to it than not buying some thing.
Click to expand...
Ok, but how is it you have a computer?
 
Last edited:
Not wanting to entice a debate, but...

I'm doing my best to live without a cell phone for the rest of my life. I've also made certain none of the tech or computers I own contain any tracking in hardware or software too. Someday I'll go to the public library as a last resort for internet use, even though their comps won't have any privacy.

Ahh... If only people today would appreciate the peace of mind of not being spied on. How can they sleep at night, really? Privacy is sadly a now forgotten and misunderstood value.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top