pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Istock is hacked?  (Read 15063 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

drd

« on: November 29, 2012, 13:07 »
0

Hello, I am following the forum for a while greetings to everyone!

A post with a similar subject "Istock is hacked" appeared on the istock forums few days ago. This thread is not live anymore, it was quickly deleted, despite several people answered to it. Someone was saying he registered on istockresseller to see if they have our non-watermarked files on their servers.

I decided to check out that as well, so here is my experience:
_I registered with istockresseller and received a $2 bonus within 1 hour of registration.
_with that $2 bonus I was able to purchase and download from their site an xsmall non-watermarked image of one of my files which I uploaded to istock only few days ago.
_the purchase instantly appeared on my istock account as an xxl file download and the royalty received was $11.

I double checked the sale with istock's customer support and they said the download and the received royalty is correct.

How is that istockresseller got hold of non-watermarked images? Shouldn't we get protection for our images on istock? Does Istock really do not know that their website is hacked? I am wondering what is happening here?

Any ideas on what to do? I feel robbed.

Thanks.


Poncke

« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2012, 13:18 »
0
If thats true, you can buy all your images for 2$ a pop and make a 9$ profit. Wow....

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2012, 13:19 »
0
I've noticed my recent uploads flying onto that site. It has been reported several times on the iStock forum, usually deleted soon afterwards. Apparently they're working on it. Don't know why it's taking so long. You'd think they'd get Getty's big money lawyers onto it.

But you paid $2 and it showed up as a XXL sale netting your $11? If that wasn't an incredible timing coincidence, you're quids in. That can hardly be the sales model. The trouble with CR is so often getting the cookie cutter 'that is the correct amount', which I got one time to a totally different question.

« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2012, 13:21 »
0
Read this blog post from Sean with more on this. As far as I know from the photographers who downloaded their own photos with the $2 credit (and reported those file numbers via Sean to iStock) no refunds yet.

Not sure why it's taking so long for iStock to shut them down.

drd

« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2012, 13:53 »
0
Thanks for the link, I didn't know about this blog.
It is worrying that the scam site has access to non-watermarked images. Which in my opinion means that this scam is more than just cross linking.

RacePhoto

« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2012, 14:03 »
0
Thanks for the link, I didn't know about this blog.
It is worrying that the scam site has access to non-watermarked images. Which in my opinion means that this scam is more than just cross linking.

I'd be more worried that it's a scam site collecting CC numbers for future use.

Either way, they have been reported and for some reason Getty is doing nothing to stop them?

Anyone have a confirmed download, that's paid? I'd open an account and download the worst never sold, piece of "not suitable for stock" image. There would be no accidental co-incidental download. LOL

But I won't give out my CC numbers to a site that's already stealing images.

« Reply #6 on: November 29, 2012, 14:11 »
0
Several contributors have used the $2 that gets added to most new accounts to download their own images - so no credit card changed hands. The site had PayPal before iStock got their account closed - the site you buy from gets no info about how payment was made. After that the contributors who tried to sign up got an "under construction" page for payments. I think I read something about another payment processor showing up - PayPal-like, but not.

I'm not signing up to do experiments, but there should be no credit card detail issues. And you can always get those throwaway numbers for sites you're not sure of.

« Reply #7 on: November 29, 2012, 14:25 »
0
Thanks for the link, I didn't know about this blog.
It is worrying that the scam site has access to non-watermarked images. Which in my opinion means that this scam is more than just cross linking.

They have access inasmuch as anyone who buys an image has access.

drd

« Reply #8 on: November 29, 2012, 15:04 »
0
Unfortunately the paypal function is up and running again on the scam site. I also don't feel experimenting with this any further, but someone from istock should definitely see why paypal has unblocked their account.

« Reply #9 on: November 29, 2012, 15:26 »
0
I don't see it.  Still says "Under construction".

« Reply #10 on: November 29, 2012, 15:42 »
0
If thats true, you can buy all your images for 2$ a pop and make a 9$ profit. Wow....

Yeah why would you feel robbed receiving 500% more royalties then you should?

drd

« Reply #11 on: November 29, 2012, 15:45 »
0
I don't see it.  Still says "Under construction".

you have to login, then you have the option to add money to your balance. If you click through you will get to the paypal payment. Their email address is [email protected]
See the image attached.



« Reply #12 on: November 29, 2012, 15:53 »
0
I don't see it.  Still says "Under construction".

Actually even better, they say: Under Contruction , they must have typed it fast in their urge not to get sued :)

« Reply #13 on: November 29, 2012, 15:55 »
0
It sounds like a phishing site trying to get PayPal login and passwords from people. They probably don't have an actual account with PayPal they are using. They probably just put up a fake Paypal payment screen to get you to enter your Paypal account details thinking you are logging into your PayPal account. Then once they got your PayPal account login details they would rob you later.

They are also probably mining for email addresses to send other types of scam emails to in the future. They probably figure if people fall for this site then they will fall for other scams too. Anyone who signs up for this site can probably expect a barrage of assorted scam emails to follow.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2012, 16:00 by bokehgal »

drd

« Reply #14 on: November 29, 2012, 15:55 »
0
If thats true, you can buy all your images for 2$ a pop and make a 9$ profit. Wow....

Yeah why would you feel robbed receiving 500% more royalties then you should?

Doesn't matter how much the amount is, istock will send an email for a refund soon. The point/problem here is how is possible that a scam site got hold and sells our images from istock and with no watermarks.

« Reply #15 on: November 29, 2012, 15:58 »
0
How do most contributors upload their content to iStock? Using Deep Meta?

lisafx

« Reply #16 on: November 29, 2012, 16:03 »
+1
Doesn't matter how much the amount is, istock will send an email for a refund soon. The point/problem here is how is possible that a scam site got hold and sells our images from istock and with no watermarks.

Great, so some of the few pitiful sales I've gotten lately at Istock aren't even real, and they will take that money back?  Great.  Happy Holidays again from your friends at Istock.  :P

« Reply #17 on: November 29, 2012, 16:22 »
0
It sounds like a phishing site trying to get PayPal login and passwords from people. They probably don't have an actual account with PayPal they are using. They probably just put up a fake Paypal payment screen to get you to enter your Paypal account details thinking you are logging into your PayPal account. Then once they got your PayPal account login details they would rob you later.

They are also probably mining for email addresses to send other types of scam emails to in the future. They probably figure if people fall for this site then they will fall for other scams too. Anyone who signs up for this site can probably expect a barrage of assorted scam emails to follow.

No, they redirected initially to a real paypal page.

« Reply #18 on: November 29, 2012, 16:41 »
0
That reminds me.
Why dont I get some software that can access the national bank, and have them issue banknotes to me.

I mean. This is fraud on the highest level, and can iStock not prevent it from happening, they should better close the shop.
As it is now they are spreading our images all over the world and undermining both us and the whole business.

And they dare refund us!


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #19 on: November 29, 2012, 16:54 »
0
How do most contributors upload their content to iStock? Using Deep Meta?
I believe so, but I don't upload via DM and my pics fly onto that site.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #20 on: November 29, 2012, 18:11 »
0
Re that site, from the contributer newsletter:
"Our legal team continues to investigate this matter and we will keep you updated. That being said, please consider this a reminder to guard your iStockphoto credentials carefully. Do not use your iStock log in details at any other sites, and consider changing your passwords from time to time.

And while were on the topic of fraud, lets talk about refunds. There is a lot of discussion in the forums about refunds at iStockphoto being higher than normal due to credit card fraud. This is simply not the case. We have a very robust set of fraud detection systems in place, and, in fact, our credit card fraud rates are below the standards set by the credit card companies."

Poncke

« Reply #21 on: November 29, 2012, 18:22 »
0
Re that site, from the contributer newsletter:
"Our legal team continues to investigate this matter and we will keep you updated. That being said, please consider this a reminder to guard your iStockphoto credentials carefully. Do not use your iStock log in details at any other sites, and consider changing your passwords from time to time.

And while were on the topic of fraud, lets talk about refunds. There is a lot of discussion in the forums about refunds at iStockphoto being higher than normal due to credit card fraud. This is simply not the case. We have a very robust set of fraud detection systems in place, and, in fact, our credit card fraud rates are below the standards set by the credit card companies."

Thats an utter fallacy.

If the CC companies have a 1% standard and istock figures went up from say 0.3 to 0.9 percent everybody would notice the 0.6% increase. So being below standards doesnt mean there was no increase.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #22 on: November 29, 2012, 18:23 »
0
Re that site, from the contributer newsletter:
"Our legal team continues to investigate this matter and we will keep you updated. That being said, please consider this a reminder to guard your iStockphoto credentials carefully. Do not use your iStock log in details at any other sites, and consider changing your passwords from time to time.

And while were on the topic of fraud, lets talk about refunds. There is a lot of discussion in the forums about refunds at iStockphoto being higher than normal due to credit card fraud. This is simply not the case. We have a very robust set of fraud detection systems in place, and, in fact, our credit card fraud rates are below the standards set by the credit card companies."

Thats an utter fallacy.

If the CC companies have a 1% standard and istock figures went up from say 0.3 to 0.9 percent everybody would notice the 0.6% increase. So being below standards doesnt mean there was no increase.

Maybe refunds are 'higher than normal' because more buyers are requesting refunds for whatever reason (no zoom; higher prices, Jupiter aligning with Mars ...)

Poncke

« Reply #23 on: November 29, 2012, 18:46 »
0
Re that site, from the contributer newsletter:
"Our legal team continues to investigate this matter and we will keep you updated. That being said, please consider this a reminder to guard your iStockphoto credentials carefully. Do not use your iStock log in details at any other sites, and consider changing your passwords from time to time.

And while were on the topic of fraud, lets talk about refunds. There is a lot of discussion in the forums about refunds at iStockphoto being higher than normal due to credit card fraud. This is simply not the case. We have a very robust set of fraud detection systems in place, and, in fact, our credit card fraud rates are below the standards set by the credit card companies."

Thats an utter fallacy.

If the CC companies have a 1% standard and istock figures went up from say 0.3 to 0.9 percent everybody would notice the 0.6% increase. So being below standards doesnt mean there was no increase.

Maybe refunds are 'higher than normal' because more buyers are requesting refunds for whatever reason (no zoom; higher prices, Jupiter aligning with Mars ...)
or that  ;D

« Reply #24 on: November 29, 2012, 18:56 »
+2
Re that site, from the contributer newsletter:
"Our legal team continues to investigate this matter and we will keep you updated. That being said, please consider this a reminder to guard your iStockphoto credentials carefully. Do not use your iStock log in details at any other sites, and consider changing your passwords from time to time.

And while were on the topic of fraud, lets talk about refunds. There is a lot of discussion in the forums about refunds at iStockphoto being higher than normal due to credit card fraud. This is simply not the case. We have a very robust set of fraud detection systems in place, and, in fact, our credit card fraud rates are below the standards set by the credit card companies."

I'm one of them who used their $2 promotion to buy an XS of my own -- a newly uploaded file, in my portfolio for one day, no views.  MyUploads, open in another window at the time, immediately showed a download of an XL, the largest size available for me.  iStock was notified.  I haven't seen a refund yet.  This was 11 days ago.  My purchase from istockreseller was done in an incognito window, with no cookies or caching or history or IP information going to them, with a throw-away account that has no connection to my real name or email address.  They have no paypal info or credit card info from me, and I've received no other emails from them or anyone else (which frankly surprised me, as I expected a boatload of spam).  The downloaded file went immediately into the trash without being opened (who knows what they might have embedded in them). 

With several people doing this now and providing all the detail to iStock (and one would assume iStock would be doing this to, to track the payer of these), I question the "very robust set of fraud detection systems".  Someone is paying for these large size purchases from iStock.  I still believe that if this happened to Amazon or BestBuy or your bank, this would not still be going on almost a month after first being reported.  Can it be that difficult to track where it's coming from when they get paid for these?

I understand some of the responses and Sean's blog post -- no, the site probably hasn't been "hacked" -- but someone is getting our images.  This is taking the fun out of getting downloads, because now I instantly wonder if they are legitimate, and if I will find myself going into the hole after the next payout (I also don't understand the time delay for the refunds).


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Hacked

Started by tab62 General Stock Discussion

13 Replies
4162 Views
Last post October 27, 2011, 17:51
by madelaide
296 Replies
48562 Views
Last post December 02, 2011, 01:17
by hoi ha
6 Replies
4961 Views
Last post March 16, 2012, 22:26
by sbonk
33 Replies
14437 Views
Last post December 09, 2012, 20:39
by gostwyck
6 Replies
3979 Views
Last post February 06, 2014, 01:07
by ArenaCreative

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle