> I've been called by the credit card company many times for failed transactions that I've authorized. When fraud did occur then I was not contacted by my card company and I had only noticed the fraud because I actively monitor my card.
Yes, credit card antifraud has both false positives and false negatives. It's not clear to me whether you're going from there to saying that it is useless?
> I do not think that the credit card company should be permitted to sell the information about my transaction under the guise of determining how likely it is that someone has stolen my card.
I think I misunderstood you earlier. When you wrote "the credit card processor should not have any right whatsoever to do anything with the facts..." I thought you meant that they shouldn't be allowed to use the credit card data to do anything, including fraud prevention, not just that they shouldn't be allowed to sell it?
Yes, credit card antifraud has both false positives and false negatives. It's not clear to me whether you're going from there to saying that it is useless?
> I do not think that the credit card company should be permitted to sell the information about my transaction under the guise of determining how likely it is that someone has stolen my card.
I think I misunderstood you earlier. When you wrote "the credit card processor should not have any right whatsoever to do anything with the facts..." I thought you meant that they shouldn't be allowed to use the credit card data to do anything, including fraud prevention, not just that they shouldn't be allowed to sell it?