PayPal implements EV SLL to combat phishing

PayPal have moved further ahead in the fight against phishing by implementing EV SSL certificate support. SSL has been standard in browsers for some time and stands for Secure Socket layer, the EV stands for Extended Validation. Other browsers are looking to follow, but Microsoft plans implementation by the end of the month for Internet Explorer 7.

PayPal are one of the very first sites to go live with EV SSL certificates, having just released Security devices it's good to see they're pushing ahead with more stringent security as well.

The big difference you'll see with EV SSL certificates is the lock icon (the padlock or key depending on your browser) will be moved from the Status Bar at the bottom of your browser to the address bar at the top (where you type the web address). In addition the address bar will turn green for known safe sites, red for known phishing sites, and yellow for suspected phishing sites.

One issue for the Firefox (Mozilla based) browser is that it already changes the address bar yellow for standard SSL certificated websites. With users trained to associate yellow as "safe", using it for "Suspect" on IE will take some getting accustomed to and may lesson the security awareness it may have otherwise had. EV SSL support is unlikely to appear in FireFox until version 3.0 is released later this year.

There are also concerns that smaller websites who have been unaffected by phishing attacks will be able to afford certification costs leaving users unsure which sites are secure and which are simply uncertified.

Revealed : How the Sunday Times decided to set up eBay sellers

This morning's Sunday Times carries a piece which it claims reveals how eBay sellers push up the prices on their own items, a practice which the paper believes is "widespread" across the site. Though the report alleges that "businesses ranging from overseas property agencies to car dealerships" shill-bid, they focus on one single seller, who apparently admitted to an "undercover reporter" that his associates bid on his auctions for him.

TameBay were contacted by a reporter from the Sunday Times back in December. This is what he had to say:

Hello Sue,

I am researching an article on Ebay "spill bidding" ie: the process of artificially bidding up an item's value through false email addresses, friends or associates. Is this something you have ever come across? I would be interested to hear examples.

Many thanks

Jonathan Calvert
Insight Editor

Some reporting if he can't even get the term 'shill bidding' right! We know that several other UK eBaying websites were contacted by this same gentleman, begging for information and examples of shill bidding. One, UK Auction Help, even went so far as to email all *it's* members, asking if they could help with examples:

Subject: Fair Trader Scheme ­ Can you help?
...
I have been contacted by Jonathan Calvert the Insight Editor on the Sunday Times, he is working on an article about Shill bidding.

I have spoken to him about this but have no current examples to show him.

If you have any examples, recent experience etc of Shill Bidding on eBay he would like to hear from you.

eBay sellers who are members of this scheme might like to consider whether an organisation which is so ready to help the biased media tar all eBay sellers with the same 'shiller' brush, is one that they wish to continue to support.

Furthermore, Mr Calvert has obviously begun his research with the assumption that eBay sellers are mostly shillers, and has dug and dug until he managed to find one seller for his News of the World-style set-up. So much for objective reporting. I'm sure that if I decided to publish an article arguing that all Sunday Times reporters are lazy, biased hacks, I'd be able to turn up one example to back up my argument. Would that mean that all employees of that august publication are the same?

As for Mr Paraskevaides, well, he has rather a checkered history. He resigned from his gynaecologist's job after concerns about his work were raised, and subsequently has been frequently accused of selling merchandise said to be fake. While we hope and expect that eBay will now close any other accounts he still holds on the site, to expose a well-known scammer as a scammer is hardly great investigative journalism, is it, Mr Calvert?

eBay promise more off site links in search results

We reported Shopping.com links appearing in search results promoting sales on eBay's rival Amazon back at the begining of December. Now eBay are promising more off site links in the form of Google text adverts on search results driving yet more buyers off the eBay site.

Testing will commence on eBay.co.uk and eBay.ie for Google ads, supposedly in searches where few results appear on eBay. It does make sense that if a buyer can't find what they're looking for on eBay that they're directed to another site where they can purchase, but concerns have been voiced where a buyer can legitimately claim to have made a purchase clicking on a link on eBay but are directed to an off eBay site.


eBay have in the past educated buyers that the only safe way to purchase is to keep their transaction "on eBay" and now in a sea change they are to encourage buyers to leave eBay and purchase on alternative sites, and in many cases from eBay's competitors. Even worse having seen some of the results from shopping.com adverts buyers are directed to minor websites with no large company backing and no recourse for assistance if a transaction goes bad.

eBay should consider very carefully how the legitimacy of a safe marketplace could be undermined by buyers being directed elsewhere. There are enough stories where buyers complain they purchased on eBay but it was a spoof site, or they took the transaction off eBay, now eBay are going to encourage them to do so.

Unable to verify www.paypal.com as a trusted site

Just days after PayPal announce security devices to generate one time passwords to protect users accounts they have yet another security flaw. The SSL certificate used to verify that the PayPal site is secure is again warning users that PayPal is not a trusted site.



This is by no means the first time PayPal have had problems with certificates, in the past they have had issues with non-secure images on SSL pages caused by third party banner adverts. It really is time a company handling financial transactions for over 100 million users got their act together on security. All the time users logging into the genuine PayPal site get warnings they have no option but to ignore if they need to perform transactions it's no wonder they also fall for phishing sites.

$5 PayPal security key gives false hope to stop phishers

Like many financial institutions, eBay and PayPal are late adopters of security devices for one time passwords. A security device (costing $5 in the US) gives a different security code each time you log into your account. PayPal say it "generates a unique six-digit security code about every 30 seconds. You enter that code when you log in to your PayPal or eBay account with your regular user name and password. Then the code expires - no-one else can use it." Or can they??

These devices have been around for almost twenty years with Security Dynamics (RSA Security) and Vasco being the earliest to market solutions. The eBay PayPal key has been developed in conjunction with VeriSign.

The biggest concern is are the tokens effective in preventing phishing attacks? Well firstly it's not what they were designed for. They were designed originally for remote access solutions where an employee would dial into a company workplace over a telephone line. Rather than a password that could be written down the token ensured hackers couldn't dial in to the network with a compromised password. There was little chance of anyone intercepting the dial up phone call. The tokens were then deployed for use internally for all users on a network. Later they migrated outside the network as the Internet became more common for remote users connecting to corporate networks, for online banking, and now for eBay and PayPal.

It's important to realise they weren't designed for use on the Internet in the first place, and that hackers have had decades to develop ways to combat the tokens. The actual keys generated are still secure, there is still no effective way to compromise the security codes generated. This doesn't deter the phishers though - they have other tools in their arsenal.

Man in the middle attack

We've all seen phishing emails where a hacker tries to get you to click to a fake eBay or PayPal website and enter your user name and password which they later use to access your account. Smarter phishing sites are becoming more common where the hacker captures your user name and password and instantly uses it to log on to the real site. They pass the information you request to the site and back to you - you may never realise you're not logged directly into the site, but in the mean time the hacker is able to perform any transaction they please while you make the transaction you logged on to do.

Trojan attacks

Far too few Internet users keep their security up to date allowing virus and trojan attacks. If a phisher manages to install a trojan on your computer next time you log on to eBay or PayPal they can piggy back on your logon to perform their own transactions.

These two methods for bypassing one time passwords are not new - they were reported by Bruce Schneier back in March 2005. What does this mean to the new PayPal and eBay security devices? Well it'll make the phishers lives harder but so far they're only available in the US, Australia and Germany, leaving plenty of targets for phishers in the other eBay and PayPal territories. Secondly they're not compulsory, free for PayPal Business accounts but the $5 cost will put off many users who arguably are the most vulnerable. Finally the efficacy of the tokens themselves has to be questioned. It's technology that's been around before most of today's hackers first logged on to the Internet and was designed for dial up connections to corporate networks. Hackers have grown up looking for ways to render them useless.

It remains to be seen if the promise of security will result in users lowering their guard still further. After all no one can access your account without your token can they? Well possibly they can - users need to be as vigilant as ever. As Blogging stocks ask "Are the days at an end to eBay and PayPal phishing scams?". Sadly the chances are they're only just beginning!

EU know it's a load of cobblers

So far, these efforts appear to be paying off with minimal disruption to our legitimate sellers.

That's Bill Cobb referring to the effects of the new "Building Trust by Reducing Counterfeits" policy. Exactly which sellers is Cobb talking about here? The couple of hundred cherry-picked and invited to listen to his spiel in San Jose? Or the thousands of sellers around the world outside the Ivory Towers who are struggling to maintain their sales on eBay?

We reported last week the huge problems Spanish sellers are having now that they're unable to list or ship outside Spain. The European Union is working to remove all cross border trade restrictions.

Removing border posts across Europe is easy. The real challenge for the European Union is to ensure that more subtle obstacles to cross-border trade in goods and services are similarly consigned to history.

Suddenly removing the ability for Spanish sellers to sell luxury goods across Europe is taking European Internet commerce back years at a single stroke, and it's not just the Spanish! All the other EU sites are in the same position, it's just I don't speak good enough Italian to communicate with those guys and report on the situation there!

There's another serious consequence of the new policy too, sellers who have been regularly selling on eBay for a number of years are suddenly finding their ability to make a living is severely restricted. A quick browse of almost any community board reveals sellers fighting to be able to list the inventory they have for sale.

It took them 10 days, to reinstate mine.... Their reply was that my account was in good standing and it was just a spot check!!!! bloody cheek. i was reinstated for a day then it happened again. was off for 5 days then back on again.. same answers..... then restricted me again while they looked into it. another 5 days..all in december too!!! i lost thousands as a power seller.

This quote is not an isolated incident, and we're not talking about sellers that have only just started out on eBay. These are sellers who have been trading for years and in many cases rely on eBay for their entire income.

It's all very well for Bill Cobb whose remit is eBay North America to state that sellers aren't being disrupted, but maybe if he cast his eye across the water to Europe he'd find a very different story. It is not the biggest sellers on the North American continent who are suffering, it's the rank and file of sellers worldwide who have piles of inventory and are suddenly barred from marketing their goods to the customers they purchased them for.

Fraudulent seller "faked own death"

A nurse who faked his own death after being caught out selling non-existent computer games on eBay wept as he was sent to prison for six months. Martin Dunn from Kirk Sandall listed computer games for sale months in advance of their release date. Buyers were expecting to have to wait up to three months for delivery, so by the time they realised they had been scammed, Paypal's thirty day complaint period had elapsed.

Upon complaining by email about non-receipt of their goods, several buyers received an email purporting to be from Dunn's wife, saying that he had passed away and she was winding up his affairs. When Dunn was arrested, police found a document entitled "Is eBay Safe?"; the fraudster claimed that he had been running an experiment to expose flaws in the eBay system.

Of course, the old "sorry, I'm dead" line will be familiar to anyone who's sold very much on eBay. With a sad tear, I remember the grieving widow who told me that her husband had purchased a tie from me on the very day of his death, and that once she had paid off the cost of his funeral, she would pay me. Being the nice seller I am, I *did* send her a With Sympathy card ]:)

Any potential scammers should note that eBay and Paypal have now closed this loophole: sellers are not allowed to list pre-release items longer than thirty days before the release date, and Paypal's complaint period has been extended to forty-five days.

"Safe" Paypal compulsory for new sellers

One positive aspect of Bill Cobb's Keynote speech yesterday are the payment requirements for new sellers. New seller accounts will be required to either offer Paypal or to accept direct credit card payments; other payment methods which eBay does not like, such as cheques and money orders, may be offered in addition.

Despite eBay spokesperson Catherine England's assertion that eBay do not intend to make Paypal the sole acceptible payment method on eBay, this is one more step towards exactly that: new sellers tend to start by either selling their own unwanted possessions, or as very small businesses, and one of the beauties of Paypal is that, unlike merchant accounts, it's cheap, quick and easy to set up. In practice, "Paypal or a merchant account" is going to mean *Paypal*.

This is great news. What better way to stop the brand new, (0) feedback scammer accounts than by forcing them to offer Paypal. Such a high percentage of buyers now prefer to use Paypal that this will, at a stroke, instantly protect hundreds of potential scammees. It might (and I know I'm being super-optimistic here) put the scammers off a little in the first place. It's possibly the best move eBay have ever made to keep their buyers safe.

We have just one question. Why is this, the cherry on the sour cake of eBay's changes, being kept just for north America?

Feedback 2.0: I have seen the future and it's full of whinging

Without a doubt picking up on the "Web 2.0" buzzword, this is eBay's attempt to "update" their feedback system. Buyers will be able to rate sellers on a variety of specific aspects of the transaction, including accuracy of description, shipping time, communication and shipping and handling charges.

This has been suggested by eBay, trialled and surveyed for months now, and it was pretty obvious it was coming. Sellers, it must be said, are almost universally against the proposals. This is a system that will be largely used by buyers with a gripe. Happy buyers will leave a positive and that will be that - only those with a complaint that their first class shipping took three whole days, or that they emailed at 4am and didn't get an immediate response, are likely to bother with detailed feedback.

Of course, this will be the same for all sellers. Just as now, the average eBay seller has better than 99% positive feedback, detailed feedback will find its average level. Sadly, this is likely to be rather lower than 99%, which might give the impression that eBay sellers have suddenly all got much worse.

At the same time, percentage scores will be calculated over the last two years only, not from the beginning, thus "archiving" old negatives. No doubt this will be a much more popular move!

But really, one has to ask what the point of these changes are. Will they make eBay any more money directly? No. Will they make sellers more money, so making eBay more money indirectly? No. Will they really make buyers feel more secure? I doubt it. Who goes in to an eBay transaction thinking "oh well, if the seller doesn't ship for a week, I can give them a black mark for it"? This is simply a system that rewards the whingers.

It's also likely to mean the end of most sellers leaving feedback first. And that is something that buyers will not like one little bit.

eBay España crippled by unannounced counterfeit policy

At the beginning of December eBay introduced steps to reduce counterfeit goods on eBay. It took another two weeks until they made public the new policy "Building Trust by Reducing Counterfeits".

Since then many sellers have found themselves being restricted from listing and fighting to meet the new criteria for selling. Suddenly finding your account restricted from listing designer goods with no prior notice, while eBay "conduct a review" of your account (which you may or may not pass), can severely cripple an eBay business. If you fail the review there is no published appeal process or even criteria needed to pass.

In general once a seller has jumped through the requisite hoops and passed the unknown "account review" they've been free to list and sell again.... or at least that's your own country.

Cross-border trade for certain types of items that are often subject to counterfeiting will be restricted as follows:

Sellers registered in the UK, U.S., and Germany may post these items worldwide.

Sellers in English-speaking markets – UK, U.S., Australia, and Canada – will be able to list and post these items freely across these sites. For example, a UK registered seller will be able to list an item on the US site.

Sellers in Germany, Switzerland and Austria will be able to list and post these items freely across these sites, with the exception that Austrian sellers won’t be able to post to Switzerland.

Sellers in France and Belgium will be able to list and post these items freely between these sites, with the exception that French sellers won’t be able to post to Belgium

Sellers in all other countries will only be able to list and ship these items domestically.

We've been hearing from Spain that eBay businesses are being crippled by the new restrictions. Previously able to trade freely across Europe, Spanish sellers of designer brands are limited to selling on the Spanish site to the Spanish market place.

Rumour has it a meeting is to take place next week with Maria Calvo, General Manager of eBay Spain, Klaus Gottschlich, Director of Category Management and Seller Development and several of the biggest Spanish sellers. The meeting will focus on the state of eBay Spain (currently some 250k listings per day) and why Spanish sellers are unable to sell luxury goods to the rest of Europe.

The situation is so severe that a website proposal has been advanced amongst Spanish PowerSellers as an alternative venue to eBay. The sellers involved all have their own ecommerce ventures but recognise the benefits of a large venue with a greater variety of goods than any one seller stocks. They propose a site only open to Spanish PowerSellers (who would pay a fee to fund the site) specifically to market luxury goods from Spanish sellers to the rest of Europe.

It's easy to see, with increasing pressure in the UK from programs like BBC Watchdog and around the world with Louis Vuitton & Christian Dior in Europe and Tiffany in the US, why steps to reduce counterfeits would be introduced. However the ramifications may be more draconian than eBay management in the US intended - after all the US, UK and Germany (eBay's three largest marketplaces) are free to ship worldwide. How much consideration was given to other countries is unknown as eBay have at no time made an official statement or posted on the UK or US announcement boards.

It will be interesting as Meg Whitman continues to gather the management stars from across the eBay marketplaces to San Jose whether growing marketplaces such as Spain receive more attention and are treated more equitably in the future. If they're not it may be the death knell for worldwide growth as eBay fragments into multiple closed trading venues and international commerce dies.

"Report this item" finally reaches UK

Links to "report this item" have just appeared on all listings on eBay UK. This feature was introduced on the Australian site many months ago; though promised to the UK, it had not been implemented until now.

This is a great step forward in eBay's attempts to clean up the site. eBay rely largely on users of the site to police it, and this will make reporting illegal and counterfeit items so much easier.

However, yet again a fairly major site change has gone unannounced by eBay. In the face of inevitable fears by sellers that easier reporting facilities will be used by rival sellers to try to remove the competition, eBay must put out some reassurance that they have the staff, and that the staff have the training, to ensure that this new feature is not used maliciously.

Bye bye Standard Protection, hello compulsory Paypal?

eBay have doubled the amount guaranteed to be refunded to Paypal buyers in the event of non-delivery or receipt of damaged goods to up to US$2000 for qualified sellers, and to US$200 or CA$315 across the board.

Well this looks nice. More protection for buyers means more confidence in the eBay marketplace, which has to be good news for everyone, buyer and seller alike. Doesn't it?

Not quite. Many eBayers, myself included, have speculated that eBay would like to force all transactions to be concluded through Paypal, and this is just one more move towards that goal, as the Standard Purchase Protection Program is being discontinued in the US and Canada. This program protected buyers who paid with non-Paypal methods such as cheques and money orders against non-receipt of their item. eBay say:

From a risk management and fraud prevention perspective, SPPP is flawed, because it offers coverage on the riskiest payment methods. This is clearly not in the best interests of the marketplace long-term.

In other words, choose to pay by a method that we don't control, where we don't take another cut of the cash and where we can't reclaim chargebacks from errant sellers like we do with Paypal... and you're on your own.

Obviously eBay don't like exposing themselves to risk. So why are they so ready to let their sellers do it? With this increase in buyer protection, sellers are left to bear even more of the risk of fraudulent chargebacks by scamming buyers. Until eBay make it possible for sellers to control the level of risk they will accept - by, for example, being able to block bidders without verified Paypal accounts and confirmed addresses - sellers remain completely over-exposed by these measures.

Safeguarding Member IDs launched on eBay.com and eBay Canada

Following the implementation of Safeguarding Member IDs in Australia and the UK last November it is now to be rolled out in the US and Canada. Bidders ID's will be hidden when bidding rises above $200 in the US and C$220 in Canada.

Rob Chesnut posted on the US announcement board adding that he acknowledges concerns over shill bidding (which unlike in the UK is actually a crime in several US states). eBay users will no doubt hype shilling as being a much bigger issue than eBay would like, and they would do well to learn the lessons from the UK workshop on Safeguarding Member IDs which Tamebay reviewed. Sadly the workshop in the UK failed to communicate the rationale behind the Safeguarding Member ID's initiative instead concentrating on shill bidding.

A Tamebay guest blogger, sean_coolness, has published "Safeguarding Members IDs is not a licence to shill" which explores the information divulged regarding bidder activity. The article demonstrates that it's actually easier to identify shill bidding once Safeguarding Member IDs is implemented than was the case previously.

Spam me, eBay, one more time

I know it's not like me to complain that eBay communicate too much: normally, it's exactly the opposite. But this week, I've had a bunch of communication from them that's gone beyond pointless, deep into 'completely infuriating' territory.

Firstly, we have the "you've changed your email" alert. Actually, I have two, because my main email account went down on Friday, came back Sunday, and so I changed to an alternate and then changed it back again. eBay put alerts in My Messages, great. And then they tell me I can't delete those alerts for ten whole day. WTF? I've read the messages, I made the changes, it's all legit, why do I have to have that stupid red blob at the top of my screen making me think that my seller account is overdue or some buyer has filed for non-something or other? I don't need it, eBay, I really don't.

Secondly, there's eBay's neat trick to double your spam. For some reason, rather a lot of Chinese wholesalers think that my gothy jewellery-selling ID might wish to invest in their electrical products. In fact, they're so sure that I should become a customer of theirs that on Christmas Day, they sent me spam ASQs from a dozen different accounts with the same enticing message. I know there's nothing eBay can really do about spam ASQs; I've been getting them for seven years, and I can deal with them. On Boxing Day, I duly clicked the "report" link beside each one in My Messages and grassed them up as spammers. So far, so good.

But then I received back, for each spamming ID, a "Communication Partner Warning" from eBay, informing me that a member with whom I had recently communicated had now been excommunicated from the site. These were not people from whom I'd bought, or to whom I'd sold. They were people who had sent me ONE email, whom I'd reported. And gotten a whole bunch more spam back from eBay as a result. Thanks. Thanks SO much.

Finally, and perhaps least expicable, is the "Notification of Change to my Feedback":

Dear biddybidbidbid,

A member with whom you've recently transacted has been indefinitely suspended from eBay within 90 days of registration. We have removed any feedback they left for you or others.

eBay removes feedback when a member is indefinitely suspended for certain policy breaches within 90 days of registration. eBay believes that members indefinitely suspended soon after registration shouldn't be able to permanently affect another member's account.

To see your current feedback score, go to your Member Profile.

Thank you,
eBay

They obviously liked me because I got fifteen of those messages: musta been a nice big order. But do eBay tell me who it was? Nope, not a clue. So what was the point of that? They don't tell me who the dodgy buyer was so I can look out for them when they re-register, or suggest that I keep an eye on their Paypal payment as a potential chargeback. Maybe they want to to make phishers lives easier by encouraging clicking of links in emails (which it does - I get this message from phishers too)? Who knows.

Please could someone who designs this rubbish for eBay actually start using the site, get rid of the stupid over-communication when it serves no purpose, and start communicating with users about the things that actually matter.

Treasure still found on eBay

The British Museum has complained that antiquities are still being sold on eBay, despite a warning given to sellers that they could be acting illegally.

A month after we blogged the original story, a BM spokesperson said "The number of potential treasure finds for sale on eBay has not noticeably decreased since we began the monitoring process." Many sellers, whether truthfully or not, have claimed that they are selling items they have bought in good faith themselves. The law as it stands requires the discoverer of potential Treasure objects to report them, but doesn't confer a similar obligation on subsequent purchasers.

Though eBay has made the selling of antiquities very much more obvious than it has been in the past, they are neither the cause of nor the sole channel for this trade. eBay cannot be expected in these cases to act above or outside the law, by regulating sellers who are not acting illegally. If we as a country wish important artefacts to be saved for national collections and for study, rather than being sold off to private collectors and part of our heritage being lost, there is a clear and urgent need for new legislation.

"8000% increase" in phishing

Banking trade body APACS has announced that there were 5,059 phishing incidents in the first six months of 2006. January to June 2005 saw just 312 reported incidents. APACS security chief Philip Whitaker said that the increase was largely down to better detection, but the FSA has said that it is "very concerned" about banking scams.

'A guiding light' to fraud

The Observer have picked up the story about software to track feedback shilling that we blogged about last week, and post an intriguing clue as to how it might work correctly:

Transactions between accomplices and fraudsters create a pattern that sticks out like 'a guiding light', says one of the researchers. The clue is that members of one group have lots of transactions with members of a second group, but don't have transactions with members of their own group.

Of course, now they've published this information, all the fraudsters need to do is to change the pattern of how their IDs interact and presumably they can still fool the software.

Still, we'll be interested to test this one if it does get a public release.

Finally: a policy announcement on counterfeits

eBay have at last made an announcement on the new policies to reduce counterfeits implemented two weeks ago.

The new rules begin with an impassioned statement that fakes are not just an eBay problem, but that they undermine the entire marketplace. As we've seen, Paypal verification, the restriction of one and three day listings (commonly used by scammers in the hope of evading detection by selling quickly), and being an established eBay member are all parts of the strategy.

Then comes the shocker:

Sellers registered in the UK, U.S., and Germany may post these items worldwide.

Sellers in English-speaking markets – UK, U.S., Australia, and Canada – will be able to list and post these items freely across these sites. For example, a UK registered seller will be able to list an item on the US site.

Sellers in Germany, Switzerland and Austria will be able to list and post these items freely across these sites, with the exception that Austrian sellers won't be able to post to Switzerland.

Sellers in France and Belgium will be able to list and post these items freely between these sites, with the exception that French sellers won’t be able to post to Belgium

Sellers in all other countries will only be able to list and ship these items domestically.

eBay's restricting trade within the EU? I assume the legal team have checked this out, but it seems unnecessarily harsh.

Perhaps most annoying for sellers, though understandable from eBay's point of view, is that eBay are do not state to which items the restrictions will apply. Sellers of legitimate goods have, over the last fortnight, found themselves unable to sell their stock until they have completed a "review" whose process has not been made clear to them, and with no kind of public timeline. No remedy for this situation seems forthcoming. There is apparently no way for sellers to check, before purchasing stock, whether it is likely to trigger a "review" or not: once more, sellers are left at the mercy of eBay's whims, and that can't be good for anybody's business.

[At the time of posting, I'm unable to find any version of this page on the US site. However, I'll keep looking: I'd expect it to be updated later today.]

Inappropriate links undermine the trust and legitimacy of eBay’s marketplace

"Inappropriate links undermine the trust and legitimacy of eBay’s marketplace" is a direct quote from eBay's own policies. It has always been a given that links that permit off site sales were forbidden, but that's all changed

Shopping.com adverts have now started to appear on eBay, but only in certain categories. Not a problem you might think, but they're appearing in search results and pushing products relevant to the search criteria and worse are clickable to ecommerce vendors own websites. The display below was from a search for new sewing machines.


It is understandable that eBay would want to cross promote it's platforms. It's perfectly natural that sellers on eBay may want to pay to have their items featured on shopping.com as well as eBay, however the reverse doesn't hold true. Sellers on eBay have to pay to have listings appear in search results and many are still smarting from the reduced visibility of shop inventory format listings. Now adverts are appearing at the bottom of listings that have paid nothing to appear in search results, pay no eBay fees and direct eBay buyers to off eBay venues.

Taking buyers off eBay brings up a host of issues - Why are eBay sending buyers to competing sites for example amazon? Does this make good business sense? What about directing them from eBay to virtually unknown sites? What about trust and safety? eBay have always promoted on eBay transactions to be safe with feedback, buyer protection and dispute resolution. A buyer clicking through direct to a merchant website can legitimately claim their purchase was through eBay, although it's certainly off eBay.

This seems to be madness, eBay pay millions to attract customers, why would they want to let them go? Currently only a few categories appear to be infected with shopping.com adverts - we'd rather they weren't there at all. Promote the fact that eBay have other platforms by all means, but if sellers can't have links to their own ecommerce platforms then for all the same reasons shopping.com shouldn't have direct links to vendors on eBay either.

Feedback changes announced at the Town Hall on eBay radio

The last Town Hall of the year was held yesterday in the US. This is a chance for eBay members to ask general questions regarding eBay and for the first time was broadcast live as a radio phone in. Feedback as ever featured highly with two main developments being looked at

26 minutes in the question was asked now that buyers feedback is removed if they don't respond to an unpaid item dispute (UPI) when will the same happen with sellers. Although no specific time frame was given it's likely that during 2007 sellers that fail to respond to item not received disputes (INR) that their feedback will be removed similarly from buyers profiles. This is rather more complicated as the INR process moves across to the PayPal site if that was the method of payment.

53 minutes in "What's eBays plans as far as forgiving negative feedback older than a year?" was asked. An interesting question and even more interesting answer

This is something we're looking into. I wouldn't get into the time frame but as we're now 11 years old and grown as a site and changed as a site this is something we're studying. I think this is the right thing to do as a seller has proved their worth over an extended period of time that this is something that we should look to retire. This is a live discussion that we're inclined to try and figure out for sellers and for buyers.

Eleven years is a long time to carry around a red blot on your copybook, and it is possible in the future these blemishes may be removed in time. Personally I can't see what all the fuss is about - no one is perfect and to strive for 100% feedback is an impossible aim. You can't please all the people all of the time so why not just accept that if you trade enough on eBay sooner or later you'll get a neg?