Expired Visa cards can still pay, which makes the expiry date a label and not a control
Researchers relayed dead cards through a pair of phones. Whether the payment cleared came down to the issuing bank, not to the date printed on the plastic.
The Product Desk
What happened
- University of Massachusetts Amherst researchers told Usenix that expired Visa-issued cards can still authorise contactless payments.
- The method relays the card's data through a man-in-the-middle app running across a pair of phones.
- Visa did not respond to requests for comment from The Register, which covered the research.
Why it matters
- constraint Expiry can no longer be used as a lifecycle boundary in fraud rules or customer messaging without first proving your own issuer declines the relayed transaction.
- exposure Cardholders on the permissive side of the issuer split are reachable through cards they have already thrown out, and have no way to find out which side they are on.
- cost The remedy offered sits with the customer and a pair of scissors, so the cost of a protocol gap lands on people who never see the failure.
- decision Issuers now have to choose between testing their own decline behaviour and continuing to assume the scheme handles it for them.
A relay setup forges nothing. The card is proxied through a man-in-the-middle app that carries its data between two phones [6], so the terminal is holding a conversation with a real card that happens to be somewhere else and out of date [5].
What settled the outcome was not the date. The researchers found that whether an expired card's transaction gets disallowed had been left to cryptography that various card issuers implemented differently [1], and Visa's own check carried a flaw that let out-of-date cards pass [2]. As the researchers describe it, Visa had effectively handed the job of authenticating these transactions to the cardholder's bank [3]. Some banks stopped the revived cards. Others did not [4].
That is the part worth sitting with if you build or run a card product. Expiry is a field you can read off the plastic and out of a token record. The decline is a behaviour, and on this evidence it is a property of the issuing bank rather than of the card or the network [12]. Any rule, reissuance schedule or customer-facing promise that treats the printed month and year as a boundary is inheriting whichever half of that split its issuer landed in, and nobody downstream can see which half that is.
The attack itself is unglamorous and cheap. It wants a card that was discarded intact or left lying around [8], and a checkout with no human at it to notice a phone rig standing in for a card [7]. Neither of those is a rare condition. The mitigation on offer to the cardholder is a pair of scissors [9], which is a reasonable piece of advice and also a statement about where the residual risk has been parked.
Two gaps in the record matter for how hard you should read this. Visa did not respond to requests for comment from The Register, which covered the research [10]. And the account does not name the banks that blocked the technique or say how many issuers were tested [11]. So the defensible conclusion is narrower than "expired Visa cards work everywhere": it is that expiry enforcement cannot be assumed from outside a specific issuer's decline logic, and the network was not the place it was enforced [3][12]. For a control that appears on every card in the wallet and in every product spec that references card lifecycle, that is a large amount of load resting on something no single party owns.
What to watch
- Any scheme rule change that makes the expired-card decline mandatory at the network rather than optional at the issuer.
- Publication of named issuer results from the UMass Amherst paper, which would let cardholders and acquirers tell who declines revived cards.
- Whether operators of unattended terminals add their own checks, given that the attack depends on no one watching the checkout.
Clarity's read
What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.
Reality
- Evidence52
- Adoption
- Insufficient
- Hype gap+22
- Incentives38
- Confidence55
Claim ledger
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
- [1]
Due to issues in the authentication chain of contactless payments, whether an expired card's transaction would be disallowed was left to cryptography implemented differently by various card issuers.
- [2]
Visa's cryptography had a particular flaw allowing out-of-date cards to pass its check.
- [3]
As the researchers describe it, Visa essentially passed the task of authenticating these transactions to the cardholder's bank.
- [4]
Some banks prevented the use of the zombified cards and others did not.
- [5]
At the Usenix Cybersecurity Conference, researchers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst warned that fraudsters could make contactless payments using expired credit cards issued by Visa.
- [6]
The technique proxies the expired card through a man-in-the-middle app that relays the card's data through a pair of phones.
- [7]
Fraudsters could in some cases dumpster dive for an expired card and use it to make payments from the unwitting owner's account, particularly at point-of-sale terminals where no human is present to look askance at a phone-based proxy setup.
- [8]
An expired Visa card left unattended or discarded intact could serve as an errant key into the owner's bank account if discovered by a fraudster and zombified using the technique.
- [9]
WIRED's stated lesson is that cutting up an expired Visa card with scissors ensures it does not reanimate in someone else's hands.
- [10]
Visa did not respond to requests for comment from The Register, which reported on the research.
- [11]
The WIRED account does not name the banks that prevented use of the zombified cards, nor state how many issuers were tested.
- [12]
Because the expiry check was delegated to issuers and issuer behaviour differed, expiry enforcement is a property of the issuing bank rather than of the card or the network.
Sources
1 independent publisher whose own reporting we read for this story.
- wired.comYour Expired Visa Card Could Be ‘Zombified’ to Make Contactless Payments
1 article · August 22, 2026
Topics and entities
Follow any of these and your For You feed starts watching them — no settings page required.
Topics
- Vulnerability DisclosureFollow
- Contactless Payment SecurityFollow
- Payment Card FraudFollow
- Issuer-Side Authorisation ControlsFollow
Entities
- The RegisterFollow
- University of Massachusetts AmherstFollow
- VisaFollow
- WiredFollow
- Usenix Cybersecurity ConferenceFollow