‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

U.S. postal inspectors shut down website selling counterfeit postage labels

281 points · 169 comments · ilamont

  1. zucked · · focus · HN ↗
    I am pretty sure I bought from a seller using this (or something similar) on eBay. It sent me down a rabbit hole of reading about this type of scam that exploded earlier this year: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.uspsoig.gov&#x2F;sites&#x2F;default&#x2F;files&#x2F;reports&#x2F;2026-04&#x2F;25-072-3-r26.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.uspsoig.gov&#x2F;sites&#x2F;default&#x2F;files&#x2F;reports&#x2F;2026-04&#x2F;...

    Here&#x27;s how it went down:

    <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ebay.com&#x2F;fdbk&#x2F;feedback_profile&#x2F;theperfectpart" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ebay.com&#x2F;fdbk&#x2F;feedback_profile&#x2F;theperfectpart

    Note that they’ve sold so much that even 1k neutral ratings are barely registering - they have “100% positive feedback”

    I bought a cheap tool from this seller on ebay. Tracking number was provided showing my town as the destination. About four days later, I get an unprompted ebay message from the seller: “I monitor all my shipments and sometimes there are problems so I’m proactively sending you a new one, here’s a new tracking number.”

    The original tracking number showed a message I’d never seen before “Item seized - counterfeit postage”. The new tracking number showed postage that had been bought back in January, but never entered the mailstream. Huh. I suspect that buys them time while they re-ship.

    I did eventually get the item after another tracking number was provided.

    My suspicion is that the seller uses counterfit USPS postage on &#x27;x&#x27; number of packages to juice their margins. If you look at the neutral reviews, you can see a pattern — slow postage, lost package, had to replace, blah blah. Look at the positives — rave reviews at how fast things are arriving. Probably because the seller is “paying” for higher end postage via scamming the USPS.

    And only when they get caught by USPS do they need to re-ship an item. They must get away with it enough to make it worthwhile

    1. landr0id · · focus · HN ↗
      Thanks for the links. I&#x27;m confused how this works and the USPS report seems to be heavily redacted around details.

      I would assume that the tracking number has the address details tied to it (I mean, based on support claims with USPS it definitely does), but maybe there&#x27;s some obscure package type where destination is not distinct and they abuse that in a pool with other sellers, then at the last mile it gets sorted appropriately?

      Seems wild that this market even exists considering how USPS flat rate postage exists.

      Was your package something heavy or extremely light which makes weight-based shipping more economical?

      1. zucked · · focus · HN ↗
        The redaction is frustrating, but I suspect the approach is still at least partially viable, so they aren&#x27;t interested in giving a playbook for scammers to exploit.

        The tool I bought wasn&#x27;t what you&#x27;d think of as a small, inconsequential item. I&#x27;d wager it was ~2lbs and was a automotive brake bleeder in a blowmolded case. Probably the size of an old-timey encyclopedia. Cheaply made of course (almost certainly an aliexpress item). The seller I bought from has what appears to be an aliexpress dropshipping supply chain -- they buy the tool for $, ship from a US warehouse in Florida for $$.

      2. theturtletalks · · focus · HN ↗
        I’ve read about this. They basically reverse engineered how USPS creates the unique tracking number.
        1. TemplarRush · · focus · HN ↗
          They aren&#x27;t hard to generate. They give you how to generate them via their own documentation. It&#x27;s just made up of an app ID, service type code, mailer ID, serial number, and check digit.
          1. devy · · focus · HN ↗
            No. That won&#x27;t work. Every carrier has it own way to generate tracking number. And that number must have registered in the carrier&#x27;s database before it becomes &quot;valid&#x2F;sanctioned&quot;.

            If you generate a random number even fitting the pattern and looks like a real one, the scan will fail with an error and fail to register tracking information every single step of the way that package gets scanned from dropoff at the retail postal office (this was the case) as bulk inbound pickup from USPS are only allowed for USPS verified partners.

            Label creation (which generates the tracking number) is a billable action in their API. Some volume partners have pre-arranged&#x2F;allocated tracking number segments assigned to the bulk volume partner&#x2F;shipper (similar like how IP address v4 is assignment from IANA). And that pre-allocation tracking number range requires $$$$ contract in place. Billing that is post paid like cellphone bill.

            Most retail shipping software (like shipengine, pirateship etc.) bills using the prepaid method, meaning you will have to pay for the label at the time label is generated.

            Disclaimer: I used to work for a carrier that integrated a few dozens of global shipping carriers.

            1. theturtletalks · · focus · HN ↗
              Yes, I’m deep in e-commerce and fraudulent labels are all over the place. Even Amazon, 3rd party sellers are using these fake labels to sell items for cheaper and win the buy box. Even UPS has this issue.

              I get that they have reverse engineered how the numbers are created, but how are they showing up in USPS and UPS databases?

              Are shipping platforms like shipengine getting these labels pre-made and this fake label seller has reverse engineered how these tracking numbers are created programmatically and are essentially using the ones allocated to these big shipping platforms?

              1. devy · · focus · HN ↗
                And the only plausible way they got around is likely recycle previously used real tracking numbers because USPS is inept (the thing USPS has been constant and consistent is raising prices).

                We would never know how since that&#x27;s the part USPS redacted heavily.

                I wish Anthropic&#x2F;OpenAI FDE take over USPS IT altogether.

              2. mmooss · · focus · HN ↗
                &gt; how are they showing up in USPS and UPS databases?

                Are you overestimating their validation capabilities? Maybe the validation just isn&#x27;t that accurate or isn&#x27;t always done, for efficiency.

                I once desperately needed a (FedEx or UPS) package that was delayed. Tracking showed it in a facility about an hour away so I asked if I could pick it up there. I was told: &#x27;It&#x27;s not really there; our (customer-facing) tracking shows where packages should be.&#x27;

                Their image of super-efficiency is for selling themselves. (If you are deep in e-commerce, you probably already know.)

                1. theturtletalks · · focus · HN ↗
                  Yeah USPS definitely reuses tracking numbers, but how were these guys able to overwrite the delivery address? I feel like this shouldn’t be possible unless they are inside the system.
                  1. dwd · · focus · HN ↗
                    Having a connection&#x2F;s inside who are in on the game would make sense.
                  2. xeromal · · focus · HN ↗
                    My guess is that the validation just validates the numbers which are old and valid and some automated system notices the label and routes it. I bet their system is a disjointed system and not set up in a way where every step checks every thing. It&#x27;s very plausible it was home grown in such a way where its like this
            2. TemplarRush · · focus · HN ↗
              Correct, I was just pointing out how trivial it was to generate&#x2F;counterfeit a USPS barcode. I also worked in shipping&#x2F;logistics with heavy USPS integration, but it was dealing with bulk&#x2F;volume labels, where we&#x27;d only get charged if the label was actually used (returns, etc).
    2. what · · focus · HN ↗
      Why is that report so heavily redacted?
      1. wbl · · focus · HN ↗
        Because the redacted bits tell you what the crooks are doing wrong.
      2. zucked · · focus · HN ↗
        There was recently an update report published that gives a little bit more information but is still heavily redacted. I presume some of these vectors are still viable for exploit. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.uspsoig.gov&#x2F;sites&#x2F;default&#x2F;files&#x2F;reports&#x2F;2026-09&#x2F;25-072-r26.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.uspsoig.gov&#x2F;sites&#x2F;default&#x2F;files&#x2F;reports&#x2F;2026-09&#x2F;...
    3. neilv · · focus · HN ↗
      Related: Not US postage labels, but suspicious US postage stamps, seemed to also be used as a crude currency.

      A third-party seller on Amazon or eBay was including sheets of suspicious US postage stamps in product shipments, unsolicited, with full-color glossy notes offering more stamps in exchange for positive reviews.

      (I took the stamps and note I received to a post office, where a manager agreed they looked suspicious, and I asked them forward it up the chain. I like the USPS as a trustworthy service and institution, and I hate counterfeiting.)

      1. [deleted] · · focus · HN ↗

        [deleted]

      2. xur17 · · focus · HN ↗
        What was the end result of this?
      3. squirtle24 · · focus · HN ↗
        It might have to do with the fact that the First Class stamps exploded in price recently. It was $0.55 right before covid, but now it&#x27;s $0.82. It&#x27;s like printing counterfeit money, except easier. A 4x5 sheet the size of a postcard becomes worth $16. The stamps themselves have relatively little in the way of counterfeiting measures, especially if you consider that &quot;Forever&quot; stamps exist. So even if they introduce anti-counterfeiting measures into new stamps, a pirate could print old-style Forever stamps, circumventing the new measures.

        The USPS is also, ahem, rather incompetent, and their own report [1] shows that &quot;mitigation efforts are limited, with no substantive approach to identify counterfeit stamps in the Postal Service network. While the Postal Service and the Postal Inspection Service have increased prevention-related efforts, the quantity of counterfeit stamps in the network remains unknown.&quot;

        So the increased value of the stamps, the inability to change old Forever stamps, and the lack of enforcement have created a perfect storm for the counterfeiters.

        [1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.uspsoig.gov&#x2F;reports&#x2F;audit-reports&#x2F;counterfeit-stamps" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.uspsoig.gov&#x2F;reports&#x2F;audit-reports&#x2F;counterfeit-st...

        1. saghm · · focus · HN ↗
          I thought that for a while now all stamps are &quot;forever&quot; rather than it being s separate type.
          1. jffry · · focus · HN ↗
            USPS still sells denominated stamps from $0.01 to $10.00, in addition to &quot;First Class Forever&quot; stamps - see near the bottom of the filters sidebar on <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;store.usps.com&#x2F;store&#x2F;stamps" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;store.usps.com&#x2F;store&#x2F;stamps
            1. ZeWaka · · focus · HN ↗
              There&#x27;s also other types of forever stamps, such as the domestic Postcard and Global Forever stamp!
            2. Spooky23 · · focus · HN ↗
              These are problematic as well - they don’t have a way to tally the stamps, they just look for the marker and process it. A postal employee at the delivery point may flag it.

              Also if you mail stuff this way you’ll have mail inspected for bombs or anthrax.

          2. celticninja · · focus · HN ↗
            It&#x27;s common in the UK to sell them both with a £ denominated value on them or the class of service. My brother bought loads of the latter a few years ago, which was a great idea, because as mentioned postal rates have increased significantly. The UK post office will also exchange your old unused stamps for new versions (now with QR codes or with sticky backs) for free. So even if they go out of date they alcan be upgraded at no cost.
            1. scun · · focus · HN ↗
              I miss the taste of the glue.
          3. Ferret7446 · · focus · HN ↗
            Forever stamps guarantee delivery forever (subject to terms and conditions on weight&#x2F;size). Regular stamps denote value, e.g. 50 cents. They will always be usable but you will need to match the inflation of prices (e.g., mailing a letter might be 50 cents in the past but 100 cents in the future)

            Numbers for demonstration only

        2. alexfoo · · focus · HN ↗
          The UK moved to stamps with unique QR codes back in 2023 for the bulk of its stock.

          <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.royalmail.com&#x2F;sending&#x2F;barcoded-stamps" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.royalmail.com&#x2F;sending&#x2F;barcoded-stamps

          There are still some &quot;Forever&quot; stamps (those with pictures on or Christmas Stamps) but the old non-QR code non-forever stamps stopped being legal a while back (but you can always swap them for the new ones for free).

          I&#x27;ve had people try and reuse a QR-coded stamp, you just get a postcard saying there&#x27;s an item of mail with invalid postage for you to collect (and pay for). You get to look at it before you decide whether to pay the fine or not and then your argument is with the sender to reimburse you or not.

          1. sippingabonedry · · focus · HN ↗
            I thought &quot;forever&quot; referenced the Royal Mail&#x27;s typical transit time.
            1. Angostura · · focus · HN ↗
              Typical transit time seems pretty good for me
          2. Barbing · · focus · HN ↗
            &gt; swap them for the new ones for free

            This was almost my thought for mitigating USA stamp fraud. Exchange Forever stamps for $currentValue stamps, but show your ID so you’ll be subject to extra scrutiny if you try to trade in a million of them. (QR code’s better and more fair.)

            1. whatsdowndog · · focus · HN ↗
              &gt; show your ID.

              What about the marginalized communities who don&#x27;t have IDs, or are you saying USPS needs more security than federal elections?

              1. brookst · · focus · HN ↗
                I think they’re saying there is more evidence of fraud in stamps because of the direct monetary value, where there is no evidence that our current registration-time voting controls need to be supplemented with additional friction at voting time, because what little evidence there is of voter fraud is mostly just lies: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2026&#x2F;09&#x2F;24&#x2F;us&#x2F;politics&#x2F;nevada-voters-homeland-security-trump.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2026&#x2F;09&#x2F;24&#x2F;us&#x2F;politics&#x2F;nevada-voters...
              2. AlotOfReading · · focus · HN ↗
                Rhetorical question aside, federal elections use voter rolls that identify each potentially eligible voter and actively monitor for issues like double voting. There&#x27;s no &quot;forever stamp-holder&quot; roll for the USPS to check.
                1. whatsdowndog · · focus · HN ↗
                  How do you know it&#x27;s actually John Smith who came to vote?
              3. slopinthebag · · focus · HN ↗
                maybe federal elections needs more security than usps?
          3. fredoralive · · focus · HN ↗
            “Forever” stamps in US terms are what 1st class &#x2F; 2nd class stamps have always been in the UK since they appeared in the ‘80s, where they remain valid for a level of service forever. The US went through a weird phase where they had 1st class stamps, but they would only actually be for the monetary value of whatever the 1st class rate was when issued, so if the rate went up you’d have to add extra postage.

            The basic split between what has barcodes and what doesn’t it that the everyday “definitive” stamps (both 1st&#x2F;2nd etc. and those with a direct monetary value) were withdrawn and reissued with barcodes, but commemorative and special stamps weren’t. Basically, stuff sold to stamp collectors to be put in a box and never used on postage doesn’t have them.

            1. consp · · focus · HN ↗
              &gt; but they would only actually be for the monetary value of whatever the 1st class rate was when issued, so if the rate went up you’d have to add extra postage.

              Reminds me of our monetary stamps. They were the old fashioned monetary value stamps which had a fixed value on it, so when the price hiked you could get 5ct&#x2F;1ct stamps to add to get to the new rate, fixed value of the stamps stayed the same. People added real money to it since they were not going to buy a full sheet of 5ct stamps for one older one to compensate. And since the mail usually didn&#x27;t care you sometimes got a free 5ct coin as recipient! (As a kid this was always fun to receive).

              Fun thing is that those coins are way heavier than the paper so adding them might get you onto the next cost bracket making the whole excersize pointless.

            2. Dylan16807 · · focus · HN ↗
              Stamp value still matters in the US for normal letters because of the janky way extra weight is priced. In particular, the current price of a max-weight letter is two stamps plus 5 cents.
              1. royskee · · focus · HN ↗
                But one can get non-denominated extra-ounce stamps (for two ounce, three ounce, or &quot;extra ounce&quot; to use with another stamp) for letters over an ounce <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;store.usps.com&#x2F;store&#x2F;stamps&#x2F;additional-ounces&#x2F;_&#x2F;N-d7hkz5" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;store.usps.com&#x2F;store&#x2F;stamps&#x2F;additional-ounces&#x2F;_&#x2F;N-d7...
        3. hvb2 · · focus · HN ↗
          &gt; The USPS is also, ahem, rather incompetent, and their own report [1] shows that &quot;mitigation efforts are limited, with no substantive approach to identify counterfeit stamps in the Postal Service network.

          They&#x27;ve been underfunded for a long time. Meanwhile they still have the legal requirement to deliver everywhere in the US. So the big guys like Amazon will happily deliver their own packages in densely populated areas where it&#x27;s easily profitable. The areas where it&#x27;s not can be done by USPS...

          So basically the taxpayer is paying for Amazon to not have to deliver where it would be costly for them.

        4. thomasjudge · · focus · HN ↗
          &gt;The USPS is also, ahem, rather incompetent,...

          Just as a datapoint, the USPIS has a &gt;= 98% conviction rate for cases that go to trial

          1. ceejayoz · · focus · HN ↗
            Incompetence can result in cases that don&#x27;t go to trial, though.
      4. kulahan · · focus · HN ↗
        Fun fact: Charles Ponzi (yes, THAT Ponzi) got started buying and selling postage stamps via arbitrage. It was legal until he started doing some shenanigans regarding over-promised ROIs and needed to use new investor money to pay older investors.

        He would buy a stamp in Spain for 30 centavos, then exchange it for a 5 cent stamp in the US. Spain’s currency was depreciating against the dollar, so you could make some surprising returns. Really, his numbers weren’t straight-up lies, it’s just that it would’ve been impractical at the time to transport enough stamps to make that payout occur.

        1. filmgirlcw · · focus · HN ↗
          Correction: his idea was that he could buy international reply coupons (which were different than regular stamps) and arbitrage the rates against whatever currency value was greater. As an academic exercise, it was interesting (if utterly unpractical, especially for 1920).

          But he NEVER did anything legal. In fact, he didn’t even receive his first attempt at successfully buying a small number of international reply coupons from a friend in Italy until his scam unraveled. And he’d never figured out how he could turn those coupons into cash.

          And the reason his arbitrage excuse was caught so quickly (it was basically one summer that he was able to run his scam before his money ran out), was because the global supply of all the international reply coupons in the world were valued at significantly less than his revenues from his schemes, a fact experts pointed out to the local papers as the scam was happening. In fact, he even stopped telling new investors about the postal reply coupons scheme and had moved on to other lies about how people could double their money so quickly.

          1. kulahan · · focus · HN ↗
            Thanks for the corrections! I only heard the story once quite a while ago :)
      5. lostlogin · · focus · HN ↗
        &gt; I hate counterfeiting

        There is a good book about Konrad Kujau who forged heaps of stuff before faking Hitler diaries and the getting caught. It’s worth a read.

        A line that’s stuck with me (and is hopefully remembered correctly) ‘there are efficient documents and inefficient documents.’

        <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Hitler_Diaries" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Hitler_Diaries

        1. ahartmetz · · focus · HN ↗
          Kujau became famous as a counterfeiter, so some people counterfeited his counterfeits.
    4. behringer · · focus · HN ↗
      They get away with it long enough until the day they go to federal prison involving fraud across state lines. Definitely would not want to try it.
      1. onemoresoop · · focus · HN ↗
        Yeah, it&#x27;s greed that does that to people.
    5. cjbgkagh · · focus · HN ↗
      They usually have someone on the inside they can contact to remove negative reviews, eBay doesn’t care because the high positive ratings means more sales which means more commissions.
    6. ericpruitt · · focus · HN ↗
      &gt; Note that they’ve sold so much that even 1k neutral ratings are barely registering - they have “100% positive feedback”

      I&#x27;m pretty sure eBay&#x27;s neutral ratings never impact the positive feedback rate regardless of how many you get.

      1. abanana · · focus · HN ↗
        Clicking the Information icon on the end of the line &quot;Positive Feedback (last 12 months): 100%&quot; shows that this is correct. Never forget it&#x27;s a marketing line, to encourage you to buy, not to help you. Percentages ideally shouldn&#x27;t be rounded to 100% at any time, but generally are; but ignoring all neutral feedback makes it even more meaningless.

          We calculated this positive feedback percentage using the total number of positive and negative ratings...
  Positive feedback: 189647
  Negative feedback: 9...
  189647 &#x2F; ( 189647 + 9 ) = 100%
        1. ericpruitt · · focus · HN ↗
          Funnily enough, I&#x27;ve run into long time eBay sellers that don&#x27;t seem to realize this, either (assuming they&#x27;re not just lying). I&#x27;ve given neutral feedback to people that complained about how I was jeopardizing their shop by ruining their 100% positive feedback rating, and I have to explicitly point out that their rating was unchanged.
          1. zucked · · focus · HN ↗
            Turns out you&#x27;re correct, but this store also has a fair number of negative reviews, too. Fortunately for them (or unfortunately for us) they end up a rounding error in their favor.
    7. ChrisRR · · focus · HN ↗
      What does does buying back postage mean in this context?
    8. throwitaway222 · · focus · HN ↗
      Remember this guy:

      <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=HPC3mLNL3B0" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=HPC3mLNL3B0

      It seems like all the people bought his book ended up just creating fraud enterprises and it just probably expanded from there.

    9. alwaysthiserror · · focus · HN ↗
      I saw a bunch of denim jackets (with size options on the listings, usually indicating significant stock on hand, not just someone selling a couple used items) in four or five styles from a manufacturer I&#x27;m interested in show up on eBay at a bit under half retail price a couple months back. Big discount, but not suspiciously low for overstock or maybe someone selling seconds and lying about them not having defects. From what I can tell, some of these brands that rarely have sales at all and never steep ones either sell would-be steep-sale material directly on ebay (without publicizing it) or wholesale it in lots to people who turn around and put it on ebay, so a bunch of new stock for one brand showing up from a single seller all at once isn&#x27;t that weird.

      So I bought one.

      About a week and a half passes, and no update on ebay regarding the shipping. I&#x27;ve had this happen once or twice before and the thing just eventually shows up, so I&#x27;m not too worried, but I am approaching the point of being worried.

      Around that time, the seller sends me a message that their... warehouse burned down. So I should cancel the order because they can&#x27;t fulfill it.

      WTF.

      I am like 95% sure this was some kind of scam or hustle from the beginning, but I haven&#x27;t been able to figure out how. I got my money back. What gives? Maybe... some kind of drop-shipping thing that fell through, or they got a line on some counterfeits or &quot;fell off a truck&quot; stock but with limited info on what was actually in the batch, and weren&#x27;t able to fulfill all the orders they took? I remain puzzled.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.