About 488893 bin
Executive summary
Multiple BIN/IIN lookups identify 488893 as a Visa BIN used in the United States and most commonly attributed to either Bank of America or FIA Card Services, N.A.; several databases class it as a Visa Platinum/credit BIN (examples: CreditCardValidator says Bank of America [1]; IIN/BIN sites list FIA Card Services, N.A. [2] [3]). Public BIN lists and informal sites also surface the number in carding or "non‑VBV" lists, indicating the BIN appears in both legitimate-check sources and illicit‑market lists [4] [5].
1. What the databases say — issuer and card type
Commercial BIN lookup sites consistently report 488893 as a Visa BIN issued in the United States and associated with a credit product, often labeled Platinum. CreditCardValidator reports the IIN 488893 as issued by Bank of America in the United States [1]. Multiple other BIN aggregators — including Bincheck.org, iin-bin, Checkb.in and GetBinCodes — identify the issuer as FIA Card Services, N.A. [2] [3] [6] [7]. These sites also list the card network as Visa and the card type as credit or Platinum level [8] [9].
2. Conflicting attributions — why the issuer varies
The exact issuer name differs across lookups: some services show Bank of America; others show FIA Card Services, N.A. These discrepancies reflect how BIN/IIN databases are collected and maintained: commercial aggregators combine public records, user submissions and historical mappings, and can show different entity names for the same BIN range [1] [3] [10]. Available sources do not provide an authoritative, regulatory registry entry to reconcile the two names definitively; each lookup site warns about potential inaccuracies or offers its data "as is" [1] [10].
3. BINs, practicality and limits — what a BIN reveals and what it does not
BIN/IIN lookups can tell you the card network, probable issuing organization name, country and card level (e.g., Visa Platinum), which is why merchants use them for basic fraud screening and routing [9] [11]. But they do not identify a specific cardholder, current account status, credit limits, or whether a particular card number is valid for a transaction. The lookup pages themselves commonly include disclaimers about accuracy and warn that BIN data should be used at your own risk [10] [1].
4. Red flags in public lists — appearance in illicit or “non‑VBV” lists
Some sources compile BIN lists used by fraud communities and include 488893 among entries labeled “non‑VBV” (non‑Verified by Visa) or as part of carding lists [4] [5]. The presence of a BIN in those compilations does not by itself prove wrongdoing by the issuing bank; it indicates the BIN has appeared in datasets or posts used by fraud actors. BIN aggregator sites and security practitioners note BINs can appear in many contexts—legitimate and illegitimate—and that inclusion in an illicit list is a signal warranting caution, not a definitive judgment [4] [5].
5. Practical advice for merchants and consumers
Merchants verifying a transaction should use BIN checks as one of several fraud indicators (billing/shipping mismatch, AVS/CVV checks, velocity rules), not as sole proof [9] [11]. Consumers seeing unfamiliar charges should contact their card issuer directly; BIN lookup sites cannot dispute or reverse charges and typically disclaim responsibility for inaccuracies [10] [1]. If you operate a payment platform, rely on risk vendors and issuer contact points rather than public BIN lists alone, because public lists vary and can be outdated [1] [9].
6. How to interpret source quality and next steps
The reporting here is built from BIN-aggregation websites and community lists; these sources provide consistent high‑level signals (Visa, U.S., credit/Platinum) but differ on the precise issuer name (Bank of America vs. FIA Card Services, N.A.) and carry self‑disclaimers about completeness and accuracy [1] [3] [10]. To resolve issuer ambiguity, contact the payment network (Visa) or the suspected issuing bank directly; available sources do not include an official Visa registry entry or bank confirmation that definitively resolves the discrepancy (not found in current reporting).