Following the lead of rival Visa, MasterCard has set out plans to push the United States into abandoning mag-stripe cards in favour of EMV chip technology.
At the POS, the cashier never ever looks at the signature, so you do not even have single factor auth (because it can be a copy of the magstripe). US could have been cycling POS terminals for the past 10 years to ease the cost. To me it seems like a stubborn
point of principle, and one which has no rationale at all. Maybe NFC cards will enable US to leapfrog to there (getting EMV on the way) and save some face, because at the moment its a joke.
Well that's a bit underwhelming. And a missed opportunity to support full chip and PIN.
Yet another card brand seems to be putting a lot of faith in the, as yet, far from ubiquitous “future innovations” as justification for not also moving ahead with the already proved Chip and Off-Line PIN. It will be interesting to what forum(s) in the USA
this will be debated in, perhaps Merchant Associations or given the fraud implications, will the Government step in?
Yeah. Go Mike. Why do we in the developed world (and Visa and MC in the States) need to sell it to the undeveloped world as a means of supporting new, exciting and innovative technologies? Why can't we just say: "Hey Guys, look at your fraud figures and
look at this chip and PIN stuff - it works", and then hit them with international liability shift. If we can stop the buggers charging back the fraud they have caused with thier insistance that magstrip is secure because it's online, then essentially I would
be happy, and I know of several organisations that would be several million quid better off, and happy. I don't want to force EMV on these people, I just want them to pay for the fraud.
Oh, and can we have the money back that we have wasted on PCI DSS please?
Basic 1-1.3 million SEK - OTE 2.5 million SEK - NO...Stockholm (possibly Oslo or Copenhagen)
© Finextra Research 2014