This is page 2 of:

A Wireless Tracking Way To Solve The In-Aisle Digital Receipt Verification Problem

November 16th, 2011

Another concern speaks to consumers who shop with their mobile phone in airplane mode, effectively transmitting no signals at all. They would turn airplane mode off to make a purchase and then turn it back on. Few consumers do that today, because it prevents them from receiving phone calls or texts. But privacy-worried (or, for that matter, cancer-fearing) consumers who do go airplane mode could undermine this system.

A different hiccup for this tracking lies in the nature of the signals. A mobile phone has a unique number called an IMSI (International Mobile Subscriber Identity). When first connecting with a cell tower, the phone sends this number to the tower, which confirms that the phone is allowed on the network (for billing purposes), and then returns a similar (but random) temporary number called a TMSI (Temporary Mobile Subscriber Number). The TMSI is then used between the phone and the cell tower after that, until they get disconnected.

This is the number we’ve been discussing, and it has one catch: The TMSI changes every time the phone moves to a new cell tower and also is regularly changed by the cell tower just to make sure the phone is harder to track. That means if you’re tracking the TMSI within a store or mall, it may change. If your system is keeping a list, it may notice that a TMSI vanishes suddenly and a new TMSI appears to have taken its place. Maybe that just means the TMSI was changed by the network. Or maybe it means that one customer turned off her phone or left the store at the same time a different customer turned on her phone or entered the store. There’s no way of telling. But until the TMSI changes, it will consistently point to the same customer.

There actually is a way to deal with this TMSI change, and the software can deal with it. Unless that specific aisle at that specific moment is very crowded—a scenario that could certainly happen during a holiday busy period—the changeover will typically happen very quickly. If the system, therefore, sees 1234567890 and then that number vanishes but a new number—9292929292—suddenly materializes in the exact same spot, the system can tentatively assume that it’s the same person. In all probability, it is.

Even Wal-Mart is trying to figure out these issues. Venky Harinarayan, Walmart’s senior vice president of global E-Commerce and head of Walmart Labs, was on a panel at the GigaOm Roadmap conference in San Francisco last week when he addressed the mobile issue. “What we’ve got to figure out is, how do you make that customer experience something really worthwhile,” Harinarayan said, according to a PCWorld story. “These are not technology problems, they are customer experience problems.”

The Wal-Mart exec is quite correct. The beauty of the wireless tracking is that it is entirely transparent to the customer, which is crucial to maintain that experience. And yet it also confirms that the phone that paid for that product is the same phone approaching the exit right now.

Additional reporting by Frank Hayes.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.