advertisement
advertisement

Yes, Virginia, We Really Do Need A QIR Program

Written by Walter Conway
May 16th, 2012

A 403 Labs QSA, PCI Columnist Walt Conway has worked in payments and technology for more than 30 years, 10 of them with Visa.

After my last column about the PCI Council’s Qualified Integrator and Reseller (QIR) Program, reaction was unusually strong on both sides. And readers did force some questions to be addressed. For openers: Was it really necessary for the PCI Council to launch this program?

Bob Russo, general manager of the Council, said the program was “sorely needed, as evidenced by the number of data breaches” that happened due to implementation errors made by third parties such as system integrators and resellers. Russo pointed out that merchants buy Payment Application Data Security Standard (PA-DSS) validated applications to be secure, but those applications can’t provide the intended security if they are not installed and maintained properly.

Russo’s response reinforces what QSAs (including those who wrote to me, all of whom enthusiastically support the program) see too often: retailers spending good money hoping to get a secure payment application only to find out it has not been installed according to the vendor’s PA-DSS Implementation Guide. QSAs, acquirers and forensic investigators see shortcuts—for example, using the same passwords across multiple installations or leaving debug logs enabled (recording all transaction details)—that supposedly make troubleshooting easier. But these sloppy practices put retailers at risk. Too often, the result—confirmed by published data breach statistics—is that the retailer risks a business-threatening data breach. Anyone wondering why the QIR program needs to exist only has to look at the numbers.

The next question I got from two readers was: Why did the PCI Council act in a vacuum and develop the QIR program on its own? Why didn’t the Council reach out to trade organizations or other groups who have training programs already? Russo’s reply was direct: The Council did work with not one or even two but a range of industry parties to develop the QIR Program. Russo, who appeared surprised at the question, said: “The Council created a task force that included representatives from the card brands, software vendors and acquirers. The task force received a series of briefings from forensic investigators and others on the sources of data breaches. They heard about the risks. Software vendors and their trade group representatives were an integral part of the QIR task force. They provided a lot of valuable feedback.”

So much for the program being developed in a vacuum.

As to why the Council felt it needed to develop its own training and testing program, Russo said: “We want to concentrate on benefitting retailers. More training for integrators and resellers is a good thing, and any program that helps them do a better job installing applications correctly is better for everyone.”

Russo was being a bit more diplomatic about the need for more training than I might have been.


advertisement

One Comment | Read Yes, Virginia, We Really Do Need A QIR Program

  1. Michael Says:

    We are a Fortune 500 retailer. Our leadership applauds this new program. It’s a good thing.

Leave a Reply

Readers, specifically those who want to comment on a story:
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 17,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

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...

StorefrontBacktalk
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.