As PayPal’s Home Depot In-Store Trial Expands, Can Users’ Sloppy Security Habits Change?

Written by Frank Hayes
January 26th, 2012

PayPal’s expansion of its in-store payments trial at Home Depot (up from 400 PayPal employees to all PayPal users) marks a huge jump in the trial’s scope—and risk. On January 19, PayPal opened up the trial to include 51 stores (up from the initial 5) and said all PayPal users could now sign up for the system. That should give both PayPal and Home Depot much more useful information on who will use the system, and how.

But PayPal’s approach—which essentially reverses 50 years of payment-card advances by eliminating any physical authentication device—still presents a big challenge when it comes to security.

The expanded trial, which adds stores in northern California and the Omaha, Neb., and Atlanta areas, came less than two weeks after PayPal announced that Home Depot was testing the system.

By the way, a much-quoted Reuters report from January 20 said that Office Depot is also currently in trial with PayPal’s system. It’s not, and the problem was tracked down to an Office Depot exec who was discussing that chain’s announced trial with Google Wallet and apparently accidentally said PayPal. It’s not clear if Office Depot is indeed in talks with PayPal about a possible trial. Given PayPal’s attempts to talk with a wide range of retailers, though, it’s certainly quite plausible.

The Reuters report quoted Kevin Peters, president of Office Depot’s North American unit, as saying that PayPal “at this point [is] in a small number of stores” and that is “because there are still some rough spots in that experience. There are some limitations on who can use it, service carriers that support that.”

The part about service carriers doesn’t seem to apply to a PayPal trial, but it does apply to Google Wallet. And the “rough spots in that experience” comment also is consistent with reports about Google Wallet initial efforts. A source within Office Depot confirmed that Peters was apparently discussing Google Wallet and not PayPal and that there is no current PayPal trial happening at Office Depot.

That Reuters report happened to publish the day after eBay CEO John Donahoe told an analyst call about trying the system himself at a Home Depot: “I left my wallet and my cell phone in my car,” he said. “Without my wallet, without my mobile phone, on the terminal, I pressed ‘Pay with PayPal.’ I put in my mobile phone number and a PIN and, boom, I was done. The receipt E-mailed to my E-mail account, texted to my mobile phone and I walked out. So it was a beautiful experience.”

“It’s going to be a learning year,” Donahoe added. “But for early trial in beta, it’s a great experience and, frankly, an experience no one else can match.”

Donahoe’s experience matches other reports about how the system works from users who aren’t PayPal or eBay employees. Ordinary PayPal users can now sign up online, which should give the trial a large influx of users to do testing (something currently missing from Google Wallet trials at some retailers).

The process is straightforward: An existing PayPal user just links a mobile phone number to the PayPal account and chooses a PIN, along with whether receipts will be sent via text message to the phone or only to the user’s PayPal account. At the POS in-store, the user works through a few prompts, keys in the phone number and PIN, and then completes the transaction. (PayPal also offers a conventional magstripe card, but it’s the numbers-only version that’s really being tested in the Home Depot trial.)

According to Russ Jones, the editor of the blog Payments News who tried the system himself, the transaction receipt is a full receipt—not just the final amount, but line-item information (albeit in Home Depot’s cryptic inventory shorthand) for each item purchased.

All that really does sound simple, and not that different from what customers are accustomed to. And that’s the most worrisome part of PayPal’s approach: It feels too familiar to customers, even though a major layer of security that protected them in the past is no longer there.


2 Comments | Read As PayPal’s Home Depot In-Store Trial Expands, Can Users’ Sloppy Security Habits Change?

  1. Philip Cohen Says:

    “All that really does sound simple,…” Still not as simple, or as secure, as me simply tapping my “chipped” MasterCard on the POS terminal. Let’s face it if you are stupid enough to leave both your phone and your wallet in your car or wherever, undoubtedly you should not be allowed out without an adult chaperone, and that chaperone would most likely have a credit/debit card issued by a real bank. The other aspect about this that frightens me is, are people actually leaving their funds “on deposit” with this unlicensed, un-prudentially regulated PayPal “bank” that is not itself even licensed to provide credit? Otherwise, how are users’ funds being sourced from the user’s real bank? Frankly, this clunky operation sends shivers down my spine.

  2. Miles Thomas Says:

    There are many reasons why a user may want to pay with Paypal even if they have their payment cards with them. It’s a good way of bypassing a retailer’s choice to not accept certain payment cards (e. g. Amex, Discover, out of area debit cards, prepaid debit cards/travel money cards etc), and/or clearing small balances from Paypal. Or indeed buying something on behalf of someone else, who has paid for it in advance with Paypal. That said, I agree overall with the article, and I probably wouldn’t use paypal that way.


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.