advertisement
advertisement

Chip Card Confusion Could Challenge Chains’ POS Plans

Written by Walter Conway
August 15th, 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.

Visa recently issued a bulletin with recommendations for implementing chip cards in the U.S. market. Don’t ignore this document. You may not know all you think you do about Visa’s plans and what you, dear retailer, need to do. Most important, merchants must be sure their POS devices accept both EMV contact chip cards and traditional magnetic stripe cards. Make a mistake, and you might have to buy the stuff all over again.

Unfortunately, one recent experience related by a client indicates that not all acquirers are necessarily getting the right message out to their merchants. In this case, the acquirer representative told the merchant there was no need to upgrade its devices to read chip cards. Instead, the acquirer advised simply upgrading to another single-interface magnetic-stripe-reading terminal that could not read EMV chips.

Hopefully, this was an isolated incident. But it got me thinking. The most important thing for all retailers and merchants to realize is that to qualify for Visa’s Technology Innovation Program (TIP), they must authorize at least 75 percent of their transactions on “chip-enabled, dual-interface terminals.” That means you need to have the right POS terminals. In Visa’s parlance, “dual-interface” means magnetic stripes and contact EMV chips, not just magnetic stripes plus contactless EMV.

Notice there is no requirement that 75 percent of the actual transactions be on chip cards. That means if you upgrade your devices, you should qualify for TIP. Merchants just need to use devices capable of processing the chip transaction, should a customer present a chip card.

Visa’s guidance includes some other items of interest to merchants beyond the imperative to upgrade to dual-interface terminals. Merchants will need to send the full chip data to their acquirer. Acquirers need to test that transaction flow using a device validation toolkit (provided by Visa or using the equivalent from a third-party vendor). This testing will take time and will also require test cards with EMV chips, so merchants should plan accordingly. Acquirers need to complete their own (not their merchant) testing by April 2013.

Visa also advises retailers, especially large ones, to prioritize deployment of their new dual-interface terminals. It suggests starting with locations where merchants expect high chip usage (e.g., lots of non-U.S. cardholders, who already have chip cards) or where there is higher than usual counterfeit or fraud transactions. It makes sense to deploy the new devices where they will do the most good from the very start, although these will be the same locations where testing could be most disruptive and any service interruption will be most costly.


advertisement

One Comment | Read Chip Card Confusion Could Challenge Chains’ POS Plans

  1. Tom Mahoney Says:

    In the last 6 months, three of my credit/debit cards (all Visa) have expired and been replaced. One of the old ones was chipped but none of the new ones is, unless they’ve removed the logo. Are we moving to chip cards or not? My limited evidence says NO.

Newsletters

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!
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.