advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Recovery Disaster: PayPal Crash Strands Merchants

November 4th, 2010

  • 9:25 AM: Both merchant APIs and Web site payments were fully recovered and running out of Denver. Some merchant API users still experienced timeouts.

  • 9:32 AM: PayPal’s corporate communications department announced the ongoing outage via the company blog and Twitter.

  • 10:00 AM: Merchant APIs and Web site payments were switched back to the original datacenter from Denver.

  • 10:43 AM: PayPal announced on its blog and Twitter that the outage was resolved.

  • 11:32 AM: A second outage began. PayPal hasn’t given any details on this outage except that payments were unavailable for most (but apparently not all) merchants and ordinary customers.

  • 11:55 AM: Payments for most merchants and ordinary customers were working again.

  • 12:21 PM: The second outage was officially declared resolved.

    Notice that along with PayPal’s two big technical glitches—the networking hardware meltdown and the failover that didn’t work—there was a third non-technical failure: It took more than an hour for PayPal to announce the first outage to its users. Indeed, that outage was actually resolved by the time the company’s corporate communications department announced that PayPal was down. The second outage and its resolution weren’t announced until Friday evening.

    That meant it was up to major E-tailers to contact PayPal on their own to find out exactly what was happening. Even for them, it took hours after the outages began to get the necessary information and cut off PayPal functionality.

    It’s understandable that many E-Commerce players are still trying to get a solid understanding of how crucial it is to keep everything running. Five- and 10-minute outages still aren’t unusual, and it’s tempting to assume that every outage will be fixed in just another minute.

    But that’s a dangerous way of thinking. In PayPal’s case, it meant that big customers—who in this case were also big retailers—remained in the dark while IT people in PayPal’s datacenter assumed that the problem was about to be solved.

    Like American Eagle, PayPal had a fallback plan. But it didn’t work the way it was supposed to. And though it had a technical plan (that didn’t work) for dealing with the outage, like Wal-Mart, PayPal didn’t have any plan at all for quickly notifying the people most affected (Wal-Mart’s store personnel, PayPal’s biggest E-Commerce partners).

    The lesson about failed backup plans just keeps getting bigger. Yes, improbable failures can happen. When they do, failover plans can fail. And when that happens, you need a plan already in place to warn those affected in real time.


  • advertisement

    One Comment | Read Recovery Disaster: PayPal Crash Strands Merchants

    1. Bill Bittner Says:

      There are two thoughts this whole incident inspires. The first is just the whole idea of backups in general. The simple answer is “practice, practice, practice”. Backup plans have to be exercised on a regular basis and they must go full circle, transferring to the backup site and also bringing services back on location.

      But the other thing that comes to mind is “too big to fail”, to borrow a phrase from the financial crises. A lot of retailers are considering Cloud Computing and they should. Cloud Computing makes significant sense economically, but it also introduces a whole new set of risk factors. The backup plan becomes even more significant because the retailer is counting on their service provider to be practicing it. As processing becomes more centralized the impact of a single outage becomes more significant. At the same time, the processes necessary to ensure adequate backup are becoming more opaque. Retailers considering Cloud solutions should consider this in their evaluations.

    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.