Sears’ E-Receipt Fear: Buy Once, Return Many

Written by Evan Schuman
January 18th, 2012

As retail rapidly moves to integrate mobile into almost every aspect of its customer interactions, many in IT and Loss Prevention are wisely scared about the security holes that will crop up during the rush. One such exec, William Titus, LP VP at Sears, said on Tuesday (Jan. 17) that one of his biggest fears involves mobile electronic receipts.

“The E-receipt problem is that the customer now has a valid receipt. I can’t bring it in. I’m not checking it off and signing off on it. So the ability to use that fraudulently increases unless you have a true returns management system,” Titus said while speaking at NRF during a StorefrontBacktalk moderated panel.

The problem is that few chains today have such complete returns management systems. This is likely to be a temporary setback, because those types of systems will not only address—dare we say fix?—the E-receipt issue Titus discussed but also deliver quite a few additional benefits with everything from inventory to CRM to payment systems.

Until then, though, this security hole will be quite real.

“Our CIOs are always making decisions about transactions and how those transactions should move up and down the line. Should I trickle this thing up? Should I batch it up? The problem is that if I’m batching this up, or I’m trickling it and it takes a long time for it to get up there, I have this huge window of opportunity where (dishonest customers) can now do multiple fraudulent refunds. There’s a lot of different things that we have to be thinking about.”

Theoretically, this problem might be slightly reduced through actions from some of the potential mobile wallet players—Google, PayPal, ISIS, maybe Apple, maybe Square. But that would be disjointed, because it would only impact a small portion of the purchases. With the potential for thieves moving from one store to another with stolen merchandise being cashed out as a return, a centralized system within the chain is the long-term viable approach.

Another item that might temporarily alleviate some of this problem, added fellow panelist Michael Sajor, CIO of Ann (owner of Ann Taylor), is item-level RFID. “At least then we would know that that item was purchased,” he said.

As a practical matter, though, a chain that doesn’t have a full-fledged returns management system is unlikely to go through the much more painful item-level RFID process.


One Comment | Read Sears’ E-Receipt Fear: Buy Once, Return Many

  1. jandraski Says:

    I find the comment concerning the “painful item – level RFID process interesting. obviously there is an education gap that can easily be closed. item level RFID provides a host of benefits that can definitely impact returns management.


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.