advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Should Retailers Use PCI Training To Enhance—Or Replace—Their QSA?

March 2nd, 2010

Some merchants will see the benefits as reducing or even eliminating various QSA costs. Merchants need to assess how significant the QSA’s professional fees are in relation to the total cost of a PCI assessment. Often, the infrastructure costs and dedicated internal resources–including the newly trained Auditors–are a large part of the total cost. In addition, merchants still need internal and external penetration tests, the costs of which can be a major part of a QSA engagement. Remember, too, your quarterly external vulnerability scans still need to be conducted by an Approved Scanning Vendor (ASV).

Second, let’s look at the product: the assessment itself. The PCI DSS is complex, and QSAs live in it. QSAs regularly call on their colleagues to review findings, discuss interpretations, seek advice and craft compensating controls. QSA firms have a formal quality assurance process for each document or Report on Compliance (ROC) that goes out. One or even several Internal Auditors with limited exposure to PCI (how many are conversant in encryption key management, firewall rules or certificate authority?) and few colleagues to talk with will lack these advantages.

PCI is about protecting the enterprise. This point brings up an awkward organizational issue: Will Internal Audit be able, politically, to deliver the occasional difficult news that a technical or business process has to be changed? If this ability cannot be guaranteed, the merchant may be validated, but it will not be compliant. And it certainly will not be secure.

A reasonable middle ground is that Level 1 and Level 2 merchants will use the Merchant QSA training to leverage an existing QSA relationship. For example, the document gathering phase of an assessment might be compressed and the onsite visit(s) might be conducted quicker and more effectively. Compensating controls can be drafted internally.

Such an approach can save QSAs time. The Internal Auditor also gets valuable on-the-job PCI training by working closely with an experienced QSA and bouncing ideas around with that person. The QSA has been through the assessment process before and has a lot of experience to share. (Hint: The ability to work with their staff and “teach” PCI may be something merchants should consider when seeking their QSA.)

The question for Level 1 and Level 2 merchants should not be whether to send their staff to the PCI Council’s Merchant QSA training. That is a no-brainer. I hope every merchant sends people to this course, or at least to the current merchant training. It would be great to see those courses so full that the Council has to schedule additional sessions. There is not a QSA on the planet who doesn’t want a knowledgeable, PCI-savvy merchant as a client.

I’d like to hear what you think. Have you sent staff to the current training program? If so, what was their response? Do you plan to send your Internal Auditor(s) to the Council’s training? Either leave a comment or E-mail me at wconway@403labs.com.


advertisement

2 Comments | Read Should Retailers Use PCI Training To Enhance—Or Replace—Their QSA?

  1. Jestep Says:

    This not only undermines PCI but just undermines the benefit of a 3rd party. On a cost basis, it’s probably a no-brainer. Realistically, if you want PCI to work, you can’t have the person managing the books and writing the checks. They’re going to do what’s in the best interest of the bottom line.

    Just look at things as simple as using CVV for online transactions. It’s in the best interest of every for fraud prevention. It’s free and easy to use. Most big retailers don’t use it because the losses incurred when requiring cvv outweigh their losses from fraud.

  2. Dave CISA/M/SP Says:

    I think this arrangement represents a balanced compromise. The goal was to increase the overall quality of merchant assessments, specifially self-assessments. Originally that was to be accomplished by expanding the QSA franchise. This solution allows merchants to continue self assessing, while mandating a measurable and demonstrable understanding of PCI DSS by the self-assessor through examination. It also keeps the QSA firms sharp by forcing them to deliver value above and beyond the internal assessor to EARN merchant business, as opposed to having it handed to them.

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.