Tesco’s Mobile Trial Opted For Android Because It Was Less Secure

Written by Evan Schuman
June 1st, 2011

In what may be a first in retail IT, the more-than-5,000-store Tesco chain chose the mobile platform it would experiment with based on a determination that it was the least secure. The trial is about a Wi-Fi system in each store that should map for customers the closest route between selected products. But the reason the chain opted to trial this system on Android is deliciously counter-intuitive.

The security issue cropped up because the chain wanted to do extensive beta testing with customers before offering the final version of the application to the world. Security policies with Apple’s iPhone and Research in Motion’s BlackBerry, among others, require that only tested and approved apps can be installed on their phones. Android’s more lax application security process made it the more desirable platform.

“The service is only available publicly to Android phone owners at this time, because we don’t want the app in its current state going into the public app stores. Only Android easily offers the ability to install apps from ‘Unknown Sources,'” wrote Nick Lansley, who manages IT R&D projects at Tesco. Testers are being asked to “change a setting temporarily to allow non-marketplace apps on your phone to install it.”

Lansley’s note to prospective testers was wonderfully candid, in a way that I just can’t see Wal-Mart or Macy’s doing. “You are prepared to run an R&D app and accept no liability from us if we cause your phone problems, although it doesn’t do anything more than require access to your Wi-Fi and location-based services on your phone. You accept that the app, being R&D, is a bit geeky, but you are prepared to fiddle and play with it and you accept the system, being R&D, may just not work from time to time,” Lansley wrote. “Please note that we won’t be rolling this out to customers in general for a while, because we have to think about how useful it’s going to be. The system involves a lot of infrastructure installation in the stores, so we need to get all kinds of people involved in thinking about the customer experience. It would be awful if we did all this work but few customers really used it. We must also see how we would put the technology into our production applications and make it really easy for everyone to use. There’s also the possibility that the infrastructure is not reliable right now. This project is in R&D for a good reason.”

The idea of the service—referred to simply as in-store sat-nav—is for customers to build and share shopping lists, with the system then flagging the products on a digital map that “guides you round the store to pick up your products using the shortest route.” The system has a goal of locating customers and products “within 3 meters.”

“The idea of ‘sat-nav’ is to give a sense of where you are and how far it is to the product when you have a very large store like the one at Romford,” Lansley said. “This is a low cost R&D project just to see if we can be better for customers. That’s what R&D is for.”


2 Comments | Read Tesco’s Mobile Trial Opted For Android Because It Was Less Secure

  1. A Reader Says:

    You’re confusing “security” with “proprietary vendor lock-in”, which is exactly what Apple wants you to do. Apple’s no-external-apps policy exists for only one reason: to ensure Apple’s cut of every app sold to run on their platform.

  2. Calvin Says:

    Calling Android insecure because it is more accessible to developers and gives users more control is like saying a computer with a keyboard is less secure than one without. Sure, a computer without a keyboard will make it much harder for the user to do something stupid, like download and install malware, but there are other more sensible ways to protect a system without tying the user’s hands and making it harder for the user to do anything. Android has a much more robust local security policy than the iPhone. This, and appropriately-worded warnings when an unsigned app is about to be installed (along with basic commonsense), is enough to make the system as secure if not more so than the iPhone. Paranoid Android users can still limit themselves to Google-vetted apps if they so choose. The only difference is that Android gives the user that option.


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.