The Great PCI Divide: The Dids And The Never Dids

Written by Evan Schuman
January 15th, 2009

In talking with various retail IT execs at the NRF show this week, I was struck with two observations. Let’s not dwell on the first, which is my annual rhetorical question: If NRF is going to hold their annual big event every year in January, why do they opt for New York City? I pondered this point this year as the temperature hit 9 degrees Fahrenheit while I typed this column.

While we’re at it, would it really kill them to start the conference a week later, to give some breathing time after retailers return from the holidays?

But the other observation is less futile. PCI kept cropping up in conversations. No surprise there. What was interesting was how differently IT execs with very similarly sized chains viewed it.

Those retailers with a history of making security a priority, in terms of both money and labor investments, said that PCI was ultra-easy and they couldn’t understand the fuss. Those whose companies have a history of ignoring security issues, on the other hand, will find PCI compliance efforts to be much more painful, time-consuming and expensive.

It’s the Great PCI divide: The Dids and The Never Dids. The problem with this divide is that the retailers who need PCI’s guidelines the most are the ones most likely to be put off by the guidelines, seeing them as unreasonably demanding and expensive.

This thinking is an extension of the USDA Pyramid analogy, where the food pyramid was made less healthy in an attempt to boost its compliance. If it was perceived as too strict, it would be ignored.

Most PCI presentations are done for all retailers within their PCI category (Level 1, Level 2, etc.), with little thought given to the fact that The Dids and The Never Dids have radically different perspectives about PCI security.

Some assessors have been known to unofficially factor this divide into their thinking. As a result, a retailer might be approved if it is merely making major strides toward compliance, even if the chain is still far from compliant.

But such a move only intensifies the inconsistency in how retailers are graded, PCI-wise. Should PCI officially factor in how difficult compliance will be for a particular chain, given its current systems and budget?


Comments are closed.


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.