DataBar Likely To Mean More Fraud, At Least Initially

Written by Frank Hayes
June 1st, 2011

The long-awaited GS1 DataBar is about to come into its own, as the high-density barcode becomes the default code for grocery coupons on July 1. Although the increased information packed into a DataBar is supposed to improve inventory management and cut coupon fraud for grocers, early indications are that some manufacturers are getting parts of the code wrong, thereby wiping out some supply-chain and inventory advantages. And if grocers have to be forgiving of all those DataBar errors, it could make coupon fraud easier, not harder.

Big retailers that handle groceries are theoretically ready to handle DataBar coupons at POS, but the reality is that there has never been a large-scale, full-on test of these coupons with no UPC-A codes to fall back on. And no one from the barcode’s sponsoring organization seems to be offering practical advice on cutting the risks—which could lead to unhappy customers and a backlash among grocers.

“Already we’ve been finding variations in the expiration date format in some manufacturer coupon barcodes, such that the field is all but unusable for practical applications,” an IT exec at one of the largest U.S retail chains said. “Can a retailer afford to be lenient with some aspects of these barcodes and still hope to meet the conflicting goals of reducing fraud while accurately collecting data and properly serving their customers?

“We can lay some of the blame on the GS1 organization for making its standards so complex and expensive to acquire that manufacturers would rather guess at what a proper coupon looks like than pay a consultant,” she said. “But customers who are wronged will blame only the store that denied their coupons, and will not accept or even understand excuses that ‘it’s a specification error.'”

Coding information like expiration dates on product stickers, especially for produce and other quick-to-spoil items, was a big selling point for DataBar when it was still the Next Big Thing. It still may be an advantage, but both traditional supermarkets and big chains that carry groceries (such as Wal-Mart, Target and Kmart) are coming up against the flexibility built into the DataBar specifications. With a huge number of suppliers and too many options, decoding DataBars becomes complex and error prone.

Still, that’s no worse (and probably a little faster) than keying in item numbers for produce. The real problem with DataBar errors comes in coupons, where DataBar was intended to eliminate the need for checkout clerks to manually check coupons to make sure they match items and to confirm expiration dates.

But that only works if all the information packed into a coupon’s DataBar is trustworthy. When an authentic coupon has bad coding, it won’t fly to reject it at the POS—that just makes customers unhappy. They know the coupon is real. The best case for the checkout clerk is to accept the coupon anyway, probably after a delay and a manager’s approval.

The logical IT workaround is to loosen your standards for coupons, especially for particularly error-prone fields. But that opens the door a little wider for the thriving online community of coupon counterfeiters, who reverse-engineer coupon coding to create their own forged coupons.

This problem isn’t small potatoes, either.


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.