So you say that you can't wait for mobile payments eh? Well, in an article published by Kelly Jackson Higgins of DarkReading.com, (Smartphone Risks Intensifying) quoting research from McAfee, you might want to wait until they figure out how to make those Smartphone's more secure.
I say we tackle the Internet payment problems first, then move on to mobile.
M-Payment supporters cite convenience as the thrust behind the interest in mobile payment.
Convenience may be nice but it's way overrated. Anyone who argues that convenience is the number one driving force behind the popularity of a payment methodolgy simply doesn't get it. Security is the key and convenience arrives at the expense of security. (How convenient is airport check-in and boarding post 911? Yeah, quite the "departure" from convenience, is it not?) Allow me to provide another analogy.
Would it not be of the "utmost" convenience for you and your family to get in and out of your house, (along with your relatives and/or neighbors who want to come and pay you a visit) if you always left the front and back doors of your house unlocked? Sure it would.
Then why don't we do it?
It's because that very same convenience comes at the expense of security which in turn, would also be likely to attract malicious characters.
On the flipside, if you always locked your door, you may occasionally be "inconvenienced" by having to fumble around in your coat-pocket or purse, looking for (those damn) keys. 110% inconvenienced if you've ever lived in the US/Midwest in January, I might add.
But we go through these same insanely inconvenient motions everyday anyway. Why? Because it's worth it to us have the peace of mind in knowing that it's safe. Why should it be any different with securing payments? Don't the bad guys want to get into our house to steal our money? Don't we use money to make payments?
(BTW, I know we used to leave our doors unlocked back in the "Leave it to Beaver" days, but sadly, even prior to "Beavis & Butthead" becoming the number 1 movie in America {which marked the day I started locking my doors, heh heh heh...}, it became a much different world out there.
We threw convenience out the window and not only started locking our doors, but also the very window we threw convenience out of...along with locking our garages, our bicycles, blah blah blah...etc. etc. etc.)
So, convenience is not really the core issue. Risk and security are.
So the question begs to be asked: When will retailers understand that because fraud is rising exponentially (a trillion last year) and because it's them who are always the one's getting stuck with the bill, maybe it's time to stop complaining about Interchange and time to "implement change." I would argue that it's time to "take charge" and stand up and fight. Instead of being responsible for chargebacks and fraud, take responsibility and implement and push a more secure (thus lower interchange) payment method. (such as the one afforded by HomeATM? You betcha!)
Face it, consumer's only want convenience in the face of zero liability.
V/MC knows that, which is why they have implemented their so-called "zero liability" programs...to make consumers feel like they have no risk of exposure.
Heck, if my auto insurance had a zero liability program, I'd never take my keys out of and never lock the door to my car. Wouldn't it be nice if you never had to look for your car keys or worry about losing or leaving them somewhere? They'd always right where you left them, right where they need to be...in the ignition. If that isn't convenient, I don't know what is. So why don't we do it if it's "all about convenience?" Because it's not. It's all about safety, security and protection.
The bottom line, is if you ask anyone who has had their purse,wallet or ID stolen, it's a very time consuming, aggravating and frustrating effort to deal with all the financial institutions, credit bureaus' etc. to right the ship. Not one would say they found the process to be anything but "inconvenient." So one could argue that there are some "untruths that lie" beneath the zero-liability programs pushed by V/MC. Imagine that.
Even worse, on the flip-side, (of zero liability), it's the merchants whom are almost certainly always at risk. We'll call that program the "100% Full Liability Merchant Left Holding the Bag Program." They're the one's liable for fraud, chargebacks, thefts, etc. It's no secret that V/MC has them by the bollocks because they can't afford to NOT take credit cards. Or can they?
With the decline in credit card usage and the rise in debit card usage, now may be the perfect time to make a move and switch over to a more secure payment mechanism. What is a more secure payment mechanism?
For one, Card Present is more secure than Card Not Present. That's the singular purpose of HomeATM's personal swiping device...to facilitate card present transactions. Wait, there's a dual purpose to our "slider" as we take it a step further in order to provide "dual authentication" Therefore, we have incorporated a PIN Entry Device into our "slider." Why? To make it more convenient for people who want a secure transaction.
According to this months issue of Card and Payments,
"PIN Debit transactions have lower fraud rates because of the required PIN, while signatures are relatively easy to forge. Betwen 2005 and 2007, the average fraud cost on PIN Debit transactions was 1.09 cents per $100 of card spend compared with 5.4 cents per $100 of card spend on signature debit transactions." Through HomeATM, online retailers now have a choice. A choice whereby they can increase security, reduce risk, hence interchange fees, virtually eliminate chargebacks and increase their bottom line...all in one fell swoop.
In these times of both fraud and economic frugality, you'd think, now more than ever, retailers would demand security over convenience. Transactions don't have to be "inconvenient," they just should NEVER be insecure.
Let's use HomeATM as an example...just how "inconvenient" is it to swipe a card into our Slider versus type in a 14 or 16 digit number, an expiration date and a CVV? Most would agree that it's actually "more convenient" to "swipe vs. type." One thing is certain...with HomeATM's E2EE, it's about a million times more secure.
Anywho, I almost forgot...here's the article questioning the security behind smartphones...and always remember...hackers are smart too. They figured out the insecurity behind web browsers, amounting, by at least one account, to $1,000,000,000,000 (one-trillion) dollars in losses due to cybercriminal activity. That was in 1 (one) year.
But did you know that HomeATM has also engineered and is testing a secure SmartPhone PIN based (click pic to enlarge) E2EE mobile transaction platform? More on that later.
Let's get this Internet payments mess fixed first...
Smartphone Threats Intensify - DarkReading
Enterprise data at risk, according to new McAfee report, which shows mobile device manufacturers seeing more malware attacks than ever before. IEditor's Note: Oh yeah? Wait til Next Year!)
By Kelly Jackson Higgins - DarkReading
Security threats were bound to catch up with the proliferation of smartphones across the enterprise. More than half of mobile device-makers said their products experienced malware, voice-, or text spam attacks last year, according to a newly published report from McAfee.
Experts have long warned that smartphones, such as Windows Mobile and iPhone handsets, could become the new weakest link in the enterprise, with more users relying on them for accessing corporate email, surfing the Web, and other applications. "[Users] want to do everything on them," says Stewart Allen, a Toronto-based independent consultant. "But they are [typically] completely bypassing the IT infrastructure." They are also bypassing security, he says, putting sensitive data at risk.
McAfee's report, which is based on a survey of 30-plus mobile device manufacturers from around the world, found these vendors are getting hit with more malware attacks than ever before. As a result, they are spending more money on recovering from them.
Nearly 55 percent said network or service-capacity problems have ensued due to mobile security incidents -- up from 25 percent in 2007. Around half said third-party application/content problems had plagued their devices last year, up from around 25 percent in 2007. Around 48 percent said their devices accounted for data loss problems, up from around 27 percent in 2007.
Continue "DarkReading"
smartphones, security, malware, HomeATM
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=923c7ded-2051-4fe5-9ce4-6fc64db86347)
0 comments