SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
According to an article in BankInfo Security, Visa and Mastercard have given fuel pump terminal vendors an additional 3 years to add support for EMV.
Visa and MasterCard announced this week that they are pushing back their liability shift dates for counterfeit card fraud that results at non-EMV chip-compliant U.S. pay-at-the-pump gas terminals to October 2020 from October 2017.
That news is an early Christmas gift for convenience-store operators and the petrol industry, even though if it leaves issuers on the hook three years longer for counterfeit fraud that might result from a hack or skimming attack at self-serve gas pumps.
But I wonder how much fuss issuers will make about the extension. Counterfeit card fraud at gas pumps pales relative to retail point-of-sale and ecommerce fraud. And despite what we heard five years ago about pay-at-the-pump skimming reaching nearly "epidemic" proportions, we hear much less about it today. That's not to say it's gone away, by any means; but it no longer appears to be a looming epidemic
Visa and MasterCard made the right decision to give gas pumps a break on EMV. The question now is, will the three year extension be enough?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Wednesday December 14 2016, @08:08PM
The same Visa and Mastercard cards have been used in Europe to pay at the pump with chip-and-pin for at least two decades...
Who's profiting from keeping the Americans behind?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 14 2016, @08:48PM
The people who don't have to spend money on new machines / infrastructure!
And identity/card thieves...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 14 2016, @08:50PM
All the people buying gas.
You do know that all this techno-gadgetry is just a form of insurance, right?
And buying insurance gives a benefit (to some), but almost always pays off for the insurance company.
In other words, costs more.
And mom&pop gas-r-us has to spend for the gadgets, and they, out of the goodness of their hearts, don't go on vacation in 2017 to pay for it (oops, now they can, but 2020 is looking bad).
And non-mom&pop gas stations are obviously evil for other reasons, so they can die in a fire.
Right?
Much better to use what you got until it dies anyhow, then not be able to replace it with old standard, only new standard.
But, Visa and MC want to shift their losses to somebody else, faster.
(Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Thursday December 15 2016, @11:36AM
Yes, except no.
I buy my gas in Europe (seeing as I live there). Somehow, I don't think Visa and Mastercard out of the goodness of their hearts are going to be eating the costs of preventable fraud in the USA for three years. Nope, they're going to spread that cost around to others. And I don't see any particular reason they'd keep that confined to the USA.
So: I never buy gas with a credit card, yet I wouldn't be surprised if this delay in the USA has a tiny but material effect on me.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Wednesday December 14 2016, @08:54PM
Its the other way around, until '10 or so, the brits burden of proof was on the cardholder for stolen cards, at least legally even if CS waived the costs if you asked, so people were freaking the hell out and demanding the more advanced cards.
It wasn't until 2010 that brits and USA both more or less have the burden of proof on the card issuer but by then chip and pin was already deployed in the UK.
In the USA the burden of proof has been on the issuer for... as long as I've been alive or so.
Or to summarize the banks were making piles of money off individual brits until after the chip cards were issued whereas in the Socialist USA the issuer has always eaten the loss making everyone pay for card fraud just like everyone pays for police or army or medical care oh damnit scratch the last one, but you get the idea.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 14 2016, @09:00PM
the brits burden of proof was on the cardholder for stolen cards
Americans are too lazy for this level of responsibility. If they are liable for this shit, and then forget to report it (or worse: don't know it's been stolen - I'm looking at you, there, Target), then they themselves are liable. Like fuck are they going to be liable, they'll just stop using the cards - and we can't have that, now can we... people not using credit cards and not getting themselves into debt anymore. No sir-ee... can't have that...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 14 2016, @10:23PM
So true.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Thursday December 15 2016, @04:50AM
Got a citation for that? Because I don't think it is true (at least, for credit cards, debit cards have always had less protection for the cardholder).
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Thursday December 15 2016, @04:56AM
In fact this link [out-law.com] supports my suspicion that you are wrong.
The change in 2010 [bbc.co.uk] appears to be related to all bank transactions, not just credit card fraud: