Howard Brazee writes:
> And the IS community has to realize that any solution is flawed if it
> requires these salesmen and/or everybody who does on-line shopping to
> be experts in security.
we had been called in to consult with a small client/server startup that
wanted to do payment transaction
On 12 Jan 2010 14:28:02 -0800, rfocht...@ync.net (Rick Fochtman)
wrote:
>
>Shops like Fry's always annoy me when they ask for my Driver's license,
>make a cursory comparison of the picture and my name with my face and
>the card, and
-
I disagree. The basic operation of a credit card at the get go was for
the customer to be authenticated by comparing the signature on the
voucher with the one on the card. If they don't match the vendor refuses
the transaction. T
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Howard Brazee
>
> Lots of people have been taught (by popular media?) to not sign their
> credit cards.Instead, the vendor will ask to see their signature
> on a different ID.
I printed "REQUEST PHOTO ID" in the s
Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010b.html#2 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
there was recent case in the UK where an individual needed a copy of the
ATM machine video recording to prove that they didn't make the
withdrawel
Lots of people have been taught (by popular media?) to not sign their
credit cards.Instead, the vendor will ask to see their signature
on a different ID.
I don't know if this advice has been backed up by actual figures. We
get *lots* of advice from people who think their advice makes sense,
On 11 Jan 2010 13:56:09 -0800, p...@voltage.com (Phil Smith) wrote:
>Fourth, Magstripe cards are easy to copy; chip-and-pin cards are (supposedly)
>not.
Which effectiveness can be measured.
>As for asking for a license, sure, it doesn't guarantee anything -- but it
>probably stops the kid
>w
ions ... getting information for tens of thousand (or millions)
> ... rather than a few tens.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#97 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
skimming news item from today:
ATM Skimming Incidents Increase
http://www.bankinfosecurity.com/artic
lynn/2010.html#98 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
a lot of record retention is by UCC which most states follow ...
aka like for checks:
http://www.bankersonline.com/compliance/gurus_cmp1001l.html
above references "if the items are not returned to customer" ... in
t
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
> t...@harminc.net (Tony Harminc) writes:
> > I'm not sure why this offends you so much. How would it help anything
> > if the cashier checked your signature? Such checking is highly
> > unreliable, and contributes much less to authentic
31 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not
back)
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Ron Hawkins
> wrote:
> > Jack,
> >
> > According to the web site you referenced they can ask for ID, but for
VISA
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Ron Hawkins
wrote:
> Jack,
>
> According to the web site you referenced they can ask for ID, but for VISA
> and MasterCard they cannot refuse to complete the transaction if you do not
> comply.
>
> I'm tempted to test this the next time I'm asked...
Be prepared n
Jack,
According to the web site you referenced they can ask for ID, but for VISA
and MasterCard they cannot refuse to complete the transaction if you do not
comply.
I'm tempted to test this the next time I'm asked...
Ron
>
> In California, a merchant is allowed to ask to see ID for a credit ca
Ron Hawkins
>
> True, but the requirement to sign the slip with a signature that matches
the
> card would be an equal deterrent. The D/L check would be redundant if
the
> store checked the signatures in the first place.
Provided that the signature hasn't worn off, which it has on my most
com
>I'm talking about credit cards, not debit cards. What point are you trying
to make about signatures on credit cards? As for signatures on cheques, it
was the responsibility of the paying Bank to verify the signatures. The
Maybe I'm obtuse, but what is the difference in authentication for a debit
True, but the requirement to sign the slip with a signature that matches the
card would be an equal deterrent. The D/L check would be redundant if the
store checked the signatures in the first place.
> As for asking for a license, sure, it doesn't guarantee anything -- but it
> probably stops the
IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: [IBM-MAIN] Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not
back)
>
> >I disagree.
> >The basic operation of a credit card at the get go was for the
> customer to be authenticated by comparing the signature on the voucher
with
> th
t...@harminc.net (Tony Harminc) writes:
> I'm not sure why this offends you so much. How would it help anything
> if the cashier checked your signature? Such checking is highly
> unreliable, and contributes much less to authentication than does the
> data they already know about the transaction.
a
ww.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#71 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#73 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#93 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
http://www.garlic.c
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Hardee, Charles H
wrote:
> I, too, don't see how they can be more secure.
> Possession is supposedly 9/10ths as the saying goes, but unless there's
> something bio-metric in the chip/card/human being relationship, I would
> have to say that the chips cards are no
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Ron Hawkins
wrote:
> I disagree. The basic operation of a credit card at the get go was for the
> customer to be authenticated by comparing the signature on the voucher with
> the one on the card. If they don't match the vendor refuses the
> transaction.
> This is
>I disagree.
>The basic operation of a credit card at the get go was for the
customer to be authenticated by comparing the signature on the voucher with the
one on the card.
>If they don't match the vendor refuses the transaction.
>This is still the basic MO for credit card transactions.
The bas
2010-01-11 Hardee, Charles H :
> What really peeves me is when I go into a merchant, present my plastic
> for my purchase and ma told I don't need to sign anything,
> What, no signature? But how do you know it's me? You didn't check my
> signature on the back of the plastic against my signature at
I disagree. The basic operation of a credit card at the get go was for the
customer to be authenticated by comparing the signature on the voucher with
the one on the card. If they don't match the vendor refuses the transaction.
This is still the basic MO for credit card transactions.
Shops like F
Does that mean you never use self service gasoline pumps?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Hardee, Charles H
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 7:21 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
on the back of the plastic against my signature at the time of
> the purchase.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#93 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
the signature isn't a fraud countermeasure ... it is a dispute issue.
if you dispute the charge and the mercha
Howard Brazee writes:
> We probably need to go bio-metric - but this is including on-line
> purchases.Our current system of random, unique, not-written-down
> passwords does not work.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#93 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not b
cards are no more, if not less, secure than
> the regular plastic we use today.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#71 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#72 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
http://www.garl
Well chip cards need a pin number to be entered or they don't work! And i am
the only guy who knows the pin number of my card.
It is not full proof but the merchant generally knows it's you because you
have entered the proper pin number
Or did i miss something ?
Bruno Sugliani
zxnetconsult(at)f
n at H^&e D&p$t. (don't want to say the merchant's real name)
Chuck
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Korean bank Mo
Well loose one gain one.
I saw a post on the z/VM list that the University of Maine just shut down their
mainframe operation.
--- On Thu, 1/7/10, Chase, John wrote:
> From: Chase, John
> Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.e
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
e99...@jp.ibm.com (Timothy Sipples) writes:
> So it's very important to decode that term whenever having detailed
> conversations about scale, sizing, growth, and o
>What I sometimes find -- and not just in Korea -- is that the term
"transactions" has different meanings depending on whom you're talking to.
>The business users and managers tend to think of measurements like card
swipes, purchases, etc. -- the direct business metrics.
>However, the IT staff tend
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:
> I should say right up front that I am not an expert on Korean banking.
> Also, I have no idea whether the following remarks apply to BC Card
> specifically.
>
> One commenter in this thread suggested that the number of transactions
> looks
>Is the PIN on the card or is it at the bank where they assigned the
one you already had on the debit card to it?
When I went in to get my (pre-chip) card, there was some processing and
encoding done on the card after I entered my (new) PIN.
I assume there is something on the card, because you c
I should say right up front that I am not an expert on Korean banking.
Also, I have no idea whether the following remarks apply to BC Card
specifically.
One commenter in this thread suggested that the number of transactions
looks strange, if by "transactions" you mean "card swipes," basically. Wha
: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 19:29:56 -0400
> From: cfmpub...@ns.sympatico.ca
> Subject: OT smart cards was Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no,
> not back)
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
>
> Is the PIN on the card or is it at the bank where they assigned the
> one you alread
On 7 Jan 2010 12:27:09 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>>The chip is not just data; it is a processor. All data exchanged between the
>>card (ie. the chip) and the terminal is encrypted.
>
>Why can't their web-site say that?
>
>>There's obviously a lot more to it than that but, righ
Of course, I meant "wringer"!
> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:03:24 -0500
> From: jayare...@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
>
> > But, the PIN is supposed to be a secret.
>
>
7 Jan 2010 22:51:52 +
> From: eamacn...@yahoo.ca
> Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
>
> >I presume they did that for your convenience. (Not anybody else's since they
> >wouldn't know the PIN.)
>
>I presume they did that for your convenience. (Not anybody else's since they
>wouldn't know the PIN.)
However, being a "smart" card with a processor on it, you should be able to
change your PIN at an ATM.
Yes!
But, the PIN is supposed to be a secret.
Give me the chip-card, and have me come
> mag-strip cards have access to the technology to use chip cards? I
> don't know the answer.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#71 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#72 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...n
is they are really superb at campaigning!
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Sam Siegel
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 11:52 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not
0000
> From: eamacn...@yahoo.ca
> Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
>
> >The chip is not just data; it is a processor. All data exchanged between the
> >card (ie. the chip) and the terminal is encrypted.
>
> W
On 7 Jan 2010 12:22:08 -0800, eamacn...@yahoo.ca (Ted MacNEIL) wrote:
>I got flagged once, at work, for using a very vile word in an e-mail.
>I didn't. I was just discussing Soccer and a town that ended in "thorpe'.
>The word was pulled out of the middle of a larger word, without delimeters.
I fo
On 7 Jan 2010 11:16:06 -0800, jayare...@hotmail.com (J R) wrote:
>> Why are they more secure?
>
>
>
>On a mag-stripe card, the data is right there, unencrypted for anyone to read
>and,
>if they so desire, clone.
>
>The chip is not just data; it is a processor. All data exchanged between the
On 7 Jan 2010 11:44:55 -0800, john.mck...@healthmarkets.com (McKown,
John) wrote:
>Perhaps the Korean banks are competent? And they can make money by not paying
>the account
>holder all the income that the bank makes on the money entrusted to them? U.S.
>banks used to
>be user friendly and com
>The chip is not just data; it is a processor. All data exchanged between the
>card (ie. the chip) and the terminal is encrypted.
Why can't their web-site say that?
>There's obviously a lot more to it than that but, right from that basic level,
>the chip is inherently more secure that the st
>It also discussed programs done by anti-terrorists and anti-fraud
units which check for suspicious withdrawals.
>Everything gets tracked.I haven't worked for a bank IS, but it could be
interesting to develop such programs.
Banks, at least in Canada, have been running DSS/AI/Anti-Fraud/Terrori
me out.Maybe
> now that we see higher security and privacy needs, we will get a
> better model here as well.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010.html#71 Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes
(...no, not back)
there was actually a rather large deployment in the NE about the time of
the c
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.
jayare...@hotmail.com (J R) writes:
> That's the point of (EMV) "chip" cards. They are inherently more secure.
modulo when there are significantly less secure .
2) Wait for the technology to be perfected before adopting it.
> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 12:35:38 -0700
> From: howard.bra...@cusys.edu
> Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
>
> On 7 Jan 2010 10:26:24 -0800, jayare...@hotma
On 7 Jan 2010 10:31:19 -0800, dennis.ro...@lmco.com (Roach, Dennis ,
N-GHG) wrote:
>The number is not that surprising when you stop and think about the no cash on
>hand philosophy.
>Think of using your debit/bank/credit/atm card for everything you buy.
>Morning coffee, newspaper, breakfast.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Hal Merritt
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:00 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
>
>
: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
On 7 Jan 2010 10:26:24 -0800, jayare...@hotmail.com (J R) wrote:
>>> ... they don't use 'credit cards' as we know them in Asia. Rather, it
is more of a 'smart card' strategy.
>>The US is at least
On 7 Jan 2010 10:26:24 -0800, jayare...@hotmail.com (J R) wrote:
>> ... they don't use 'credit cards' as we know them in Asia. Rather, it is
>> more of a 'smart card' strategy.
>
>
>
>The US is at least 12 years behind Europe, Australia/NZ and parts of Asia in
>deploying chip cards.
Yep.
iously a lot more to it than that but, right from that basic level,
the chip is inherently more secure that the stripe. I don't need Interac to
tell me that.
> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:36:37 +
> From: eamacn...@yahoo.ca
> Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainf
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
> >That's the point of (EMV) "chip" cards. >They are inherently more secure.
>
> Why are they more secure?
> INTERAC Canada has been telling us that they are.
> So far, on their web-site, the proof presented has been: "They are more
> secure".
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [On Behalf Of Roach, Dennis
(N-GHG)
>
> The number is not that surprising when you stop and think about the no
cash on hand philosophy.
> Think of using your debit/bank/credit/atm card for everything you buy.
> Morning coffee, news
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Hal Merritt
>
> Concur. It would appear that the consumer electronic financial
infrastructures are quite different
> outside of the US. Indeed, ours seems pretty primitive and a lot less
consumer friendly. More, they
>
>That's the point of (EMV) "chip" cards. >They are inherently more secure.
Why are they more secure?
INTERAC Canada has been telling us that they are.
So far, on their web-site, the proof presented has been: "They are more secure".
When they sent me my new chip card, through the bank I use, no
Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Hal Merritt
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 11:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
Concur. It would appear that the consumer electronic financial
infrastructures are q
, January 07, 2010 11:42 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
>
> I will bow to the man with direct experience ... Base on reading the
> article
> it appeared to be talking about traditional Credit Card processing. I
e
> of a 'smart card' strategy.
The US is at least 12 years behind Europe, Australia/NZ and parts of Asia in
deploying chip cards.
> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 12:00:20 -0600
> From: hmerr...@jackhenry.com
> Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no,
gel
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 11:42 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
I will bow to the man with direct experience ... Base on reading the article
it appeared to be talking about traditional Credit Card processing. It was
not cle
& cell-phone
> (it's called hand-phone in S Korea).
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
> Behalf Of Sam Siegel
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 4:15 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re:
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Sam Siegel
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 4:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Korean bank Moves back to Mainframes (...no, not back)
There are other business related inaccuracies in the article as well.
The
article i
There are other business related inaccuracies in the article as well. The
article indicates that they process hundreds of millions of Credit Card
transactions a day. Having previously worked at a large credit card
processor in the US, it can be said with certainty that the S. Korean credit
card v
That's not the correct headline.
BC Card isn't moving *back* to mainframes. In its 27+ year history, BC Card
has never had a mainframe -- nothing in the System z lineage, anyway. They
are now replacing HP and Sun UNIX servers, and Oracle databases, with (a
presumably small number of) IBM mainframe
69 matches
Mail list logo
