[Gllug] security check

[Tethys]

--------

James Laver writes:

>Chip and signature indemnifies you against fraud because it  
>shifts the liability back to the bank to check your signature
>to detect fraud.
>
>There are downsides, you can't use a cashpoint for example. And while  
>stores have an obligation to accept it, smaller retailers can be very  
>arsey about it and some flat refuse to take it.

Rubbish. My C&S cards work just fine in cashpoints. That's because
they have a PIN. It's just that I'm not asked for the PIN for customer
present transactions. The chip contains a list of authentication methods
that are tried in order. Mine just has the PIN missing from that list.
So I have the best of both worlds. The convenience of cashpoints, with
the added security of chip and signature.

You're also correct that stores have an obligation to accept the cards.
There's no legal obligation to accept any form of payment, including
cards (the store can just refuse to serve you without reason). However,
part of their merchant agreement with Mastercard and Visa is that if
they display those logos on the front of the shop, then they *have*
to accept all cards of that type. That's part of the strength of the
brand, in that they promise you that the card is accepted worldwide,
anywhere you see the logo.

I've had a few places try and refuse payment. This isn't helped by the
banks telling them that they can't accept card payments without a PIN,
which is only true if they're actually asked for a PIN. Obviously, I
don't get asked for a PIN so I couldn't enter one even if I wanted to.
Howver, none that have persisted, once I've pressed the issue, and I've
always been able to pay with my cards.

I have, however, struggled to get a C&S card. I demanded mine were
made C&S at the time C&P was introduced. But since then, trying to
get a new card issued as C&S has proved all but impossible.

Tet
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug