1 / 7

EMV Panel: Part Two (Follow up to Last Year’s Panel)

This panel discusses the liability shift from financial institutions to merchants in processing EMV transactions, the use of PIN versus signature, fraud expectations, and other areas where EMV can help in authentication.

madelainen
Download Presentation

EMV Panel: Part Two (Follow up to Last Year’s Panel)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EMV Panel: Part Two(Follow up to Last Year’s Panel) Joseph D. Tinucci, AAP, CTP Kim Smith-Gross, CTP Matt Davies, AAP, CTP, CPP 2015 ROCKY MOUNTAIN SUMMIT

  2. EMV Liability Switch • In October 2015 liability switches from card-issuing financial institution to merchant: • If merchant can’t process an EMV transaction • AND the transaction is on a counterfeit card • Bad news – the majority of fraudulent transactions are from counterfeit cards • Very likely to be the first of several liability switches (more types of fraud to be borne by merchant) 2015 ROCKY MOUNTAIN SUMMIT

  3. Processing EMV Transactions • Customer (or clerk) inserts card into terminal • Card stays in machine until transaction completed • Machine asks for either signature or PIN from customer • Machine tells customer (or clerk) to remove card • Machine will still process mag stripe-only cards (current process) 2015 ROCKY MOUNTAIN SUMMIT

  4. PIN versus Signature • Most card issuers will send out chipcards with signature authorization • Signature is useless as authorization method, just like current process • Reasoning: Customers will be disrupted / inconvenienced by change in process • PIN authorization adds communication with chip in card to confirm card’s owner 2015 ROCKY MOUNTAIN SUMMIT

  5. Fraud Expectations • Other countries have found that card present / counterfeit fraud moves from EMV-capable to non-EMV-capable merchants • Then, fraud moves online • Total fraud does not go down • No clear path to EMV for online transactions • Designed for card-present activity, not for card-not-present transactions 2015 ROCKY MOUNTAIN SUMMIT

  6. Where Else Can EMV Help? • Other in-person payment methods can benefit from more robust authentication • Mobile payments (smartphones, tablets) • Laptops with embedded card readers • Radio Frequency ID (RFID) (contactless) payments • Other stuff? 2015 ROCKY MOUNTAIN SUMMIT

  7. The Panelists • Joseph D. Tinucci, AAP, CTPAssistant Treasurer, University of Colorado(303) 837-2185, joe.tinucci@cu.edu • Kim Smith-Gross, CTPCash Manager, Catholic Health Initiatives(720) 874-1715, kimsmith-gross@catholichealth.net • Matt Davies, AAP, CTP, CPPPayments Outreach Officer, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas(214) 922-5259, matt.davies@dal.frb.org 2015 ROCKY MOUNTAIN SUMMIT

More Related