|reply to CharlesH1 |
Yep, like I said when I was over there in 99 it seemed pretty standard. So why have the CC companies been so far behind the times here? Why is that acceptable to not be secure? Fraud is good for them? Hoping that most people miss it? I don't know but it does frustrate me that we are not ahead more tech wise in that area.
1. Cost of covering fraud is lower than replacing the whole system
2. All cc terminals in the us are linked online and all transactions are verified. In Europe offline cc transactions are not uncommon.
3. Protects well against cloning fraud but not online fraud
4. Customers do not want more liability for purchases when PIN replaces signature.
5. "Greed is good" - Gordon Gekko