dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2
share rss forum feed
« Count Me OutGoogle Wallet »
This is a sub-selection from hmmmm


MSauk
MSauk
Premium
join:2002-01-17
Sandy, UT
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to CharlesH1

Re: hmmmm

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.
--
801 Images


chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom

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