Timeline for How to manually disable the no contact card?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 20, 2019 at 4:53 | comment | added | KristoferA | Yes, but until that happens, which may take a long time, chip and pin does little to protect cardholders from skimming-related fraud. Until the day no acquirer allow card-not-present transactions with only PAN+expiration, I think the chip system should be redesigned to not expose the PAN in cleartext... | |
| Nov 20, 2019 at 3:25 | comment | added | John Deters | @KristoferA , the eventual promise of EMV is that the account number will not have to remain secret. However, that promise will remain unfulfilled until mag stripes are abolished, and until someone develops a standardized secure mobile payment system to replace the CVV. | |
| Nov 20, 2019 at 0:51 | comment | added | KristoferA | This answer overlooks the fact that someone can use the contactless (or contact) chip interface to get the PAN/expiration/cardholder and then use that information for a non chip and pin transaction. There are plenty of acquirers that allow merchants to charge cards with those three elements only (no CVV, no address validation, etc). Chip and pin protects issuers and merchants, but it doesn't prevent skimming or that skimmed cardholder data is used for subsequent fraudulent transactions. It's designed to protect issuers and merchants, not cardholders. | |
| Nov 19, 2019 at 19:08 | history | edited | John Deters | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 330 characters in body; edited body
|
| Sep 21, 2017 at 12:09 | comment | added | John Deters | Contactless cards can use the same crypto as Chip and PIN and Chip and Signature, so that's equivalent. Both are susceptible to skimming, in that relay attacks are possible on both, but are very difficult requiring precise timing and coordination. A contactless card is certainly more vulnerable to a relay, as they can be read by a seat mate on a bus without your knowledge. | |
| Sep 21, 2017 at 11:17 | comment | added | SystemParadox | I find this answer a bit confusing. It seems to imply that contactless is more secure than Chip-and-PIN. Is it not true to say that Chip-and-PIN is the most secure option? You can still use Chip-and-PIN even if you cut the RF antenna to disable contactless. I agree that signatures are totally insecure. | |
| Dec 22, 2015 at 12:48 | vote | accept | JohnnyBgud | ||
| Dec 22, 2015 at 1:08 | history | edited | John Deters | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 119 characters in body
|
| Dec 22, 2015 at 1:00 | history | edited | John Deters | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 119 characters in body
|
| Dec 22, 2015 at 0:50 | history | edited | John Deters | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 119 characters in body
|
| Dec 22, 2015 at 0:44 | history | edited | John Deters | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 576 characters in body
|
| Dec 22, 2015 at 0:37 | history | answered | John Deters | CC BY-SA 3.0 |