Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:They don't make disasters like they used to (Score 1) 511

Regards the fraud, the statement was not about whether or not the merchant lost information on chip vs swipe, the duped cardholder still gets to charge back and the merchants still eat the full losses unless you are 'EMV certified' which is almost impossible to get (even with an EMV reader - see here: http://arstechnica.com/busines...).

The merchant is out of the product and fees regardless of a charge back being chip or swipe but the overhead of maintaining EMV connections, certifications, new terminals, technicians, it's simply not worth it to the retailers (EMV is only profitable to the banks and has seen serious holes poked at before they even made these card with chips in them). Although I've heard now card companies are charging EMV non-compliance fees - you get slightly higher fees if you're not EMV compliant. It's a complete money grab for a broken system, EMV chips can be quite successfully cloned.

Comment Re:They don't make disasters like they used to (Score 0) 511

1) wrong - the chip contains the same information as the mag stripe in unencrypted form and is just as easy to read out. Many large chains will read that info to match you against their databases for marketing purposes just like they do for magstripes (there was never any reason to keep track of any card info). I work with some small retailers, the chip continues to work even when their internet is down, the full info needed for a transaction resides on their POS, chip or swipe - unencrypted and employee accessible.

The only difference is that now the retailer is responsible for all losses and fraud committed with chip cards. This is a big reason retailers want you to continue swiping, a fraudulent swipe is at the loss of the banks, chip card fraud which is just as easy is at the loss of a retailer unless you can prove the chip card was fraudulent.

2) In many cases the chip won't work. If there is a mismatch in your payment processor configuration with what the chip or bank expects, it just doesn't let you swipe or chip unless you chip 3 times in a row. I have a business card which I requested to be fully encrypted (so it doesn't have the unencrypted data). The card doesn't work at large retailers like WalMart, Home Depot because they only use unencrypted data.

3) yes. But most retailers aren't willing to spend $1200 on the top of the line reader which is the cost (shakedown) a lot of payment processors are charging for an upgrade. Many of those don't allow BYOD so unless you're willing to switch banks, you're SOL, just upgrading to the cheapest chip reader costs $250 and up.

Comment Re:Let me guess (Score 2) 67

Most drunks are indeed on the lower end of the social curves, they spent all their money on booze and rarely if ever get caught. Most other people getting caught don't even recognize they are impaired, the limits are set so low in my state that you could get arrested after a single apple cider.

That's how DUI lawyers make their money though, you pay them $2k and you're pretty much off the hook if it's your first offense because there are so many loopholes and problems with the system. Second offenses will net you a 2y record and require state-sponsored religious classes (10 step program).

Comment Re:Bad news for battery dreamers (Score 1) 54

There have been plenty of improvements over the last few years, several covered here on Slashdot, they improve lifetime, storage capacity and safety usually by "incremental" changes, but these changes are happening at break neck speeds, no traditional factory, once operational, can catch up.

The only question is whether they will implement them right away (expensive short term but worth it long term) by modularizing their facility so changes can be implemented to the process or go for the quarterly profit and produce the cheapest possible battery.

Comment Re:I think it's pretty obvious (Score 4, Interesting) 160

What exactly is wrong about publishing everything? The CC should've been reported, cancelled and identity theft insurance provided the minute the DNC knew about the leak. The timing may be convenient but they gave them time to notify their customers, fix their infrastructure etc - had they published immediate, people like you would've been complaining about irresponsibility.

The fact is, the leaks happened. Nobody will die from it unlike Snowden's leak where full publish would've meant certain death to informants. It's a business hack vs a military intelligence hack. Nobody dies when Target loses CC, nobody dies when Microsoft loses source code.

Comment Nobody cares (Score 1) 121

I didn't get infected (exclusively Linux and a few Mac since 1995) but I got several attempts of sites downloading Windows scripts/binaries, some weird interaction with a custom Chromium build. I reported them to Google and submitted the sample to a few AV vendors, nobody cares, large sites (think CNN, WaPo, ...) had the same ads attempting the same thing for weeks on end and the download never got recognized by AV. I stopped caring too, the ad sellers sell ads and that's all they care about. AV companies only care about the big threats because scary sells, some custom package that affects a few dozen of their customers doesn't matter.

Comment I'll take the bait (Score 4, Interesting) 47

No, we just end up with these large corporations splitting up in entities that are harder to control (and tax). Microsoft will just transfer it's "data assets" to Microsoft Farawayistan just like it does with it's taxes to Microsoft Ireland. We may end up with all of the major data centers in South America, Japan and Eastern Europe and thus a shift of both tech, brains and money to countries that don't put up with idiotic lawmakers.

Comment Re:Pants on fire (Score 2) 59

Forcing countries like Japan and South Korea to build nuclear weapons because his resolve to continue US's longstanding defense of its allies is not going to make a better world. The last time the United States retreated behind its borders and let its Allies fend for themselves, we ended up with the most destructive conflict in history, and the costs dwarfed what it would have cost to keep a proper military presence in potential trouble spots.

Slashdot Top Deals

Waste not, get your budget cut next year.

Working...