111–120 of 360 posts
>In the case that the number of card digits will be increased, it is necessary to discuss within the industry whether the 16-digit cards that already exist should all be changed into new cards as well, or if the two types can exist alongside each other. This is literally a non issue. Amex cards have 15 digits and a 4 digit CVV I've literally never had any issues with it.
This is a ridiculous story. Japan has a population of 150M. If you can't give folks a number from SIXTEEN digits - something is wrong with the folks giving out the numbers. Some answers to the excuses. The 6 digits at front, if a company legit runs out of numbers, ask for another prefix. The reality. Instead of using the numbers properly (random ID to tie to a user account) they are probably putting some kind of stru…
Wouldn't the Luhn algorithm checksum [1] limit the available digits? It is specifically there so a one-off error doesn't result in a charge going to a valid other account. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luhn_algorithm
What's crazy is that we've had public key encryption for over 40 years, and we're still publishing magic numbers on little pieces of plastic that give whoever sees them the power to take all our money without our consent.
Right now all of the burden is on the credit card companies. Any fraud is their liability.
If we switch things up, and implement something like passwords or pins, WE get the liability. That’s worse than our current situation. And given how badly people get hacked or phished, all it means is that consumers lose.
Right now, those “magic little numbers” work great, and in the case of fraud, we are protected. I don’t want the situation to reverse itself and have us the first to suffer from fraud.
What's crazy is that we've had public key encryption for over 40 years, and we're still publishing magic numbers on little pieces of plastic that give whoever sees them the power to take all our money without our consent.
Why on earth would we want this? Right now all of the burden is on the credit card companies. Any fraud is their liability. If we switch things up, and implement something like passwords or pins, WE get the liability. That’s worse than our current situation. And given how badly people get hacked or phished, all it means is that consumers lose. Right now, those “magic little numbers” work great, and in the case of fra…
Something not clear from the article: The tech already supports longer numbers. Diners, Discover, UnionPay cards already allow up to 19 digits officially. The problem could be in the custom forms which think 4x4 is the right format, but the back-end should "just work" with them. What I really don't understand is why the article makes it seem like a national problem given the prefix is assigned to the companies, rathe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if they switched CC numbers TO IPV6 addresses? Insane or genius?
> What if they switched CC numbers TO IPV6 addresses? Insane or genius? Depends upon how it is implemented as could go full on 1984 very fast without that ever being intended. The whole aspect of a static fixed CC number you share with people is what really needs to change. A One Time CC per transaction would be more useful and negates many potential issues in a way that protects the customer and in turn the bank its…
That's what Google pay does. It generates a new credit card number for each transaction that charges the CC you have on your account. It's kind of like a password manager for credit cards.
>In the case that the number of card digits will be increased, it is necessary to discuss within the industry whether the 16-digit cards that already exist should all be changed into new cards as well, or if the two types can exist alongside each other. This is literally a non issue. Amex cards have 15 digits and a 4 digit CVV I've literally never had any issues with it.
AMEX isn't major in Japan so possibly some Visa/Master only systems causes a problem.
And the acceptance was great, when I was in Japan I never had to resort to my backup MAsterCard.
Something not clear from the article: The tech already supports longer numbers. Diners, Discover, UnionPay cards already allow up to 19 digits officially. The problem could be in the custom forms which think 4x4 is the right format, but the back-end should "just work" with them. What I really don't understand is why the article makes it seem like a national problem given the prefix is assigned to the companies, rathe…
What's crazy is that we've had public key encryption for over 40 years, and we're still publishing magic numbers on little pieces of plastic that give whoever sees them the power to take all our money without our consent.
Why on earth would we want this? Right now all of the burden is on the credit card companies. Any fraud is their liability. If we switch things up, and implement something like passwords or pins, WE get the liability. That’s worse than our current situation. And given how badly people get hacked or phished, all it means is that consumers lose. Right now, those “magic little numbers” work great, and in the case of fra…
Tell that to retailers who lose a gazillion dollars to fraud reversals every year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would encryption improve the security of a physical credit card?
It only works if you have a chip inside, like Yubikey and other HSMs do. You can't do crypto with dumb block storage. But if you have a chip you should absolutely do _something_ smarter than storing and reciting the number verbatim.
In most countries, the card number is only used for online and phone transactions. There's probably no way to do better than this without abandoning cards entirely in favor of some kind of device (or app) that has enough of a user interface to do a human-readable challenge response.