Question about Chip and Pin cards

[kjel]

My daughter is currently overseas in Asia and there are only a few banks that accept her non-chipped cards for cash withdrawals. I've traveled extensively and it is getting harder and harder with the non chipped cards. I don't know why the banks are having a tizzy over adopting chip & pin in the US. Sure there is a capital outlay but in the long run it's got to be cheaper with all the fraud that occurs.

[ojefferyo]

---

@kjel wrote:

My daughter is currently overseas in Asia and there are only a few banks that accept her non-chipped cards for cash withdrawals. I've traveled extensively and it is getting harder and harder with the non chipped cards. I don't know why the banks are having a tizzy over adopting chip & pin in the US. Sure there is a capital outlay but in the long run it's got to be cheaper with all the fraud that occurs.

---

They are starting to shift over to the chip and pin because they want to shift the loss to the customer once it's mandated. 

[Anonymous]

---

@ojefferyo wrote:

---

@kjel wrote:

My daughter is currently overseas in Asia and there are only a few banks that accept her non-chipped cards for cash withdrawals. I've traveled extensively and it is getting harder and harder with the non chipped cards. I don't know why the banks are having a tizzy over adopting chip & pin in the US. Sure there is a capital outlay but in the long run it's got to be cheaper with all the fraud that occurs.

---

They are starting to shift over to the chip and pin because they want to shift the loss to the customer once it's mandated. 

---

It's not going to be shifted to the consumer.  It's going to be shifted to the retailer if the bank provides the EMV card and the retailer doesn't update.  Vice versa is also true.  The loss will go to the bank if the retailer has the equipment but the card is not equipped with the chip.

[Anonymous]

---

@ojefferyo wrote:

---

@kjel wrote:

My daughter is currently overseas in Asia and there are only a few banks that accept her non-chipped cards for cash withdrawals. I've traveled extensively and it is getting harder and harder with the non chipped cards. I don't know why the banks are having a tizzy over adopting chip & pin in the US. Sure there is a capital outlay but in the long run it's got to be cheaper with all the fraud that occurs.

---

They are starting to shift over to the chip and pin because they want to shift the loss to the customer once it's mandated. 

---

Except the US isn't adopting the PIN part of chip and PIN.

[bigbang91]

---

@kjel wrote:

My daughter is currently overseas in Asia and there are only a few banks that accept her non-chipped cards for cash withdrawals. I've traveled extensively and it is getting harder and harder with the non chipped cards. I don't know why the banks are having a tizzy over adopting chip & pin in the US. Sure there is a capital outlay but in the long run it's got to be cheaper with all the fraud that occurs.

---

Is it in china? Cause my non chip card works  in JP and SK

[kdm31091]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@ojefferyo wrote:

---

@kjel wrote:

My daughter is currently overseas in Asia and there are only a few banks that accept her non-chipped cards for cash withdrawals. I've traveled extensively and it is getting harder and harder with the non chipped cards. I don't know why the banks are having a tizzy over adopting chip & pin in the US. Sure there is a capital outlay but in the long run it's got to be cheaper with all the fraud that occurs.

---

They are starting to shift over to the chip and pin because they want to shift the loss to the customer once it's mandated. 

---

Except the US isn't adopting the PIN part of chip and PIN.

---

+1. For the forseeable future, US is just going to be using chip + signature.

Signature is more or less a joke, because I have literally never seen a cashier compare a signature to that of the one on the card. However, at least the chip itself adds some security.

[flan]

---

@kdm31091 wrote:

+1. For the forseeable future, US is just going to be using chip + signature.

Signature is more or less a joke, because I have literally never seen a cashier compare a signature to that of the one on the card. However, at least the chip itself adds some security.

---

In the US, card present fraud with an actual lost or stolen card is very small fraction of card present fraud, and a tiny percentage of all fraud.  The vast majority of card present fraud uses a cloned or otherwise faked card.  The chip makes cloning the card hard, a pin adds very little security.  If you can clone the chip, you can clone the pin as well. 

PIN is useful for offline verification,  and for pushing liability for fraud from the bank on to the customer.  They can't get away with that fraud shift in the US, and offline verification has no real use in the US.  So the only thing the banks get from pin is added expense.  VISA are in the process of requiring that all online terminals accept the no customer verfication required verification method, so that things like automated fuel dispensers and ticket kiosks will work with US signature cards.  If VISA are serious about that, it will happen fast.  Chase is a more important customer than every transit agency in Europe....

[Anonymous]

---

@flan wrote:

---

@kdm31091 wrote:

+1. For the forseeable future, US is just going to be using chip + signature.

Signature is more or less a joke, because I have literally never seen a cashier compare a signature to that of the one on the card. However, at least the chip itself adds some security.

---

In the US, card present fraud with an actual lost or stolen card is very small fraction of card present fraud, and a tiny percentage of all fraud.  The vast majority of card present fraud uses a cloned or otherwise faked card.  The chip makes cloning the card hard, a pin adds very little security.  If you can clone the chip, you can clone the pin as well. 

PIN is useful for offline verification,  and for pushing liability for fraud from the bank on to the customer.  They can't get away with that fraud shift in the US, and offline verification has no real use in the US.  So the only thing the banks get from pin is added expense.  VISA are in the process of requiring that all online terminals accept the no customer verfication required verification method, so that things like automated fuel dispensers and ticket kiosks will work with US signature cards.  If VISA are serious about that, it will happen fast.  Chase is a more important customer than every transit agency in Europe....

---

What about the self-checkouts that will not let you complete the transaction without an attendant if you insert a chip and signature card? And the places (as rare as they are) that will see the signature line on the receipt, void the transaction and tell you "tough luck"? Or the places that will mandate ID because there's a signature slip, yet have no such requirement for their PIN customers?

Signature may be relatively pain free in the US but that's because it's more like not having cardholder verification at all.

[kdm31091]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@flan wrote:

---

@kdm31091 wrote:

+1. For the forseeable future, US is just going to be using chip + signature.

Signature is more or less a joke, because I have literally never seen a cashier compare a signature to that of the one on the card. However, at least the chip itself adds some security.

---

In the US, card present fraud with an actual lost or stolen card is very small fraction of card present fraud, and a tiny percentage of all fraud.  The vast majority of card present fraud uses a cloned or otherwise faked card.  The chip makes cloning the card hard, a pin adds very little security.  If you can clone the chip, you can clone the pin as well. 

PIN is useful for offline verification,  and for pushing liability for fraud from the bank on to the customer.  They can't get away with that fraud shift in the US, and offline verification has no real use in the US.  So the only thing the banks get from pin is added expense.  VISA are in the process of requiring that all online terminals accept the no customer verfication required verification method, so that things like automated fuel dispensers and ticket kiosks will work with US signature cards.  If VISA are serious about that, it will happen fast.  Chase is a more important customer than every transit agency in Europe....

---

What about the self-checkouts that will not let you complete the transaction without an attendant if you insert a chip and signature card? And the places (as rare as they are) that will see the signature line on the receipt, void the transaction and tell you "tough luck"? Or the places that will mandate ID because there's a signature slip, yet have no such requirement for their PIN customers?

Signature may be relatively pain free in the US but that's because it's more like not having cardholder verification at all.

---

Right - as I said, nobody seems to actually check signatures so it is pretty much pointless here.

[Anonymous]

---

@kdm31091 wrote:

Right - as I said, nobody seems to actually check signatures so it is pretty much pointless here.

---

Funny story about that. I was in Australia last year with only chip and signature cards and one place actually made me sign the receipt again because he didn't like how I signed it the first time. That trip was probably the only time I signed anything other than a scribble on receipts.