Canadian Banks Rushing To Offer Virtual Wallets 164
silentbrad writes with this quote from the Globe and Mail:"Canada's big banks are preparing to launch 'virtual wallets' as early as this fall that will allow consumers to digitally consolidate their credit and debit cards from any financial institution, and use them to make purchases online and through their cellphones at cash registers. It is being called the biggest change to the way consumers pay for goods in Canada in decades, and for the banks moving quickly into this space, the strategy is about keeping ownership of the vast and potentially lucrative stores of data that are involved in transactions. ... The majority of the banking sector is expected to follow suit in the next year or so, with each financial institution relying on the concept of 'aliases,' where a password lets consumers access their payment cards, but protects personal information from being passed to the merchant. ... Retailers can use the information contained in transactions, stripped of details that violate privacy laws, to tailor offerings or promotions to consumers. And the banks figure they can build a new business from that new world. Location data on phones can help neighborhood stores connect with customers in the area, while transaction data online can give insight into consumer habits and tastes."
As I pat my virtual pocket to check (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:As I pat my virtual pocket to check (Score:5, Informative)
If anything this should be more secure than the RFID credit cards already in everyones wallet up here. The phone shouldn't be transmitting any data until the app is opened and a password is entered. Sure someone could be intercepting the transmission at the checkout of the store, but that risk already exists with existing RFID cards and also with merchants not locking down their POS terminals and subjecting themselves to having them replaced with compromised ones.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know if they're RFID or not, but credit cards which don't require being swiped to make payments are pretty widespread.
Some of them you just put up near a receiver and it will process a transaction.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Note to TSA: I am not a terrorist even though I used the words "kill" and "nuking".
Thanks, now if only we could get everyone to just admit when they are and aren't, that would make our jobs a LOT easier. Keep up the good work, patriot!
Re: (Score:2)
You haven't seen any credit cards with the little smartcard chip in it? If you've had any cards replaced in the last few years (at least in north america), then it's guaranteed that you'd have a smartcard chip.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Ok, I'll revise my statement then. Canadian credit cards are all but guaranteed to have the chip. Almost every card I have seen recently uses it.
Re: (Score:2)
There are RFIDs in credit cards? Really? Have you got more information on that?
Technically, they're contactless smart cards, not RFIDs (different standards, different frequencies, different RF characteristics that create different range, etc., characteristics, different capabilities, including the ability to use cryptographic security, and different physical security characteristics), but yes. They use the same fundamental technology and protocols as Google Wallet and the other upcoming phone-based wallets. Well, more precisely, the phone-based NFC technology is based on the contact
Re: (Score:3)
you must not be in the US then. No-swipe (RFID) credit cards are common, and rfid credit card scanners are all over the place. You just wave your card over the scanner, and it charges it.
Re: (Score:2)
I never said they were actually used. Just that banks put the chip in the cards, and the readers are fairly common.
Even I don't actually *use* them. It's not like it saves any time over just swiping the card.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, they're actually starting to become a thing that card makers are pushing. I remember seeing guides of how to fry the RFID chip (I believe a microwave for a few seconds works, but don't blame me if it also breaks the card) because even a lot of non-techies realize the security risk.
Re:As I pat my virtual pocket to check (Score:5, Informative)
I've got one on my CC. It works great, I can just wave my wallet at the reader and I'm good to go. I don't have to touch the pen or pinpad that Typhoid Mary and Ebola Gary have been licking.
It's limited to $50 transactions.
The field is very short, approx 6".
It's my CC, so there's a buffer between it and my real money.
I'm an EE. An RF EE. They're fine. The machines aren't always set up to take them though, so it doesn't work everywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
It's limited to $50 transactions.
Read your cardholder agreement. $50 is usually the personal liability on fraudulent charges.
The field is very short, approx 6".
With their reader. With an off-the-shelf reader with a much higher transmit power, not so much.
Mastercard sent me one of those 3 years ago... I cancelled the card, because they wouldn't send me one that didn't have it. Visa sent me one a month ago, and it was a 5 minute conversation to convince them that they should send me one that didn't have it. They're providing them for convenience, but they're well aware of wha
Re: (Score:2)
If there's a fraudulent charge, I won't pay it. That's why I don't care. If someone steals my CC info via an RFID long-range reader, it doesn't matter. It's not my money, it's MasterCard's. It only becomes my money once I've paid my bill. I don't care if that charge is $0.25 or $25,000. If I didn't make it, I'm not paying it.
I liken my CC to my user account. I can use it all the time, go to any shady place and use it, no worries. My bank card, that's root, and I only use it at trusted locations and
Re: (Score:2)
This is flawed thinking, for the following reasons:
- Credit card companies don't actually lend money, its really the bank who puts their name on the card that is lending the money. Credit card companies make money off the transactions that flow over their network.
- When fraud occurs, its usually the merchant who is left holding the bag, not the credit card company or the bank.
- When merchants get left holding the bag, they pass the costs on to you the customer.
Therefore it is your money, because every purch
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have a mortgage, a job with a security clearance, no cell phone, and all my utilities are already hooked up.
Re: (Score:2)
Let your credit card go unpaid for a few months, and see what happens to your security clearance.... If you don't lose it, then your clearance isn't as high as you think it is.
In the cardholder agreements for most credit cards, you are liable for $50 of any fraudulent transaction if it happens before you report the card stolen. If it happens after you report it stolen, you're not liable. They can put through a $1500 charge, and you won't have to pay $1450 of it, but you will still be on the hook for $50 if
Re: (Score:2)
As long as you convince the bank it was a fraudulent charge....
Re: (Score:2)
If there's a fraudulent charge, I won't pay it. That's why I don't care. If someone steals my CC info via an RFID long-range reader, it doesn't matter. It's not my money, it's MasterCard's. It only becomes my money once I've paid my bill. I don't care if that charge is $0.25 or $25,000. If I didn't make it, I'm not paying it.
I liken my CC to my user account. I can use it all the time, go to any shady place and use it, no worries. My bank card, that's root, and I only use it at trusted locations and as infrequently as possible.
Let's see how that goes for the general public.
First, they need to recognize a fraudulent charge. That means they need to go over it in detail every month. If more than one person has a card they all need to. And recall all of their spending if there's something that could be/could not be (such as an extra but reasonable charge from a store you do frequent.)
Second, they need to have it taken off their bill. Just not paying something (as the quote suggests) is against your contract with the credit card p
Re:As I pat my virtual pocket to check (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem with them is that there's no way to turn them off. At least on my cell i can disable NFC and password (and track) the device. With cards you either have to permanently disable them or get a shielded wallet. I opted for the shielded wallet, but most people don't know why they would need one. Even my mom, who's been in the banking industry for 25 years, was surprised that my phone could pick up her CC through her purse. If people are so ignorant of the dangers that the whole act seems like magic, they're easy to take advantage of.
Re: (Score:2)
yes, they are both rfid
Re: (Score:2)
"Shouldn't". Now there is a weasel word that in this context, has packed in a whole lot of weasel. Might even be fair to call it a wolverine [wikipedia.org] word.
Re: (Score:2)
The main difference is : I can't remotely kill my wallet if I lose it or if it gets stolen. Plus, there is no password on my wallet.
Re: (Score:2)
The main difference is : I can't remotely kill my wallet if I lose it or if it gets stolen. Plus, there is no password on my wallet.
I thought the main difference was that I can keep my actual hand on my actual wallet and know it is safe. How many Russian mobsters are going to have access to my virtual wallet before I even know it is compromised?
Re:As I pat my virtual pocket to check (Score:5, Insightful)
Does it matter if its compromised by one person or 10,000? The one person who steals your wallet from your car or off the beach when you're not looking can just as easily provide the information to anyone else anyways.
Lets compare the process in each scenario:
Physical Wallet:
1. Thief steals wallet from car.
2. Thief opens wallet, takes credit cards and starts making purchases at physical stores and online.
Virtual Wallet in Phone:
1. Thief steals phone from car.
2. Thief must prevent any radio signal from reaching the phone to prevent a remote wipe.
3. Thief takes the phone home and starts the "hacking" process to gain access first to the phone (password lock)
4. Thief then must gain access to the presumably encrypted virtual wallet app.
If the encryption is done properly, step 4 would be prohibitively expensive and easily buy the 2-24hours it would take to realize your phone is gone and contact your credit card company.
Not only that, but once enough people are using the virtual wallet, I would imagine they would be able to easily switch to using bluetooth or similar protocol that uses some sort of SSL encryption with pre-exchanged keys to prevent any man-in-the-middle attacks at the POS terminal.
Re:As I pat my virtual pocket to check (Score:4, Informative)
option 2: phone malware picks up your details the next time you use the app.
option 3: pre installed networkcrapware like this
http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/01/technology/carrier_iq/index.htm [cnn.com] destroys any semblance of security.
Re: (Score:2)
I would suggest reading how those "virtual wallets" are actually implemented first. It always includes some form of hardware encryption, so hacking the app itself is not sufficient.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Thief steals wallet from car.
I can choose not to leave my wallet in my car. I can't choose whether the bank leaves my virtual wallet in their virtual car with the virtual doors unlocked.
Re: (Score:2)
But they can have one is the point. Pretty hard to put a password lock on your wallet or physical credit card. Even the chip&pin system only works for in-person purchases, a virtual wallet could at least work over the internet too.
I tend to not trust big corporations much, but even a few rookie developers can at least make the virtual wallet more secure than a physical wallet. How much more is the real question.
The other nice thing is no waiting for new credit cards in the mail when they do get stolen,
Re: (Score:2)
Now I no longer have to wait to lose my physical wallet to go through the agony of canceling and replacing credit cards. It can be lost more efficiently in the cloud.
And be replaced just as well.
Re: (Score:2)
What this does is substitute a single point of failure for what is now redundancy.
Re: (Score:2)
2) I don't believe the information will be on a device except in tokenized form, ie. a server somewhere in the cloud will most likely hold the real information. Not that this doesn't hold a lot of issues with security in itself, but that's not my argument to make.
Re: (Score:2)
It's all about selling customer data (Score:5, Insightful)
FTFA:
Retailers can use the information contained in transactions, stripped of details that violate privacy laws, to tailor offerings or promotions to consumers. And the banks figure they can build a new business from that new world. Location data on phones can help neighbourhood stores connect with customers in the area, while transaction data online can give insight into consumer habits and tastes.
The title of the article should read:
"Canadian banks rushing to offer your private buying history to the highest bidder"
Re: (Score:2)
Not just the highest bidder. It will be sold to everyone.
Privacy aside, the idea of my phone being spammed every time I get near a store or restaurant is a big concern. This should really be an op-in feature. But that'll never happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Privacy? (Score:1)
Why doesn't society care about privacy anymore?
1) I do not want every store I shop at to have my name and phone number.
2) I do not want my bank to have a full list of where and when I bought stuff, how much I spent and, possibly, what exactly I bought.
3) I don't want stores to keep tabs on what I buy.
4) I don't want my virtual wallet to be compromised should I somehow lose my phone.
Sorry, but you should be happy enough that I shop at your store. I do not owe you to let you provide me with advertisements.
I'l
Re: (Score:2)
Cash. That's what I've been doing lately especially with many places starting to not accept credit cards.
[John]
Re: (Score:2)
with many places starting to not accept credit cards.
Really? That seems like a good way for the business to lose a lot of sales.
Re: (Score:2)
>> with many places starting to not accept credit cards.
> Really? That seems like a good way for the business to lose a lot of sales.
Ever heard the joke about "we'll lose money on every transaction, but make up for it in volume"? All that "lot of sales" is going to come at the cost of 2 or 3 percent cut by the credit card issuer. In a business with thin profit margins, it can mean the difference between profit and loss. That's why those places are willing to "sacrifice" that business.
Re: (Score:2)
Leonard Cohen predicted this decades ago:
"There's gonna be a meter on your bed which will disclose
What everybody knows."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Just make them cheaper to start with and skip the games. Simple enough for ya?
Are you such a sick deviant fuck that you are ashamed by your purchases, or buying illegal things, or buying things to commit illegal actions?
8/10.
Seriously? Get over it.
I pay with cash. Consider me over it.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you such a sick deviant fuck that you want to know what everyone else is doing and buying? Seems like. Maybe you're just a shill. Seems like you're very quick to assume that someone that wants privacy, that doesn't want other people to know what they buy, means they are doing naughty things. You may have gotten a discount price on your brain, but I don't think you got a good value.
And that world you're thinking of? Just a myth shrouded thru the fog of TV and movies.
Re: (Score:2)
If you aren't ashamed of something or doing something that shouldn't be done, then why are these people so concerned about databases (not other humans) knowing their purchasing habits?
Seriously, why are people so afraid of people finding out who they actually are?
I'd say most US'ians are just paranoid people who don't know themselves or others and want to keep it that way.
Re: (Score:2)
If I've got nothing to hide, why do you feel so strongly that you should be allowed to look?
Re: (Score:2)
I think the whole privacy crap in the USA is because people are so self-important that they actually think their life matters to other people. But really, except for a few outliers nobody could care about your buying habits. Companies don't even care about 'your' buying habits, they care about the aggregate data. The only thing that cares about matching up your identity and buying habits is some automated software that'll send you propaganda.
What's really funny about the whole
Re: (Score:2)
If they don't care about my buying habits, why do they work so hard to track it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't seem to understand what anonymous means.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh no! some electrical pattern in some computer in some warehouse in the middle of nowhere knows I buy apples every week and they send me a coupon every week!
Re: (Score:2)
If you aren't ashamed of something or doing something that shouldn't be done, then why are these people so concerned
Everyone shits but are concerned about privacy. Most everyone masturbates, but want to do it in privacy.
Seriously, why are people so afraid of people finding out who they actually are?
Everyone thinks they are different. Some are and the rest of us have been convinced that we're different and have things to be ashamed of.
What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Did anyone else read the entire summary and still have no idea WTF it's talking about? Something to do with aliasing personal information to merchants... so they can target advertising... when the merchant has all the customer's personal data out of necessity anyway...?
Canadians already primarily use a card system called Interac to make most purchases; granted, it's been a while since I lived in Canada but even three years ago it was very rare for me to make a cash purchase.
Reading TFA it seems like it's talking about cell phone wireless payments, and banks selling your demographic information to retailers. Frankly, if my bank did that, I'd opt out of it immediately, and potentially change banks if they didn't allow the opt-out. This suggests to me that within five years there will be no bank that will allow opting-out unless it's protected by law.
and all the security of a Harem Girls Pants (Score:2)
sure in the technical sense most harem girls are wearing pants but its not like 1 they conceal anything at all 2 they wont come off if you so much as stare at them hard
in similar fashion the "security" for this will work
Re: (Score:2)
At least that's what I consider this to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>s. Frankly, if my bank did that, I'd opt out of it immediately, and potentially change banks if they didn't allow the opt-out.
Not related to this article but I already know a LOT of people who just store living expenses in their banks are are converting their income into buying silver and other metals. Money is really worth nothing and chances of precious metals sinking is slim to none, while currency is not guaranteed at all.
Canada certainly not cashless (Score:2)
I see no evidence that your experience is typical. Cash is widely used, as are credit cards. We are far from being a cashless society. I only use Interac a few times a year. Interac has been hit with fraud sprees by criminals using tampered skimmers. Unlike with credit cards, where banks impose
Re: (Score:2)
I think it depends where you are (where are you?)... I lived in southwestern Ontario.
Wither Paypal? (Score:2)
The whole point of Paypal was you don't have to give your cc number to the vendor; it'll stay with Paypal.
But people found out Paypal's not necessarily always your pal.
Anyway, if these banks are offering this service, would there remain a reason for Paypal?
Re: (Score:3)
The whole point of Paypal was you don't have to give your cc number to the vendor; it'll stay with Paypal.
A little like contracting smallpox to keep you from catching cowpox.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Easy, paypal is the only company offering ONE service that NO ONE ELSE does. Allow random joes to accept a credit card without a merchant account.
If you're a business, Paypal offers you nothing more than what a regular merchant account does - to a business, it IS a regular merchant account.
If you're an individual, accepting credit cards is nigh-impossible as merchant accounts are extremely difficult to obtain for indivi
Re: (Score:2)
Just wondering: did they want a scan of the back of the card too (CVV)? Shady.
Do Not Track (Score:2)
free market fundamentalists take note: (Score:1)
canada will lead here, because you need a government entity to dictate the terms of something like a virtual wallet
private market forces do not necessarily lead to advancement, because there is no natural market that is not dominated and suppressed by it's largest players. for example: mastercard and visa will stymie google's and apple's virtual wallet efforts out of jealousy and wanting to monopolize that action themselves
and then we will have the crackpots WHARRGARBLing about virtual currency and paranoid
Re: (Score:2)
Canada will not lead here, because their banking system is woefully behind the times. They don't even have visa debit cards yet, so I can't use my standard visa debit card without it being treated like a credit card, needing a much m=higher minimum puchase etc. Pathetic.
I can hear the FAIL from here.... (Score:3)
They already tried this in the USA with the stupid nearfield credit cards. it was an epic failure. Paypal has tried it several times and failed and is on their next failure with this technology.
People DO NOT WANT to have loosey Goosey access to their money. It is why you dont see RFID on all your groceries and a push and pay register at Walmart... if they could lay off almost all the cashiers forever they would.
Good luck canada, but Mastercard could not get enough banks and people to use their atempt, I think you will have about the same chance.
Re: (Score:3)
You're wrong, this is going to happen.
Visa and MasterCard have announced that they'll implement the chip card liability shift next year in North America. What that means is that starting in 2013 all liability for fraudulent transactions will accrue to whichever links in the chain (issuing bank, merchant, merchant acquiring bank, clearinghouse) do not have the chip-based technology implemented. Since merchants pay for nearly all of the credit card fraud, you'll see a very fast response from them to add t
Re: (Score:2)
Almost nobody wants the nearfield cards except for merchants and the banks. Because it's easier to spend they get more money.
Several of the fast food resturants around here, Mc Donalds for example had the readers outside the drive up windows and have cince removed them as nobody was using them. Even TARGET, has removed all the nearfield readers from all their stores.
I suggest looking at what the stores are doing and ignore the PR releases from the banks. No way in hell Mastercard is going to up the fee
Re: (Score:2)
Almost nobody wants the nearfield cards except for merchants and the banks.
If the merchants and banks want them... they'll happen. And, actually, consumers like them too once they use them.
Several of the fast food resturants around here, Mc Donalds for example had the readers outside the drive up windows and have cince removed them as nobody was using them.
Sure, because hardly anyone has the cards, or phones with virtual wallets, yet, and there's no liability-related reason for merchants to care. But both parts of that are changing.
Re: (Score:2)
But contactless payment is a definite no for me unless it requires I enter my pin, which all the ones I've seen don't require.
The virtual wallets will all require a PIN, I think. Google Wallet does, and ISIS will according to their documentation.
Certainly will be convenient, (Score:2)
All my cards and such in one place.
Much easier for me to just wave my phone or whatever and it gets deducted. Just hope I choose the right 'card'.
And much, MUCH easier for the crooks to steal one thing, instead of going after each of my accounts one at time. One-stop shopping for them.
No, I'm not cynical, much.
Progress.
Not News (Score:2)
Is this not the history of the banking sector for at least a generation?
What's the worst that could happen? (Score:3)
Paperless (Score:2)
A paper trail really is right up there as a facet of a truly free and open society; we casually abandon it at our peril.
I don't see the benefit for the customer (Score:2)
I only see benefits for the banks in this scheme.
First, they will now have access to a crapload more data about people's shopping habits that they can mine and sell.
Second, service charges. Hey now instead of paying for the privilege of using your debit card to Bank A, you can also pay a service charge on top of that to Bank B who is providing this digital wallet.
Zero benefit for the customer.
1) I already carry a physical wallet. I keep my cards in it and they are always with me -- digital wallet provides
Credit Cards (Score:2)
Using credit cards gives your information to foreign corporations (USA) who process all this information in the USA and naturally their government has access to all of it. Don't expect it to go well, Russia tried to at least have the data processed within their nation and lost that fight.
Canada is more likely to have standards develop and government (post Harper) properly regulate it; plus they do have credit unions... Wasn't Canada the nation who's government was looking into providing official electronic
Re:if it ain't green. (Score:5, Informative)
Canadian bills aren't all green now. $5 is blue, $10 is purple, $20 is green, $50 is red, $100 is brown, $1000 is pink (I believe, been a while since I've seen one) and when we used to have a $1 it was dark green and $2 was orange
makes it much easier to tell denominations at a glance when looking through your wallet.
Re: (Score:3)
Was pink. The $1000 bill was withdrawn back in 2000 due to money laundering concerns.
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding is that the $1000 is still in circulation, just rare. I know last time I saw one the banks wanted you to call ahead to reserve them.
Re: (Score:2)
The $1000 bill is still legal tender, but is withdrawn from circulation.
Unless they keep a few on hand for sale as collector's items, I wouldn't think any banks would keep $1000 bills around. All the major ones just send them back to the Bank of Canada for destruction.
Re: (Score:3)
Nope. It's gone for good [bankofcanada.ca]. They stopped printing them in 2000 and any financial institution that receives one is asked to return it to the BoC for destruction. They're still legal tender and can still be held privately, but they're not officially in circulation. They were rarely used for anything other than money laundering anyways. The only time I ever saw them was in a bank vault in bundles.
Re: (Score:2)
Canadian bills were never all green. I hate using american money, I keep dropping $50's instead of $1's.
Re: (Score:2)
Or..you know...I'm just used to having bills actually look different.
Can't take the heat (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:if it ain't green. (Score:4, Informative)
...and when we used to have a $1 it was dark green and $2 was orange
Actually, the $1 was black and yellow on front, and green on the reverse.
The $2 bill was considered to be "terracotta" coloured, and was more reddish-brown than orange.
Yaz
Re: (Score:2)
"redish brown" is one way I would define orange...
And the $1 had green on the front as well as the black and yellow, and the overall appearance was "green" though a notably different shade than that of the $20
I don't think of myself as old... but I certainly remember the $1 and $2 bills (theoretically I should still have one of each around somewhere...)
Re: (Score:2)
And the $1 had green on the front as well as the black and yellow, and the overall appearance was "green" though a notably different shade than that of the $20 I don't think of myself as old... but I certainly remember the $1 and $2 bills (theoretically I should still have one of each around somewhere...)
I non-theoretically have a few of each, and the last series of $1 bill (the 1973 series) was predominately black. There was a somewhat greenish tinge to parts of the background, but it was primarily black, not green. The 1967 series, 1954 series, and 1923 series were more green with black boarders, but the series that lasted the last 15 years of the $1 bills life had only the smallest patch of light green on its face.
The reverses were entirely green on all of those series, mind you -- but I don't know any
Re: (Score:2)
Canadian notes are all the same size, which is more convenient for many things, however they do have some braille-like bumps on them to assist blind people (I don't think they are actually braille, but they are bumps that are different on each denomination)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah ... why do I get the feeling that this is from some crackpot taking a lighter to the bill because they don't like the plastic money? A few weeks ago when we had that heat wave here in Southern Ontario, I was on an offsite job, and the storage locker on my truck hit 144C, the bills in it were fine. Including the 100's and 50's which were both the new plastic notes.
Re: (Score:2)
Stores up here like Safeway and Save-On Foods get around people making cash transactions by inflating their prices and then dropping many (but not all) of those prices back to normal as long as you sign up as a "member". Then, it doesn't matter how you pay. If you don't sign up and let them track your purchasing, you get shafted on the price you pay. You might say, "well, then don't shop there", and I usually don't. When I do, however, I sort-of get around it by using my brother's wife's membership number.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same tech as Australian currency which is more than 20 years old and proven. The crap you said simply isn't true. Get used to it, it is an improvement in every way.