3 ms·
"Equating credit card fraud to physical theft is silly. " In both cases someone is out money. It isn't a difficult step. Fraud costs the credit card industry.
by endorphone 7y ago
"Equating credit card fraud to physical theft is silly. "
In both cases someone is out money. It isn't a difficult step.
Fraud costs the credit card industry. It costs issuers (they shoulder 60% of the direct cost), merchants, and it costs the future of the industry because it is a nuisance for end-users.
They make a standard of best practices to reduce fraud. Following those best practices is good for every single participant, outside of criminals. Reducing fraud wholesale is the goal, obviously.
Spinning this in a nefarious fashion is not helpful to anyone, and does nothing but muddies the waters.
- cptskippy 7y agoNo one is denying fraud has a cost or that there's benefit to mitigating it. Mitigation comes at a cost and so there is a cost/benefit analysis performed by stake holders to determine the scope of mitigation employed. PCI identifies recommended mitigations and imposes penalties for failures, but it doesn't ensure or validate compliance. It simply shifts liability from one stakeholder to another. No one is spinning this as nefarious, but rather information that should be taken into consideration.