4 ms·

Based just on Google's blog post, this seems like another implementation of the standard that Apple helped create and push through with the banks and card netwo

by zrail 11y ago

Based just on Google's blog post, this seems like another implementation of the standard that Apple helped create and push through with the banks and card networks for Apple Pay. They mention tokenization and virtual card numbers, which is exactly how Apple Pay works.

soylentcola 11y ago
And Google Wallet did before it.
- mattkrea 11y ago
  Google Wallet did not use tokenization. See here: http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/android-pay-will-embrace-tokenization-mostly-replace-google-wallet/ http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/android-pay-will-emb...
  - dmayle 11y ago
    solyentcola is actually correct. Google Wallet 1.0 used tokenization, but it was issuer side, not network side. When the networks weren't interested in tokenization, Google Wallet relaunched with HCE.
    - mattkrea 11y ago
      Do you have a source for this? I work in the payments industry and have lately been trying to follow things closely but this I must have missed.
    - lxgr 11y ago
      As far as I understand it, they were issuing an actual credit card applet to the secure element for the first version, and later switched to the "proxy card" model and HCE. Issuer-side tokenization wasn't even launched until 2014-09 by both Mastercard and Visa ("coinciding" with the launch of Apple Pay), so they couldn't have used it for the first version of Google Wallet.
      - dmayle 11y ago
        Mastercard and Visa launched network-side tokenization, not issuer-side tokenization. And yes, it used a Mastercard PayPass applet, as does network-side tokenization. When it comes down to it, tokens are just credit cards that have a mapping back to an account. The network-side tokenization spec includes additional measures for provisioning and security, but they're still just credit cards. (If that weren't true, then all of the merchants would require terminal upgrades to work with them). In issuer-side tokenization, it's the issuer (the user's bank/cc company) that creates the token, and they map it to accounts internally. In network-side tokenization, it's the network (MC, Visa, etc.) that handles the token creation, and they map it back to the previously issued credit card before the charge goes back to the issuer.
smackfu 11y ago
Did Apple really push it through? They weren't mentioned when the spec was released, six months before Apple Pay was announced. http://www.nfcworld.com/2014/03/11/328236/emvco-publishes-tokenization-framework-specification/ http://www.nfcworld.com/2014/03/11/328236/emvco-publishes-to...
- Navarr 11y ago
  They may have helped. Apple was definitely working on it more than six months before it was announced. Google Wallet initially capitalized on Mastercard PayWave (or was that Visa's?) and when the other cards wouldn't play ball they made a virtual Mastercard for use. Now that the card companies started playing ball, maybe b/c of Apple's push, Google can work with the new standards.
dmayle 11y ago
Yes, Apple Pay uses tokenization, no Apple neither created it nor pushed it through. Google Wallet 1.0 used issuer-side tokenization, and switched to HCE when the networks weren't interested in network-level tokenization. Yes, Apple participated in the spec but the most you can credit Apple with was smart negotiation, and taking advantage of lessons learned by Wallet.
- xenadu02 11y ago
  Why do people have to constantly put down Apple's contributions? Their customers tend to be more desirable (because they're higher income) and Apple uses that as leverage to cut through bureaucracy to make things happen. USB type C would not exist without lightning. Why? Because the customers for the USB-IF aren't end-users... they're bottom-feeding OEMs who want to shave $0.001 off the cost of each port and don't give a shit. Apple doesn't have to care about that and can forge ahead with their own standard. That creates demand in the market (specifically the actual customers of the USB-IF like Samsung who immediately want to copy anything and everything Apple does.) Android Pay would be the same mostly-dead-end that Google Wallet was without Apple Pay. Why? Because Google has no power to get banks, card networks, or merchants on board. Because even if they release it that doesn't mean any of the OEMs will necessarily adopt it. Because a huge number of Android devices are cheap junk only purchased because it's almost impossible to buy plain feature phones anymore, not because the buyer actually gives a shit. Apple doesn't have any of those problems. If Apple offers Apple Pay they know higher-end merchants will adopt it. Apple customers are more likely to use it. The whole brand/cachè thing creates pressure to get on board the train. Go ahead and ask Verizon and Sprint how holding out against the iPhone worked for them. Many barriers to adoption of technology are social, cultural, or just plain old inertia. Apple is in a unique position to force change, yet there appears to be a pathological desire to lie and claim Apple isn't relevant.
yaeger 11y ago
With google being all about data mining and getting as much information on you as they possibly can, I am having the hardest time believing that google will introduce a payment system that cannot track peoples individual shopping behavior. It was one of Apple's selling points that they do not see what you buy. They only handle the monetary transaction. Only the merchant and you know what was purchased etc. It is funny to imagine google knowing this valuable information is running right through their service/device and they do not or cannot take a look. As a data miner that would be more than frustrating.

by zrail 11y ago

soylentcola 11y ago

And Google Wallet did before it.

mattkrea 11y ago
Google Wallet did not use tokenization. See here: http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/android-pay-will-embrace-tokenization-mostly-replace-google-wallet/ http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/android-pay-will-emb...
- dmayle 11y ago
  solyentcola is actually correct. Google Wallet 1.0 used tokenization, but it was issuer side, not network side. When the networks weren't interested in tokenization, Google Wallet relaunched with HCE.
  - mattkrea 11y ago
    Do you have a source for this? I work in the payments industry and have lately been trying to follow things closely but this I must have missed.
  - lxgr 11y ago
    As far as I understand it, they were issuing an actual credit card applet to the secure element for the first version, and later switched to the "proxy card" model and HCE. Issuer-side tokenization wasn't even launched until 2014-09 by both Mastercard and Visa ("coinciding" with the launch of Apple Pay), so they couldn't have used it for the first version of Google Wallet.
    - dmayle 11y ago
      Mastercard and Visa launched network-side tokenization, not issuer-side tokenization. And yes, it used a Mastercard PayPass applet, as does network-side tokenization. When it comes down to it, tokens are just credit cards that have a mapping back to an account. The network-side tokenization spec includes additional measures for provisioning and security, but they're still just credit cards. (If that weren't true, then all of the merchants would require terminal upgrades to work with them). In issuer-side tokenization, it's the issuer (the user's bank/cc company) that creates the token, and they map it to accounts internally. In network-side tokenization, it's the network (MC, Visa, etc.) that handles the token creation, and they map it back to the previously issued credit card before the charge goes back to the issuer.

smackfu 11y ago

Did Apple really push it through? They weren't mentioned when the spec was released, six months before Apple Pay was announced. http://www.nfcworld.com/2014/03/11/328236/emvco-publishes-tokenization-framework-specification/ http://www.nfcworld.com/2014/03/11/328236/emvco-publishes-to...

Navarr 11y ago
They may have helped. Apple was definitely working on it more than six months before it was announced. Google Wallet initially capitalized on Mastercard PayWave (or was that Visa's?) and when the other cards wouldn't play ball they made a virtual Mastercard for use. Now that the card companies started playing ball, maybe b/c of Apple's push, Google can work with the new standards.

dmayle 11y ago

Yes, Apple Pay uses tokenization, no Apple neither created it nor pushed it through. Google Wallet 1.0 used issuer-side tokenization, and switched to HCE when the networks weren't interested in network-level tokenization. Yes, Apple participated in the spec but the most you can credit Apple with was smart negotiation, and taking advantage of lessons learned by Wallet.

xenadu02 11y ago
Why do people have to constantly put down Apple's contributions? Their customers tend to be more desirable (because they're higher income) and Apple uses that as leverage to cut through bureaucracy to make things happen. USB type C would not exist without lightning. Why? Because the customers for the USB-IF aren't end-users... they're bottom-feeding OEMs who want to shave $0.001 off the cost of each port and don't give a shit. Apple doesn't have to care about that and can forge ahead with their own standard. That creates demand in the market (specifically the actual customers of the USB-IF like Samsung who immediately want to copy anything and everything Apple does.) Android Pay would be the same mostly-dead-end that Google Wallet was without Apple Pay. Why? Because Google has no power to get banks, card networks, or merchants on board. Because even if they release it that doesn't mean any of the OEMs will necessarily adopt it. Because a huge number of Android devices are cheap junk only purchased because it's almost impossible to buy plain feature phones anymore, not because the buyer actually gives a shit. Apple doesn't have any of those problems. If Apple offers Apple Pay they know higher-end merchants will adopt it. Apple customers are more likely to use it. The whole brand/cachè thing creates pressure to get on board the train. Go ahead and ask Verizon and Sprint how holding out against the iPhone worked for them. Many barriers to adoption of technology are social, cultural, or just plain old inertia. Apple is in a unique position to force change, yet there appears to be a pathological desire to lie and claim Apple isn't relevant.

yaeger 11y ago

With google being all about data mining and getting as much information on you as they possibly can, I am having the hardest time believing that google will introduce a payment system that cannot track peoples individual shopping behavior. It was one of Apple's selling points that they do not see what you buy. They only handle the monetary transaction. Only the merchant and you know what was purchased etc. It is funny to imagine google knowing this valuable information is running right through their service/device and they do not or cannot take a look. As a data miner that would be more than frustrating.