Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:To be fair, a pretty easy run (Score 1) 234

From my experience, that's because Colorado keeps all highways torn up all the time, and Colorado drivers are required to come to a complete stop to examine each and every orange cone, individually.

However, I did notice that nobody stopped to observe the pickup truck that was dripping fire and smelled like fireworks. That, apparently, is not noteworthy is Colorado.

Comment Let me summarize (Score 1) 199

Like pretty much everything coming out of Apple these days, this translates to:

"You have money you're not giving us. And even worse, you're giving it to someone else, you Satan worshipping devils. And equally bad, you're doing things we can't keep a record of to sell to advertisers. How dare you keep secrets from your deciduous overlords!"

Comment Let him put his money where his mouth is (Score 1) 269

When Elon Musk is willing to let me pick any place in the United States, accessible to road, get into a car he built with no manual controls, and bet his life he will arrive there safely, in the rain, at night, then I'll accept that there are self driving cars in existence.

Until then, they are, at best, an experiment in the earliest stages, but mostly, some rich guy's toys.

Comment Re:Hmm... (Score 1, Insightful) 357

A plausible theory. In the absence of any details (which we do not have), it is also plausible that the entire protest was staged for the cameras, at her instigation, which would, indeed, make her a conspirator (assuming the protest committed a crime).

I doubt we'll ever get enough detail to tell.

(You're right about sketchy laws in some parts of the country, but the pipeline protestors have engaged in organized violence against the pipeline before. I suspect it's more of a pox on all their houses situation.)

Comment Re:Retailers are holding us in the stone age (Score 1) 311

I cant beleive you wrote that entire post just to say "I know nothing about EMV".

That says more about you than it does about me, or EMV.

Now the real defence that is stopping stolen cards that is going along with EMV is the elimination of signatures for purchases. This is because signatures are easily faked (including removing the old signature and putting your own on, which is pretty redundant as no-one checks it anyway). You cant sign for a purchase any more and enforcing this means getting rid of the old terminals which would ask for a signature.

With chip & PIN, perhaps, but since virtually no credit cards in the US are chip & PIN, you have no idea what you're talking about. My employer had gotten to where we didn't need a signature on small transactions. With the implementation of EMV, since most cards are chip & signature, we now must get a signature on all transactions again, even for less than a dollar. That'll change, but you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

Comment Re:Retailers are holding us in the stone age (Score 1) 311

Chip and PIN works.

Pity virtually no US chip cards are chip and PIN.

This is what the US card issuers should be sued for. How is Chip-and-Sign any more secure than mag strips?

EMV has nothing to do with security at point of purchase. EMV is the first step to point of point encryption (which is available on may systems now), which eliminates breaking into Target's network and stealing 100 million+ card numbers at the same time.

Is this yet another way that the powers-that-be discourage Americans from international travel so that they can't see that much of the rest of the world has the same freedoms that America has?

A week ago today, I was in Iceland, mostly using my magnetic strip card for everything. I had zero trouble doing so. The only minor issue was that you can only buy fuel for your car with a card that has a PIN, and their system does weird-ass things with authorizations on ATM cards. But I had no trouble buying a gas card with my mag strip card. I just had to walk inside to do so. Big deal.

Comment Re:Good (Score 1) 311

The part that isn't talked about much, and not yet a mandatory part of the system, is the point of point encryption that goes hand in hand with EMV. When fully implemented, the store never sees any card information at all, it's all tokenized. That means that when somebody breaks into their network, there's nothing there to steal.

That is the point of EMV. It's got nothing to do with protecting the consumer. It's about reducing losses for the banks.

Comment Re:Not Sure if... (Score 1) 311

I hate the fucking chip things....

I keep almost leaving my fucking card in the slot and walking away.

That says far more about your than it does about chip cards.

With no PIN, I can't see how it is really any safer to me.

It's not intended to be. It's safer for the banks, and indirectly, for the merchants. You're not protected by the technology, you're protected by the law.

Comment Re:Retailers are holding us in the stone age (Score 4, Informative) 311

They're just not happy about the liability shift strong-arming them into this. But honestly? They SHOULD be liable when they're the roadblocks preventing customers from having good security. They're dragging their feet on this because it's an externality--they don't care if their customers get screwed, as can be seen with, e.g. the Target hack, but they do see a cost for newer, more secure equipment.

EMV has nothing to do with protecting consumers, and has zero effect on security for the consumer. Steal the card, and you can use it, same as before (since it's almost entirely chip & signature rather than chip & PIN) The consumer isn't protected buy the technology, the consumer is protected by the law, with a $50 limit on liability on a stolen card.

EMV is about protecting the banks and processing companies, who have nearly all the liability for fraud, and secondarily protecting merchants, because when fully implemented, EMV with P2P encryption means the merchant never sees the card info at all, and has nothing on their network to steal. All the worst breaches in recent years have been of retailers' networks, stealing millions (or 100 million+) card numbers at a time. And if the retailer is PCI compliant (as Target was, apparently), the banks eat the loss. EMV/P2P encryption eliminates that vector. That is the point of it.

And the upgrade is very, very much in the merchants' best interests because of that.

Comment Re:Down the rabbit hole (Score 1) 311

You're smoking dope, and they're feeding you a line. The software has to be certified, but even then, not by deployment. And for a small business, that's handled by the point of sale vendor, not the merchant. If your local grocery chain is doing their own processing software, they're not pushing on getting their stuff certified, and that's entirely on them.

There is a point about not extending the deadline - again - for those merchants who had the hardware but couldn't get the software from the POS vendors, but it's a small point unless the business is so poorly run that it gets a lot of fraudulent activity to begin with.

Comment Re:Down the rabbit hole (Score 5, Informative) 311

It isn't being forced on them. They have the alternative of not accepting CC transactions, which is something many businesses do.

They also have the choice continuing to use the old equipment, but they then accept responsibility for fraudulent transactions that could have been prevented by using chip cards. Hell, as far as I know, they still have the option of imprinting paper slips and depositing them at the bank like checks, but the costs all end up on the merchant, as they should.

At some point we need to have progress, and magstripes need to die. Many technical standards have deadlines where old features stop being supported.

Mag stripes will be around for at least a decade, and probably two or three. But they'll be slowly phased out over the next few years for most people most of the time.

The merchants have had plenty of time to upgrade,

Sort of, but not really. Unless you're Walmart or Home Depot, you don't write your own processing software, you rely on your point of sale vendor, and very few point of sale vendors were ready by October of last year. Many small businesses simply did not have the option to start doing EMV by the deadline.

and plenty of warning that the end was coming. Most merchants support the change, since it is the merchants that pay the biggest price for fraud. That is why the plaintiffs are having problems organizing a class action. It is only a few whiners that are complaining.

Liability issues aside, any merchant complaining about EMV (with point of point encryption) is an idiot. EMV isn't about protecting consumers from fraud against their card (hence the chip & signature instead of chip & PIN), it's about protecting banks and merchant services from idiotic merchants who can't keep their network secure. Implement EMV with P2P encryption, and the merchant never sees the card in at all, and if someone breaks into their network, there's nothing to steal. Makes PCI compliance easier, and pretty much eliminates the chance of the merchant having to pay six figures to investigate a breach.

Comment Re:It goes both ways... (Score 1) 332

Citizens stop acting like jackasses when they too are being filmed.

You haven't watched the show Cops then. I've never seen a black person with their hands up.

That wouldn't be very entertaining television, now would it? If they showed the routine stuff where people act like grownups, the show would have been cancelled by episode 3.

Slashdot Top Deals

Any program which runs right is obsolete.