I can see the difference if you describe it as such.
I would never have realised that the word was being used differently without the description.
Nothing has happend to me personally. But I believe that the bank was in the wrong.
You seem to think that it was simply poor training (which I think we agree is now endemic in banking)
I'm not convinced that it wasn't worse than this
"You're"
perhaps not.
tim
Again this is all semantics and missing the point.
As far as the general use of the word, 'cloned' in this context means a working copy is created.Technically its a bad use of the word 'cloned' but so what, what most people would understand is that when your card has been cloned a copy of it that works has been created.
If we work from that understanding, then C&P cards can be cloned. If you dont like that, then choose another word, the point is, all the stuff about safety of C&P cards and how they cant be cloned/copied/duplicated is bullshit, because they can and are, what name you give the process is irrelevant, and certainly in the press and media 'cloned' will mean, a working copy, and not some technical phrase re exact 1 for 1 bit copying and reconstruction of the chip.
I wonder if the ATM replacement programme applies to all the private ATMs now out there in shops and service stations and so on?) I wonder if they will also be able to deal witha 'cloned' magstripe whose contents have been altered to say that this is not a C&Pcard?
No. Not unless they are also replacing all their ATMs, and checking with the issuing authority that this is a C&P card rather than reading the magstripe to determine if thats the case.
At 22:41:27 on 16/01/2006, Tumbleweed delighted uk.finance by announcing:
If they're not, they'll be liable for any fraudulent transactions processed by them.
No :-)
It helps *who* by reducing crime?
No. Why would they need to?
If they are proved to be fraudulent of course. No doubt the company operating them will say that the card holder was careless with their card/PIN.
Our chips are better than theirs? I'll prefer a moules frites anyday over a fish & chips. Deep-fried Mars bar anyone?
OK, so what do you want people to do? If they know they're going to be given a hard time by the bank if they say "my card must have been cloned", they'll just throw their card on the fire and say it's been stolen.
Then, if it's the chip which provides the clone-proofing, why push C&P so aggressively when C&S solves that particular problem?
Makes no difference whether I'm the victim of fraud or of a mistake, I'm still a victim.
At 22:53:43 on 16/01/2006, Tumbleweed delighted uk.finance by announcing:
They can say what they want. Since the ATMs are not owned by the bank the bank's got no vested interest in claiming they're infallible and EMV rules state that the weakest link in the chain (the non-EMV ATM) is automatically liable.
At 23:09:39 on 16/01/2006, Ronald Raygun delighted uk.finance by announcing:
Because the chip has no possible way of verifying your signature. It can, however, verify your PIN. This means that instead of providing card AND cardholder authentication, only the card can be authenticated.
At 23:01:07 on 16/01/2006, Ronald Raygun delighted uk.finance by announcing:
There is no 'ours' and 'theirs'. EMV is a global standard.
But it's not a 20 year old standard, is it?
It doesn't need to. The checkout chick can do that.
But if your main enemy is cloning, then card authentication is the main job to sort out, cardholder authentication is already satisfactorily dealt with by well-established signature technology.
You are arguing for the sake of it. People arent as dishonest as that. They could do that now, as the people in the OP could have done, but they didnt.
It doesnt. Please explain how it does.
No. Your usual logic is missing here RR. The use of a truly cloned card is fraud. This quite different from a stupid remark by untrained bank staff. In the latter case the use of the word 'victim' is OTT.
In message , Ronald Raygun writes
Balderdash. Or should I say Macbalderdash so you can understand the word. 'Signature technology' as you so amusingly describe it, is the (I think) the second most serious area of theft, i.e. straightforward stolen cards.
In message , Ronald Raygun writes
If you do that then you will have deep fried my favourite method of measuring inflation.
In message , Tumbleweed writes
Doesnt a reduction crime help everybody?
In message , "tim (moved to sweden)" writes
Eh? So are you saying that until I told you, you didnt realise what the real meaning of the word 'clone' meant?
100%!
More than 100%?
Oh dear, we have resorted to that then.
To think I dallied with mentioning your regular mis-spelling of the word 'clone' by spelling you spelling it 'cloan', but I decided not to as we are both old hands in this group (one more than the other) and felt there was some chivalry among thieves.
Its "CLONE" old bean.
And by the way, "This is semantic that the customer wont understand" isnt a sentence.
In message , Tumbleweed writes
No, it wont be up to the card operator. They have no knowledge of the card owner. It will be down to the bank.
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.