In the UK and EU, chip and pin carry with it some nasty liability problems. That is, the consumer is now de facto liable for all fraud that happens, in spite of the statute.[1] A significant amount of skimming still occurs in the EU.[2] The protocol, just like the traditional charge card method, used is considered insecure.[3]
The U.S. method, where the low-security retailer is liable, is the most fair. The current charge back system works. Retailers that use inventory control, secure systems, and require ID with large purchases receive few legitimate charge backs. [4]
Comments
In the UK and EU, chip and pin carry with it some nasty liability problems. That is, the consumer is now de facto liable for all fraud that happens, in spite of the statute.[1] A significant amount of skimming still occurs in the EU.[2] The protocol, just like the traditional charge card method, used is considered insecure.[3]
The U.S. method, where the low-security retailer is liable, is the most fair. The current charge back system works. Retailers that use inventory control, secure systems, and require ID with large purchases receive few legitimate charge backs. [4]
[1] http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/Papers/unattack.pdf
[2] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3173346...
[3] http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it-security/chip-and-pin-th...
[4] http://www.internetretailer.com/2012/10/31/how-karmaloop-cle...
The n.1 you quoted there is very interesting and explains a little bit about all the types of transactions possible.
Very interesting subject.