advertisement
advertisement


Re-Thinking Payment Gateways

Written by Evan Schuman
June 19th, 2008
GuestView Columnist David Taylor suggests that a surprisingly large number of major retailers today are using inhouse or outsourced payment gateways to reduce the scope of their compliance effort, as well as their costs.

At some point in the last decade, nearly every organization involved in electronic commerce did an evaluation of payment gateways. So, what's changed?

This Story Is Only Available For Premium Subscribers. Click Or Login In Below To Read The Rest Of This Story.


advertisement

2 Comments | Read Re-Thinking Payment Gateways

  1. Steve Sommers Says:

    I’m not sure if we are the exception to the rule or if we were overlooked in the story but we have always been open to how we protect the merchant’s data — both within our data centers and the technology we install at the merchant location to secure the cardholder data on the merchant’s network. Originally when we were added to the Visa certified provider list we did sell on “we’re on the list.” We were one of the first gateway providers on the list; why not use it as far as it will go? But that advantage didn’t last long. We quickly shifted to informing and demonstrating (sometimes maybe even flaunting) our technology. We view our technology as a distinguishing selling point —- after all and as you point out, anyone can get on the certified list via various means.

    I’m sorry David, I read all your stories and most of your points I agree and even the ones I don’t agree with your point I still see your point. But I’m confused here on where you are going with this one. A university example is given to demonstrate a case for insource gateway services but industry reports show universities as one of the riskiest places for cardholder data breaches. I couldn’t decide if this example was an argument for insource gateway services or an example where outsource services should be used.

    Maybe my confusion is my own preconditioning. I’m used to stories like “in-house is good; out-sourcing is bad” or visa-versa. Maybe your intent was simply “insource/outsource — you decide,” and like I said, I’m not used to that. While I’m a little confused with this story, keep them coming as your still batting over 900 on my books.

  2. Dave Taylor Says:

    Re: the Gateway piece. The funny thing is: I started out wanting to say something very simple, which is that payment gateways built or contracted for more than a few years ago may not provide the level of data protection that retailers need, simply because most decisions were made back then with data security as a minor consideration, if at all. (Even now, many of the providers do not mention PCI, or security. If they do, it’s treated as a simple checklist.
    I believe that whether in-sourced, or out-sourced, retailers need to do much more due diligence of their service provider’s data protection, and not take it for granted, based on “check mark” on a form.
    However, I wound up throwing in some other ideas, as you can see. But, as I say, my Bottom Line was meant to be very simple.

Leave a Reply

Readers, specifically those who want to comment on a story:
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.

Weekly, Monthly Newsletters

Quickly catch-up on the latest in E-Commerce and Retail Tech with our free weekly report, with urgent bulletins as news merits—along with our monthlies on Mobile, Security, In-Store, E-Commerce and CRM.
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

"Careless" Systems Integrators Now Directly Under PCI DSS

This exact issue has been bothering me for years, and I was JUST talking about it with someone only yesterday. This may well be my favorite article, mostly because I'm biased and have hated this particular problem forever. Read more...
Good article, but how does this have anything to do with the DSS? Read more...
Actually, the QIR program has a lot to do with the DSS (or PCI). Since merchants rely on their reseller or integrator to implement their PA-DSS validated application, these resellers and system integrators play a critical role in merchants achieving and maintaining PCI compliance. As far as I can tell, the QIR program is designed to help merchants stay compliant by making sure their payment applications are installed according to the PA-DSS Implementation Guide, for example ensuring default passwords are changed (and protected), that the data encryption keys are properly set and secured, that the merchant's data retention policy is set, that no sensitive cardholder data are stored, and often that a firewall is in place and properly configured. Read more...
Although this is a great move forward in pushing the issue of highly trained people, it is also a good marketing ploy for the council. It begs the question: How much do they stand to make? The problem for this is that for people (like myself) that are just starting out their own business venture, PCI has typically charged a premium for their training and certifications. This change will likely force those of us with less capital to spin into the abyss. I have more than 15 years in the security and compliance fields with heavy hitter certs like CISSP, CRISC, and Sec+. There should not be a guide but a free test or a pre-requisite of either the PCI cert OR other heavy hitter certs. I just don't want the good guys in small places to get flushed out. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.