Big four networks team up for mobile payments

[Simon]

T-Mobile, Orange, O2, and Vodafone have teamed up on mobile payments and advertising.

The operators have created a standalone joint venture to develop a single system for mobile payments as well as advertising, letting retailers go through a single company to reach the firms' customers, regardless of the device they're using.

The joint venture will come up with the standards, technology and interfaces to run mobile payments, as well as create a centralised sales division to work with retailers and advertisers.

The system won't actually process payments, but will provide the necessary platform to banks and retailers to let consumers shop with their phones.

"This venture is not taking a banking licence," explained Ronan Dunne, CEO of O2-owner Telefonica. "It will be enabling the payments systems that work today. Any bank can enable its physical products to be virtualised onto mobile wallets, rather than have to do it individually to all the operators."

Read more: http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/368119/big-four-networks-team-up-for-mobile-payments

[john]

It would be useful if it's designed to enable low cost payments to be widely used so I don't need to carry cash and loose change.

[Lance]

It's promising that the companies are actually going to work together for once.

[Simon]

Funnily enough, I was only thinking today, wouldn't it be good if phones had a built in chip and pin reader for purchases to be made?

[Lance]

I think NFC has potential for payments.

[pctech]

Not that keen on NFC in mobiles as think it is ripe for abuse unless the NFC antenna is disabled until a certain application is loaded or the user can opt to be prompted before a transaction is authorised.

Neither of those is likely because 'convenience' will be pushed ('or to hell with security. lets make sure they can spend money without a second thought')


I'd like to see a solution using the mobile networks, a business or iself employed individual could have a wireless payment reference (not suggesting a mobile number is used as some people such as cab drivers understandably don't want to give out mobile numbers to customers)

The customer launches an application, enters the payment reference and the amount and then oresses go/enter, person requesting payment gets alerted to an incoming payment which they accept or decline, authorisation reference is generated and texted to the customer (also noted on their bank statement).

Business person also has an app that allows them view a log of the authorisations with date and time that day and to action a refund if they need to.

[Gary]

Not that keen on NFC in mobiles as think it is ripe for abuse unless the NFC antenna is disabled until a certain application is loaded or the user can opt to be prompted before a transaction is authorised.

Neither of those is likely because 'convenience' will be pushed ('or to hell with security. lets make sure they can spend money without a second thought')


I'd like to see a solution using the mobile networks, a business or iself employed individual could have a wireless payment reference (not suggesting a mobile number is used as some people such as cab drivers understandably don't want to give out mobile numbers to customers)

The customer launches an application, enters the payment reference and the amount and then oresses go/enter, person requesting payment gets alerted to an incoming payment which they accept or decline, authorisation reference is generated and texted to the customer (also noted on their bank statement).

Business person also has an app that allows them view a log of the authorisations with date and time that day and to action a refund if they need to.

Chip and Pin was not a great success Mitch, if te NFC chip is powered down it could still be powered up by a small transmitter, possibly, but if its for small payments like the RFD cards its not an issue until they reverse engineer the tech and hack your phone and bank....I can just see lots of dropped phones in the future personally as people fumble for them in shops. 

[Technical Ben]

The only two reasons for chip and pin IMHO were:
1) No signature on the back of the card. It was too easy to nick a card, and copy the signature. At least now, in practice, the pin is not written on the card.
2) No one checked the signature anyway! Chip and pin is a mechanical/electronic device, so unavoidable. Where as a signature check can just be skipped.

Not actually better security, but making sure the checking was done, and the pass was not on the back of the card. 

[Gary]

The only two reasons for chip and pin IMHO were:
Not actually better security, but making sure the checking was done, and the pass was not on the back of the card. 

So RFD chip cards and NFC phones really have just removed that step again for small purchases

[MisterW]

The only two reasons for chip and pin IMHO were:

The REAL reason that chip & pin came in is to move the burden of proof for fraudulent/disputed transactions from the banks to us!. With signatures, it was the banks responsibility to proove that the signature was valid, difficult to do in practice!. With chip & pin they can now say 'the pin was used therefore it was you OR you haven't taken care not to divulge the pin'. We, therefore, have now to proove it wasn't us performing the transaction and that we haven't been careless with the pin, difficult to do in practice!.
Their systems are, of course, flawless

[Rik]

Are you sure you didn't mean floorless?

[pctech]

Bang on MisterW.

Same reason for Verified by Visa and Mastercard Securecode on the net, if either Visa or Mastercard's systems get hacked we really are in thick smelly brown stuff.

[Simon]

Curry? 

[pctech]

I don't you'd want to eat what I am describing 

[Rik]

No, but he might like to eat it before it arrives in that condition.

[Technical Ben]

The REAL reason that chip & pin came in is to move the burden of proof for fraudulent/disputed transactions from the banks to us!. With signatures, it was the banks responsibility to proove that the signature was valid, difficult to do in practice!. With chip & pin they can now say 'the pin was used therefore it was you OR you haven't taken care not to divulge the pin'. We, therefore, have now to proove it wasn't us performing the transaction and that we haven't been careless with the pin, difficult to do in practice!.
Their systems are, of course, flawless

Well, I was giving all parties involved the benefit of the doubt. Now it;s really just doubt all around. 

[Rik]

 

Not to mention confusion...