Attacks/Breaches
1/29/2016
03:40 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Wendy's Could Become Test Case For New EMV Liability Rules

The fast food giant confirms it is investigating fraudulent activity involving payment cards used at some of its 6,500 locations.

If fast-food chain Wendy’s has suffered a data breach as reports this week suggest, the company could become a test case of how liability for such incidents is assessed in the midst of the ongoing migration of the US payments industry to the EMV smartcard standard.

Earlier this week, KrebsOnSecurity reported receiving information from banking sources about fraudulent activity involving credit and debit cards used recently at multiple Wendy’s locations. KrebsOnSecurity said that most of the initial reports were originally from financial institutions in the Midwest, but later banks on the East Coast began reporting similar fraudulent activity as well.

Wendy's spokesman Bob Bertini told Dark Reading that the company is currently investigating reports of unusual activity involving payment cards used at some of its locations. “We have been working with our payment industry contacts since recently learning of these reports and we have launched a comprehensive investigation with the help of cybersecurity experts to gather facts, while working to protect our customers,” he said in emailed comments.

Bertini said it is hard to know for sure what the scope of the incident might be given the ongoing nature of the investigation. “As always, in line with prudent personal financial management, we encourage our customers to be diligent in watching for unauthorized charges on their payment cards.”

Brian Engle, executive director of the Retail Cyber Intelligence Sharing Center (R-CISC) says such incidents affected retailers put the whole industry on alert.

“[There are] a couple of significant reasons for this,” he says. “How did the attack actually occur? Everyone is trying to learn if there’s a new form of malware, or if there’s been a [new variant]," he says. Depending on the number of cards affected, there also could be a “ripple effect” across the retail industry, he says.

And if the incident at Wendy's is a confirmed data breach, it could also test new breach liability rules that went into effect across the US payments industry last October.

MasterCard, Visa, American Express and the other major credit card companies had wanted US merchants—with certain exceptions—to move their payment systems from magnetic stripe technology to the new EMV standard by October 31 of last year. Merchants that are not EMV- compliant after that data face a higher liability risk if they are not compliant and suffer a data breach.

EMV, which is short for Europay MasterCard Visa, is the current standard on which hundreds of millions of smartcards that are in use around the world are based. EMV smartcards store card data in a small microprocessor embedded in the card rather than in a magnetic stripe. The cards are considered much harder to clone than magnetic stripe cards, and have been a standard in many countries for over a decade.

Basically, new EMV smartcards issued in the US will continue to work on old magnetic stripe-based point of sale systems for some time, even though the October deadline has passed. But if a smartcard that is swiped at an old POS system gets compromised, it is the merchant that will be held responsible for costs associated with recalling and reissuing new cards.

Similarly, if a card that ends up getting compromised is not EMV-capable, the issuing bank will bear the costs of replacing the card.

There are all sorts of caveats and conditions in between around how liability will be assessed. The sheer complexity of the payment chain will make that task even harder especially because many organizations are still only in the process of cutting over to EMV.

“If it turns out there was a breach and that Wendy’s had not fully deployed EMV, this will likely be the first time the post-EMV liability shift financial reimbursement processes will play out on a large scale,” says Jim Huguelet, principal managing partner at the Huguelet Group LLC, a consulting firm that specializes in retail security. Assuming that not all Wendy’s stores were EMV-ready, the liability would need to be assessed on a site-by-site, card-by-card basis, he says.

Wendy's spokesman Bertini did not respond to questions about the food chain's EMV status, so it is not clear if the company has migrated to the new technology, is in the process of doing so, or has yet to begin.

If Wendy's indeed was breached, it would be somewhat ironic considering some of the comments the company’s vice president and treasurer Gavin Waugh made at a conference three year ago when discussing the fast food chain’s stance on the need to migrate to EMV.

“Our actual fraud rate is so small it’s hardly worth mentioning,” Digital Transactions had quoted Waugh, who was then vice treasurer, as saying.  “[EMV] doesn’t move the needle that much. Even if we pay the fraud liability, it’s a whole lot cheaper than putting in [EMV] terminals,” Waugh reportedly said.

--Kelly Jackson Higgins contributed to this report.

Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a Senior Editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
jc01480
50%
50%
jc01480,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/3/2016 | 11:12:57 PM
I was one of them...
I am a security professional working at one of the greatest organizations there are. It came as a surprise to me one day when I received an email saying my card had been compromised and a new one was being issued. Within two days I had another (yes, the first one had a chip) EMV card. I haven't verified with my bank as to exactly where this card was compromised, but I speculate it was at Wendy's as my wife and I always ate there on the run like we do. Again, not certain it was them and I'll find out in due course. But so far there is no word from the bank about being charged for the replacement and no indications any money was fraudulently deducted from my account. I give kudos to my financial institution for making me aware and taking measures to cancel the old one while a new one was in my mailbox. So far, my life has not been affected whatsoever by this incident and I hope that the retail industry will adopt the technology required to safeguard retail transactions in lieu of risk mitigation by absorbing the losses. Eventually that risk mitigation will be a red flag to come and get it. And it does speak to the idea of a company's ethics when they are willing to implement this type of behavior because the loss of your PII still wouldn't cost them as much as implementing the technology to prevent it would. Should it be their decision? Just to save them some money? Hopefully this isn't the case for all persons affected. Thanks for reading and happy hunting!
Christian Bryant
100%
0%
Christian Bryant,
User Rank: Ninja
1/30/2016 | 7:21:47 PM
Re: EMV. Bah.
Past EMV hacks include man-in-the-middle attacks via programming a second chip (FUN card) to accept any PIN entry.  You solder that chip to the card's original chip. This increases the thickness of the chip from 0.4mm to 0.7mm.  This made insertion into a PoS possible (Ars Technia, 2015; researchers Houda Ferradi, Rémi Géraud, David Naccache, and Assia Tria).  Hackers took advantage of PIN authentication at the time being decoupled from transaction verification on EMV cards in Europe.  I'm not up-to-date on how much of this is still possible, but I know it annoys me (the chip) and many are still opposing the idea EMV is inherently safer.
dewald
100%
0%
dewald,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/30/2016 | 1:58:16 PM
Re: EMV. Bah.
"Particularly annoying is the liability shift having come so soon in this process.".  Visa announced the shift in Summer 2011.  Four years is too "soon"?
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
1/30/2016 | 12:06:26 PM
EMV. Bah.
Particularly because studies have indicated that EMV is not inherently safer than magnetic-stripe cards (it simply has different vulnerabilities that are exploited in different ways), and that it has been harder for some defrauded customers to be made whole because credit card companies and merchants automatically assume that EMV is impervious, I am pretty annoyed about EMV being foisted upon us by Visa et al. in the US.

Particularly annoying is the liability shift having come so soon in this process.  The credit-card companies are the ones who foisted this upon us, and they're the ones with the deeper pockets.  I think there was poor policy planning here.
5 Reasons the Cybersecurity Labor Shortfall Won't End Soon
Steve Morgan, Founder & CEO, Cybersecurity Ventures,  12/11/2017
Oracle Product Rollout Underscores Need for Trust in the Cloud
Kelly Sheridan, Associate Editor, Dark Reading,  12/11/2017
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: Gee, these virtual reality goggles work great!!! 
Current Issue
The Year in Security: 2017
A look at the biggest news stories (so far) of 2017 that shaped the cybersecurity landscape -- from Russian hacking, ransomware's coming-out party, and voting machine vulnerabilities to the massive data breach of credit-monitoring firm Equifax.
Flash Poll
The State of Ransomware
The State of Ransomware
Ransomware has become one of the most prevalent new cybersecurity threats faced by today's enterprises. This new report from Dark Reading includes feedback from IT and IT security professionals about their organization's ransomware experiences, defense plans, and malware challenges. Find out what they had to say!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-0290
Published: 2017-05-09
NScript in mpengine in Microsoft Malware Protection Engine with Engine Version before 1.1.13704.0, as used in Windows Defender and other products, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (type confusion and application crash) via crafted JavaScript code within ...

CVE-2016-10369
Published: 2017-05-08
unixsocket.c in lxterminal through 0.3.0 insecurely uses /tmp for a socket file, allowing a local user to cause a denial of service (preventing terminal launch), or possibly have other impact (bypassing terminal access control).

CVE-2016-8202
Published: 2017-05-08
A privilege escalation vulnerability in Brocade Fibre Channel SAN products running Brocade Fabric OS (FOS) releases earlier than v7.4.1d and v8.0.1b could allow an authenticated attacker to elevate the privileges of user accounts accessing the system via command line interface. With affected version...

CVE-2016-8209
Published: 2017-05-08
Improper checks for unusual or exceptional conditions in Brocade NetIron 05.8.00 and later releases up to and including 06.1.00, when the Management Module is continuously scanned on port 22, may allow attackers to cause a denial of service (crash and reload) of the management module.

CVE-2017-0890
Published: 2017-05-08
Nextcloud Server before 11.0.3 is vulnerable to an inadequate escaping leading to a XSS vulnerability in the search module. To be exploitable a user has to write or paste malicious content into the search dialogue.