Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Endpoint

8/15/2016
05:00 PM
Dark Reading
Dark Reading
Products and Releases
50%
50%

US Payments Forum Publishes Update to Payment Networks Minimum Requirements for US EMV Chip Deployment

PRINCETON JUNCTION, N.J., August 11, 2016 – As U.S. issuers, merchants, acquirers and processors continue their migrations to EMV chip technology for more secure payments, many stakeholders may ask: “What is the least complex way to deploy chip for my organization?” To help merchants and acquirers develop their strategies for implementation, payment network members of the U.S. Payments Forum (formerly the EMV Migration Forum) have updated the guide outlining their minimum requirements for chip deployment, including changes to incorporate requirements for the recently announced faster EMV solutions from American Express, Discover, MasterCard and Visa.

The EMV Minimum Requirements Matrix, an easy-to-use Excel document, can be downloaded at http://www.emv-connection.com/minimum-emv-chip-card-and-terminal-requirements-u-s/.  

The EMV Minimum Requirements Matrix is intended for U.S. issuers, merchants, acquirers, processors and vendors who are planning deployments of EMV chip programs in the U.S. Its primary goal is to help stakeholders understand the minimum requirements of chip deployment for the payment networks reflected in the document. The document provides a tool for stakeholders to use as a baseline from which they can work with their partners to determine their best strategy to meet implementation requirements.

“Having the most current minimum requirements for chip implementation compiled in one place provides a starting point for merchants and acquirers in their chip deployments, whether they plan to implement all of the features or choose a simpler deployment such as the new faster EMV specifications,” said Randy Vanderhoof, director of the U.S. Payments Forum. “This resource is just one example of how the U.S. Payments Forum and its members will continue to provide guidance on the most critical aspects of the chip migration.”

The matrix focuses on the minimum card and terminal requirements for payment networks Accel, American Express, Armed Forces Financial Network (AFFN), China UnionPay, Discover, Jeanie, MasterCard, NYCE, PULSE, SHAZAM, STAR and Visa for the U.S. market. These participants have documented their respective minimum card and terminal configurations for EMV compliance. While the document addresses minimum requirements, decisions regarding deployment of chip technology will differ by stakeholder and involve a balancing of considerations, such as business needs and preferences, deployment timing, complexity and associated initial and future costs.

In addition to the EMV Minimum Requirements Matrix, the U.S. Payments Forum has a variety of resources for all stakeholders across the payments industry that are interested in furthering their education and understanding of EMV chip technology in the U.S. Resources including the infographic, “EMV Chip Cards: The Future of Payments,” the “EMV 101: Fundamentals of EMV Chip Payments” webinar and the EMV Connection Press Room are available at www.emv-connection.com.

 

About the U.S. Payments Forum
The U.S. Payments Forum, formerly the EMV Migration Forum, is a cross-industry body focused on supporting the introduction and implementation of new and emerging technologies that protect the security of, and enhance opportunities for payment transactions within the U.S. The Forum is the only non-profit organization whose membership includes the whole payments ecosystem, ensuring that all stakeholders have the opportunity to coordinate, cooperate on, and have a voice in the future of the U.S. payments industry.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Data Privacy Protections for the Most Vulnerable -- Children
Dimitri Sirota, Founder & CEO of BigID,  10/17/2019
Sodinokibi Ransomware: Where Attackers' Money Goes
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  10/15/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
2019 Online Malware and Threats
2019 Online Malware and Threats
As cyberattacks become more frequent and more sophisticated, enterprise security teams are under unprecedented pressure to respond. Is your organization ready?
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-18214
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-19
The Video_Converter app 0.1.0 for Nextcloud allows denial of service (CPU and memory consumption) via multiple concurrent conversions because many FFmpeg processes may be running at once. (The workload is not queued for serial execution.)
CVE-2019-18202
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-19
Information Disclosure is possible on WAGO Series PFC100 and PFC200 devices before FW12 due to improper access control. A remote attacker can check for the existence of paths and file names via crafted HTTP requests.
CVE-2019-18209
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-19
templates/pad.html in Etherpad-Lite 1.7.5 has XSS when the browser does not encode the path of the URL, as demonstrated by Internet Explorer.
CVE-2019-18198
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-18
In the Linux kernel before 5.3.4, a reference count usage error in the fib6_rule_suppress() function in the fib6 suppression feature of net/ipv6/fib6_rules.c, when handling the FIB_LOOKUP_NOREF flag, can be exploited by a local attacker to corrupt memory, aka CID-ca7a03c41753.
CVE-2019-18197
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-18
In xsltCopyText in transform.c in libxslt 1.1.33, a pointer variable isn't reset under certain circumstances. If the relevant memory area happened to be freed and reused in a certain way, a bounds check could fail and memory outside a buffer could be written to, or uninitialized data could be disclo...