It's depressing to see the US still treating EMV cards like a strange exotic novelty while Europe is already upgrading those again and moving to NFC-enabled cards after EMV has worked without any major issues for <i>20 years</i>.<p>For small, repeated transactions you just hold the card to the reader and are done in 1-3 seconds. The first transaction on each reader and random transactions every 20-50$ (and all transactions above a $20 limit) will require chip+PIN verification, which seems to cut down fraudulent transactions for now.
I'm pretty sure the article has it completely backwards. If a retailer has a chip reading terminal, they aren't responsible for fraud. It incentivizes retailers to update their hardware, or face shouldering the fraud risk for chip enabled cards that they end up swiping.
I guess I'm not surprised by the lack of EMV capable card readers I still see in the US. Having worked in this space in the past, I am always checking out the payment terminals at the stored I visit. I've even seen some larger merchants that I frequent upgrade their PIN pads recently but to non-EMV capable models.<p>If the big-box stores aren't getting it done there is little hope for the mom & pop type stores who will be forced to either stop taking cards or accept the liability for fraud since it's unlikely the acquiring banks will want to hold the bag for their customers once the card brands pass it downstream.
EMV cards are a big improvement for security but the UX is a step big back from mag swipes. Here's an example from a recent stop at the ATM.<p>* I dipped my card and then was told to reinsert the card and leave it in for the duration of the transaction. I wonder how long it will take for me to insert/leave by default instead of dipping.<p>* The machine mechanically locked my card into the slot until I had taken my cash, I wonder how more frequently people are going to leave their cards in the ATM now. Also, what happens if the power goes out or the machine crashes?<p>* It seems that some EMV cards have multiple "Applications" on them and it's impossible to tell which one should be used in which context. When I inserted my card, the ATM presented me with a menu asking be to select between "US DEBT" and "VISA DEBT" I had no idea which one to choose, and had to pick one, try to make a withdrawal, fail, and then choose the other one to take out cash. I don't remember which one worked, and if that's the one I should use in other locations.
It seems to take a couple of extra seconds to process the transaction, compared to a swipe. I'm surprised that this bothers me so much. I might use Apple Pay more often if this doesn't get improved.
So there is zero incentive to replace a non-emv reader. Once you have to NOT use the stripe.<p>It is a big problem for stores. Credit cards have both so stores have to force only those transactions to the EMV.<p>The machines need to be smart enough to figure out if the card has both and not allow the stripe transaction.
Yep had chips for decades already in Europe (it's not called "EMV" here though, just a chip afaik).<p>I don't know who is liable in Europe for fraud (shop or bank), but, about the article, I find it odd, the chips should be more secure, so why are banks giving the responsibility of fraud to merchants while not for the insecure magstripes? The banks should be able to trust their own chips right?