People Opposed to Contacless Payments - Why?

[Bletchleyite]

On some phones face unlock can't be used for payments as it's not secure enough. Apple face unlock is considered secure enough, most Android implementations aren't. So as I do use it, I have to angle my phone away from my face when turning it on if I am going to want to pay at that point.

No great issue, though.

 

[jon0844]

On some phones face unlock can't be used for payments as it's not secure enough. Apple face unlock is considered secure enough, most Android implementations aren't. So as I do use it, I have to angle my phone away from my face when turning it on if I am going to want to pay at that point.

No great issue, though.

My phone has the same 3D facial unlocking (with all the associated sensors as used by Apple) and is fine. But, yes, many face unlock features on budget phones is just using a camera and can be fooled by a photograph.

That said, I did some work with Xiaomi on face unlocking on their phones before they started to sell them here and we did a series of quite complex tests, with the camera used at multiple angles, different lighting (including strong front and back lighting), me having my eyes shut and so on. Took 4 hours!!

As long as some unlocking methods come with a warning that they're not perfectly secure, but good enough for 99% of situations, then I don't see a problem but would definitely use a fingerprint scan for authorising payments, or a PIN*.

* Some new phones force you to have a 6 digit PIN.

 

[Bletchleyite]

* Some new phones force you to have a 6 digit PIN.

That is really excessive, though 6-digit PINs can mostly be worked around, if you would prefer 4-digit, by repeating digits from your normal 4-digit one, i.e. either using 123412 or 123434 (digit positions, not those actual numbers!)

 

[jon0844]

That is really excessive, though 6-digit PINs can mostly be worked around, if you would prefer 4-digit, by repeating digits from your normal 4-digit one, i.e. either using 123412 or 123434 (digit positions, not those actual numbers!)

I couldn't possibly comment on whether I've just used two digits from the first four again - for security reasons.

Nothing is perfectly secure. If you had something that valuable on your phone (as against wanting to make a payment), I'm sure a thief could hold a knife to your throat and force you to unlock it there and then.

For almost everything else, like losing the phone on the tube or in a taxi, even a simple pattern is likely sufficient. As long as the SIM has a PIN lock so it can't be taken out of the phone, that's fine for most people.

I bet a lot of people don't even have any security because they find it a pain.

I should add that when I said you are forced to have a 6 digit PIN on some new phones, that's only if you enable the PIN. So you still have the option to have nothing, but that's madness IMO.

These days it wouldn't be someone wanting to make a call or view your photos, but rather have access to something like your email. Perhaps to try and change the login for your bank, and get a two-stage authentication code sent to the phone to authorise.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I bet a lot of people don't even have any security because they find it a pain.

I think that's the real gain from face unlock, because it really is zero-effort once set up. Even if it's a type where you could fool it with a printed-out photograph, if you find a phone in the street you have no idea whose photograph to use so it's still "secure enough". Guarding against someone accosting you with a knife, taking your phone and pointing it at you to unlock it is a bit of a niche when you consider that at knifepoint you're just going to enter your PIN for them anyway, as if you don't you're going to die.

 

[jon0844]

Hence for most people basic security is fine becuase the extreme scenario just isn't going to happen, ever.

But people need SOME form of security and are mad not to.

 

[Groningen]

Here is a much bigger issue going on. Big markets can (if you agree) to keep an eye on your bankaccount. And remember that every time you use your card the flag goes out by Mastercard, Visa or other player in the USA. Why not accept that you are the person in charge of your cash, money and backaccount.

 

[Meerkat]

Another good thing about contactless is that you don’t have to touch the keypads, which can be properly skanky, particularly in petrol stations.

 

[Groningen]

What are the rules for paying with card without entering the PIN? How many times per day and untill which amount?

 

[whhistle]

What are the rules for paying with card without entering the PIN? How many times per day and untill which amount?

Seems to be different at different banks.
I don't think I've ever had a pin requested when trying to use contactless. But then maybe that's because I don't make enough contactless payments (usually, I spend over £30, or the merchant doesn't accept contactless), so perhaps the "counter" gets reset fairly frequently on my account.

I also note many people forget to chip and pin a transaction when it's a new card.

No doubt there will be someone along shortly that is the opposite of me though.

 

[Strat-tastic]

I dislike contactless on security grounds and besides, I don't see life as a race. My bank doesn't force me to have one but my credit card company does. However, I did see the advantage recently when using the M6 Toll. But generally, no.

 

[jon0844]

You can still pay quickly and have a relaxed life. In fact, you'll have even more free time!

 

[Strat-tastic]

Hmm yeah, five seconds each time, what's that, 30 seconds a week. When I'm 120 I'll have earned enough free time to go on that skiing holiday I've always fancied

 

[Lucan]

Does anyone else see the irony of posters advocating contactless to save pushing 5 buttons now-and-then, and yet pressing hundreds of keys to make the posting?

 

[3rd rail land]

Does anyone else see the irony of posters advocating contactless to save pushing 5 buttons now-and-then, and yet pressing hundreds of keys to make the posting?

Yep, the irony is real. The real benefit is for retailers who have large numbers of customers such as fast food chains or cofee shops etc... They can get through the queues a bit quicker.

I don't have a contactless card. In December last year I was in an establishment with a bar buying a round and the bartender didn't seem to understand that he needed to turn the PDQ machine around so I can insert my card. He eventually got the message and I managed to pay.

 

[Groningen]

Oh those 5 seconds of entering your PIN is such a timesaver. As far as i know 3 times a day below 25 euro is universal in the Netherlands without using the PIN. By the way according to Wikipedia 1 can also pay with the chip in the smartphone.

 

[AndrewE]

Why not register your bank card and get rid of the oyster card? Few people seem to use the dedicated oyster cards anymore and you don't need to have credit sat in TFL's account. As long you register it first you can log in and check all recent journeys

Because you can't have a priv contactless card!

As a secondary point, it enables even finer grained tracking of people's activities. For example, despite the scandals, Facebook are still upping their game :-
https://techcrunch.com/2019/01/29/facebook-project-atlas/?guccounter=1

While this does not bother me so much, it does others, and while I think the value of this data is overblown, Facebook don't and will pay the banks for it :-
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/banks-data-sharing-facebook,37556.html

see https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/are-paper-tickets-really-going-to-disappear.177692/ post 9:

Who is watching you?
Start the Week
Andrew Marr discusses the threats to democracy from technology and populism with Shoshana Zuboff, John Thornhill and Ece Temelkuran.
which explained how Google and Facebook etc harvest data from what they observe you looking at (and then target the adverts which turned out to boost sales by orders of magnitude,) and how Pokemon Go made its money by taking a cut off the venues where its gizmo-finding spots were located.
They were discussing Shoshana Zuboff's book The Age of Surveillance Capitalism and I'm now certain that I am right in keeping my pay-as-you-go simple phone turned off from now on (unless I actually want to make or receive a call.)

 

[njamescouk]

contactless? no thanks. too easy to get ripped off.

 

[Bletchleyite]

contactless? no thanks. too easy to get ripped off.

Er, how?

 

[Esker-pades]

I've only ever used contactless once. That was when I was running very late and I only just had time to buy a ticket before jumping on a train. If I had gone through the "traditional" chip+pin method, I would have missed it.

Otherwise, no contactless. The act of having to push buttons is a barrier between me and buying stuff. It's far too easy to spend money, so putting small barriers is helpful in that reguard. It's the same reason I try to use cash. With physical money, I can keep track of what I spend. For example, if I take out £50 and it lasts me for the rest of the week, good. If I take out £50 and I'm back at a cash point a couple of days later, I know to cut back for a few days.

I also refuse to link my phone to my bank card. Apple or Google pay creates far too much of a privacy issue for me. In the same way I keep my location setting off on my mobile unless I have to use it and never save cards to any accounts I have with anyone. Google already knows far too much about me, and I don't want my banking transactions to be one of them.

 

[Bungle965]

I have found that my Amex card is more likely to start requiring a pin a couple of times after I have used contactless on it, in comparison I cannot remember the last time I had to use my PIN on my Monzo.
Sam

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have found that my Amex card is more likely to start requiring a pin a couple of times after I have used contactless on it, in comparison I cannot remember the last time I had to use my PIN on my Monzo.

Monzo uses all manner of other security measures, such as comparing the location of your phone to the location the card is used in, so may well have it set differently if that's possible for them to do.

 

[Lucan]

A few days ago I bought a £10 item at a builders merchants using Chip and PIN. The machine took about a minute to clear the purchase, displaying "Authorising ...". The guy serving said "It's always slow". Now here is a question for the contactless guys - If I'd used contactless, would there still have been that delay?

Now my experience is that in card transactions (my ones, using C&P) most of the time is not taken up by pressing buttons, it is taken up by the response time of the machine, presumably "getting authorisation". If contactless dispenses with this authorisation, it seems to me that could it also be dispensed with for C&P transactions under £30, at the merchant's risk (as with contactless).

Seems to me there is no technical reason for C&P transactions under £30 to go through slower than contactless ones, once the buttons have been pressed (which for me is about 2 seconds, if that). It would only be because of bank policy requiring authorisation even for small amounts that makes C&P otherwise slower : I therefore wonder if this is a conspiracy to discourage C&P for an artificial reason, deliberately making it slow for C&P users..

 

[jon0844]

I suggest some new entrants read this thread from the start, as talk about hearing about phones now being usable for payments, or contactless payments being dodgy, rather suggests we'd need to repeat everything already said again.

I have no desire to do that and doubt anyone else does either!

 

[Greg Read]

There was a bit on our local radio station today about credit and debit card fraud, over the past year it has gone through the roof, not so much stolen cards or online problems, although they were there, it seemed to mainly in shops, pubs and Petrol Stns etc, they also mentioned where someone with a small gadget can 'take' up to £30 a time from your card just by standing next to you ! I don't have a credit card, but do have debit, but admit use cash more than anything, getting too much automation/computer control, it will go 'pop' one day.

 

[GusB]

I suggest some new entrants read this thread from the start, as talk about hearing about phones now being usable for payments, or contactless payments being dodgy, rather suggests we'd need to repeat everything already said again.

I have no desire to do that and doubt anyone else does either!

Don't be silly. Nobody reads threads from the start. To suggest that anyone familiarises themselves with the ongoing discussion by going back at least two pages in the thread is clearly nonsense... We're all far too busy to bother.

My main objection to contactless payments is that it's too easy to spend. That, however, says more about my inability to budget than it does about the actual technology.

I prefer cash for some things, particularly nights out. I withdraw a certain amount from the bank, and that serves as the limit that I can spend. I still have my bank card with me, and I will go to an ATM to withdraw more under certain circumstances, but the act of going to the ATM does apply a psychological brake. But before contactless was a thing, some pubs and clubs started accepting card payments and giving cashback.

My bank account doesn't provide a contactless card. I can still use Google pay, though, and I see no difference to using it over the traditional paper slip and signature, or chip and pin where I would normally make a debit card transaction. I still need to stop and think about whether or not I can afford to do what I'm about to do!

 

[jon0844]

I agree that contactless makes it too easy to spend, but even chip and pin made things far quicker than the days of signing a bit of paper.

I don't find it much safer with cash though. I'll need to take out at least £10, or £20, even if I only need a few quid. Once a note is broken I seem to easily spend the rest!

The real answer is self control I suppose.

 

[Condor7]

I also refuse to link my phone to my bank card. Apple or Google pay creates far too much of a privacy issue for me. In the same way I keep my location setting off on my mobile unless I have to use it and never save cards to any accounts I have with anyone. Google already knows far too much about me, and I don't want my banking transactions to be one of them.

I often wonder why this bothers people so much! It’s not as if there is someone sitting there saying “oh look what he’s up to?” It’s stored on a computer along with millions if not billion of others. As mentioned by others this enables them to target adverts etc to us, but as I see it I am going to get targeted anyway, it may as well be for something I may find useful. On a practical note I find by using my store/loyalty cards they build up a picture of what I purchase and therefore the money off coupons I get are for things I actually want instead of random products I would never buy.

 

[jon0844]

Targeted advertising does seem preferable to random stuff.

 

[PeterC]

Normally I am comfortable using contactless but I will always use cash in a crowded bar for the same security reasons that I use Oyster on the tube.