backtop


Print 74 comment(s) - last by Rukkian.. on Feb 6 at 1:31 PM


  (Source: wikimedia.org)
Smartcards have tiny microprocessor chips instead of magnetic strips

Target was the victim of a major security breach over the holiday season last year, and as a result, the retail chain is calling for the implementation of smartcards. 

John J. Mulligan, chief financial officer and executive vice president for Target, wrote his company's case for smartcards in The Hill this week, saying that the business community in the U.S. needs to embrace the new technology together.

Smartcards, unlike current credit and debit cards used in the U.S., have a tiny microprocessor chip that encrypts the user's personal data shared with the merchant's sales terminals. Traditional credit and debit cards have a magnetic strip instead, which hold's the user's information, but can clearly be compromised. If a smartcard number is stolen, it's useless without the microchip. 

To show Target's dedication to the smartcard cause, it's speeding up its goal of bringing its REDcard smartcards to all Target stores by early 2015 -- six months earlier than its previous goal. The chain is making a $100 million investment in the technology to accomplish this goal.  

Mulligan also noted that the requirement of a four-digit PIN number with all smartcard transactions could further protect customer information. 


[SOURCE: ABC News]

Target said other countries like Canada and the United Kingdom have already deployed smartcards, and that cases of lost or stolen cards have decreased since they've done so. However, the U.S. is slow to adopt the technology because the cards are expensive to produce, and merchants, issuers, banks and the networks haven't found a way to share the costs. 
 
"The reported attacks on Target and Neiman Marcus underline the need to do more," said Mulligan. "At Target, we know we have work to do. For years, we made significant investments in security. We had multiple layers of protection in place. But we still came under attack by sophisticated, global criminals. We will do everything we can to further strengthen Target's systems."
 
Target attempted to deploy chip-enabled cards around 10 years ago, but since it was the only retailer to do so on that scale, it failed. The cards were too expensive to produce, and since Target was the only one with such a card, customers couldn't use it elsewhere, making it inconvenient and a bit confusing. 
 
Target's breach ran from November 27 through December 15, where customer information like their names, card numbers, expiration dates and CVV verification codes were compromised. Around 40 million customers had their credit cards compromised and 70 million had their customer records stolen.

Source: The Hill



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/4/2014 3:20:58 PM , Rating: 1
...the card itself isn't going to make any difference, if what's happening is hackers getting into the retailer's database and pulling data that they'd stored there.




RE: Ummm...
By retrospooty on 2/4/2014 3:30:31 PM , Rating: 5
The idea is that you would need the card, chip and most importantly PIN to purchase anything, so if they got the DB they still couldn't buy anything with it.


RE: Ummm...
By DNAgent on 2/4/14, Rating: 0
RE: Ummm...
By retrospooty on 2/4/2014 3:39:47 PM , Rating: 4
Actually, it wouldn't be worldwide, we are already behind in the US.

Any waiter at a restaurant can take your card info when you pay. Any order entry clerk at any online order fulfillment can get your code.


RE: Ummm...
By imaheadcase on 2/4/2014 4:18:55 PM , Rating: 3
The difference is its insured for such things so not a huge deal.

None of the smart cards can prevent the theft of using it online. Not only is target wasting its 100million investment, its wasting it on the wrong technology needed.


RE: Ummm...
By lagomorpha on 2/5/2014 1:26:22 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
None of the smart cards can prevent the theft of using it online


Here's an idea: put a USB port on the smart card. Then when you want to buy something online instead of typing in your card number you plug the card into a USB port, the credit card company sends a message to your computer which gets signed by the card which verifies you have your actual card and activates the sale.

That way you can make online transactions without your card's information ever leaving the card itself.


RE: Ummm...
By Cargan Ricman on 2/5/2014 2:03:57 AM , Rating: 2
Chip+Pin is a 100% effective defense against the evil waiter attack.


RE: Ummm...
By krotchy on 2/4/2014 3:41:56 PM , Rating: 5
If you have traveled internationally in the last 5 years you would realize that the US is pretty much one of the last Countries still using the magnetic stripe on credit cards.

Last time I was in the UK, Mexico, Holland and a few other countries, they could only process my swipe card by pulling out a old dusty processor from the back room. Everyone had a Chip+Pin card.


RE: Ummm...
By RapidDissent on 2/4/2014 4:10:26 PM , Rating: 2
This is pathetic considering I've been to stores which still use imprinters and carbon sales slips. With the taxes phone lines pay to proliferate telephone infrastructure to rural America, there is ZERO reason not to be using a network enabled card reader in the 21st century.


RE: Ummm...
By retrospooty on 2/4/2014 5:31:41 PM , Rating: 2
"Last time I was in the UK, Mexico, Holland and a few other countries, they could only process my swipe card by pulling out a old dusty processor from the back room. Everyone had a Chip+Pin card."

Exactly... We are really behind here in the US. Not that any system is 100% foolproof, but in the US, any waiter at any restaurant can write down your info when they take your card to pay and go buy anything with it...


RE: Ummm...
By Murloc on 2/5/2014 7:30:25 AM , Rating: 2
I've never seen a credit card without the chip in my life.

In the rest of the world it's everywhere, the magnetic strip-only cards are alive only in the US.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/4/2014 3:38:09 PM , Rating: 1
...what about online purchases, which is pretty much the way all credit card fraud happens?

Chip or not in your card doesn't matter, since you don't swipe or otherwise authenticate your card when making an online purchase.

The fault is Target's for storing all that data...and then letting a hacker steal it. This is just them trying to deflect attention - because the card isn't the problem, and switching to smartcards wouldn't fix this problem.


RE: Ummm...
By inighthawki on 2/4/2014 5:40:35 PM , Rating: 2
You would need a smart card reader. They are relatively cheap, and by all standards not a big deal to have to buy in order to make an online purchase. Most tech companies already use a similar system for access remote resources from home, for example.


RE: Ummm...
By Solandri on 2/5/2014 3:31:47 AM , Rating: 4
You can buy a smart card reader. Or the card issuers can get off their lazy bums and let you generate single-use card numbers when logged into your online account. As I said before, the problem is the card issuers don't pay for fraud (the merchant does), so they have done almost nothing to improve credit card security because it just represents added cost to them for no benefit.


RE: Ummm...
By drlumen on 2/4/2014 6:01:24 PM , Rating: 2
The hackers didn't get into some CC database within Target. They used an exploit against the card readers. How the hackers got such detailed info about the card readers is what makes me really curious.

I too would like to blame target but from what I have read it was a fairly elaborate and sophisticated hack.

Like others have said, with the card+pin the card data would be useless - regardless of how the data was obtained.


RE: Ummm...
By tayb on 2/5/2014 11:19:22 AM , Rating: 4
I was the victim of fraud on my card last night. I just moved across the country and Amex believed that there was a device placed over the card reader at the pump and they just printed a new card later that day. They went on a shopping spree at QT grocery stores and Amex caught it within about half an hour.

Smart cards would have prevented this from happening.

If banks would get off of their lazy asses they would let you log in to your bank account online, generate a one time use card number, and authenticate it for that single transaction. Then that card number would be meaningless after that.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 12:07:21 PM , Rating: 3
What has your comment got to do with my comment, which started off with:

quote:
...what about online purchases, which is pretty much the way all credit card fraud happens?


It's mind-boggling how there's this sea of illiterate people trying to tell me how smartcards help at a physical POS...when I've never, not once, referred to anything other than online sales.

The whole lot of you need to brush up on your ESL skills.


RE: Ummm...
By Rukkian on 2/5/2014 1:20:50 PM , Rating: 2
Online purchases are easy, just get a smart card reader, and have sites require them. They are very cheap, and many laptops have (at least as an option). It could just become standard on any computing device you buy.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 2:30:46 PM , Rating: 2
The number of Americans who will purchase a smart card reader...and then carry it around at all times in case they want to purchase something online when they're not at home: 0.

I can't believe there are people like you even saying something this stupid. There is no chance - not the slightest, slimmest chance - that you're going to convince people that they need to buy card readers for their PCs, tablets, and smartphones in order to buy things online.

No. Chance.


RE: Ummm...
By lagomorpha on 2/5/2014 2:50:47 PM , Rating: 2
There are already smart cards in microSD format. Why not just use that as a credit card? You could even have a credit card shaped case to store it in. If you want to make a purchase on your computer/phone just insert the microSD card.

Your phone doesn't have a microSD port? Then you bought the wrong kind of phone.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 2:55:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Your phone doesn't have a microSD port? Then you bought the wrong kind of phone.


Yes.

But aside from that blindingly-obvious fact, giving people microSD CCs still isn't going to help. The vast majority of cellphones have the microSD slot under the battery cover...so you basically have to disassemble your phone, take out your existing SD card with all your stuff on it, put in your SD CC, put the phone back together, go online, shop, make your purchase, then take the phone apart again, take the SD CC out, put your regular SD card back in, and reassemble the phone again.

Not happening. And while it would be infinitely easier for the rare phones that have an externally-accessible SD slot, I think you'd firstly be amazed how many normal cell phone users haven't got the slightest clue what a microSD card is...or whether or not their phone supports one. And also how easy it would be to lose a microSD card that you're constantly swapping in and out of your phone. I would reckon it would be really easy to get that tiny little bit of plastic stolen too...and at this point you've made the problem worse, not better.


RE: Ummm...
By lagomorpha on 2/5/2014 3:27:53 PM , Rating: 2
You only have to remove the smart card from your phone if you're really paranoid. Otherwise you leave it in the phone and need to activate it with a pin and fraud only happens when your card is in your phone and your phone is completely owned which is still a lot better security than a card with a number printed on it.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 3:32:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You only have to remove the smart card from your phone if you're really paranoid.


...or if you actually wanted access to your *stuff*. You know...on your microSD card.

Doesn't help.


RE: Ummm...
By lagomorpha on 2/5/2014 4:31:57 PM , Rating: 2
I suppose there is nothing preventing a smart card that also functioned as a conventional microSD card. Eye-fi has been making SD cards that also have 802.11 build in for years.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 8:56:45 PM , Rating: 2
All that does is potentially increase the value of that SD card to thieves...on the off chance you're dumb enough to save something else on that card that's useful to them, like personal information.

I'm sorry...but it's just not a great idea to make microSD sized CC cards.

Cleaning up the problems on the back end of the system, like vendor databases, is a vastly easier and better option.

Although it would be really funny seeing all iThing owners incapable of making online purchases.


RE: Ummm...
By lagomorpha on 2/6/2014 7:54:44 AM , Rating: 2
The thing is, if the card stays in your phone thieves can't tell which phones have SD cards in them and which don't. And it would be trivial to setup the system to automatically revoke your card's certificate if your phone is stolen. Personal information is as likely to be stored on a phone as on the card so that's not a new issue.

quote:
Although it would be really funny seeing all iThing owners incapable of making online purchases.


That alone would be worth implementing the system.

The trouble with cleaning up the back end of the system is that it would have to happen at all vendors, and there would always be vendors with idiotic security practices and customers have no way of auditing them. Maybe you could do that if there was some sort of organisation that went around auditing vendor database security but that would end up costing more than moving to a smart card system.


RE: Ummm...
By senecarr on 2/6/2014 11:26:17 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
...what about online purchases, which is pretty much the way all credit card fraud happens?

Except, it isn't. Most instances of credit card theft are still, in fact, done physically. Almost any legitimate business uses encryption, meaning the barrier to entry to reading the information is fairly high, even with easy crackers. The only barrier to someone in person stealing your card number is the time it takes to copy or memorize the card you handed them - the whole thing is plain text.


RE: Ummm...
By arazok on 2/4/2014 3:40:33 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. The banks have been rolling these out for the past 5 years in Canada, and as far as I know they are impossible to hack without the PIN, which the retailer never gets their hands on.

The chip is useless for online transactions, so any theft of your information would limit them to online purchases. It’s saved the banks billions in prevented debit card fraud.

Good luck to you guys getting those rolled out. In Canada we have major 5 banks, so it was easy for them to get together and roll out this technology. The US has 3,000 banks. I can’t fathom how they will implement this in a timely manner.


RE: Ummm...
By Reclaimer77 on 2/4/2014 3:51:59 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The banks have been rolling these out for the past 5 years in Canada


Well that settles it. Now we KNOW they're a bad idea :)


RE: Ummm...
By arazok on 2/4/2014 4:03:38 PM , Rating: 5
Look, we’re sorry about Justin Beiber already. We didn’t know.


RE: Ummm...
By Reclaimer77 on 2/4/2014 4:10:15 PM , Rating: 3
Pffft you're still on making penance for Celiene Dion! lol :P


RE: Ummm...
By retrospooty on 2/4/2014 5:47:31 PM , Rating: 2
LOL... OK, but Kristen Kruek, Neve Campbell, Nina Dobrev and Shay Mitchell... they can be forgiven.

https://www.google.com/search?q=famous+canadian+ac...


RE: Ummm...
By Pneumothorax on 2/4/2014 7:02:37 PM , Rating: 2
Don't forget Cylon #6. Dang she's hot.


RE: Ummm...
By Spookster on 2/4/2014 4:12:41 PM , Rating: 2
At least you keep us entertained with that Mayor Rob Ford. Too bad Chris Farley is dead because he would be a great choice to portray him in any movies in the works.


RE: Ummm...
By arazok on 2/5/2014 9:26:40 AM , Rating: 2
RE: Ummm...
By Spookster on 2/4/2014 4:18:30 PM , Rating: 2
We're up to 247,000 signatures to send Justin back to you.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/deport-j...


RE: Ummm...
By hpglow on 2/4/2014 5:21:11 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure once the irs sees how much the B payes in taxes he won't be going anywhere.


RE: Ummm...
By ritualm on 2/4/2014 6:18:35 PM , Rating: 2
I'd like to see Bieber's Canadian citizenship revoked for the lulz. Seriously though, dude's plenty old enough to drink and yet he acts like a Harvard freshman jock.


RE: Ummm...
By DanNeely on 2/4/2014 3:52:53 PM , Rating: 2
What Target's doing probably is the best way to bring it forward. If a few other major retailers also upgrade their card readers, hopefully without having to get epically pwned first, they'll collectively overcome a large chunk of the chicken/egg problem by providing a widespread network that can use the new form of card.


RE: Ummm...
By imaheadcase on 2/4/2014 4:21:26 PM , Rating: 1
They are useless for online purchases? Then they are useless for consumers.. how else would you buy things online..

Most people my age buy majority of stuff online anymore.


RE: Ummm...
By ritualm on 2/4/2014 6:13:02 PM , Rating: 2
Electronics and vacation purchases maybe, but I don't buy groceries and order pizza online. I'm going to a physical store, where I still have the option to pay with cash.


RE: Ummm...
By Cargan Ricman on 2/5/2014 2:00:30 AM , Rating: 2
Chip+Pin is far more secure than cash.


RE: Ummm...
By Cargan Ricman on 2/5/2014 1:59:28 AM , Rating: 2
All you have to do to use them for online transactions is to just buy a usb smartcard reader for your computer (they're cheap) and bam, now you can use your smartcard to purchase goods online. What's so hard about that?


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 10:59:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What's so hard about that?


The fact that it has to be done at all. Except for a few outliers, no one will do that.


RE: Ummm...
By synapse46 on 2/4/2014 4:28:55 PM , Rating: 2
So this solution prevents fraud, but not a large scale data breach?


RE: Ummm...
By Mizerable on 2/4/2014 5:07:56 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think you understand the concept.

A smart chip is a tamper-proof way to store a private key in a small computer that also can calculate ciphers.

Any authentication would have the store's card reader submit a key to the smart chip so that the smart chip's corresponding secret key is NEVER stored or revealed. This is the basis of 2-factor authentication. As long as you retain physical control of the smart chip nobody can use the identity associated with the card.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/4/14, Rating: 0
RE: Ummm...
By Cargan Ricman on 2/5/2014 1:41:51 AM , Rating: 2
Dude, just buy a friggin usb smartcard reader for your computer (they're cheap) and bam, now you can use the smartcard to purchase goods online. What's so hard about that?


RE: Ummm...
By Cargan Ricman on 2/5/2014 1:54:08 AM , Rating: 2
Actually the problem "is" that CC's are insecure in and of themselves.

If everyone was using Chip+Pin the thieves could steal or hack all the data they want, but they still can't make a purchase with your card unless they get physical control of it.


RE: Ummm...
By Solandri on 2/5/2014 3:51:19 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
The problem in this case isn't that the credit cards are insecure, in and of themselves - it's that Target stored as$loads of customer data, along with credit card data, and then got hacked and gave all that data away.

It is illegal for a merchant to store your credit card number without your authorization. The cards which were compromised in the card reader hack had the numbers stolen at the moment the transaction was being made. Target didn't store anything that wasn't necessary to complete the transaction. The cards which were compromised in the database hack were stored with the cardholder's permission (they told the Target website to save the card number to make future purchases easier).

quote:
Which has nothing to do with the cards - smart or otherwise.

Please try to understand how this technology works. Without the physical smart chip itself, anything Target stores in their database is useless for completing a new purchase transaction.

The chip contains a private key from a private/public key pair. When you make the transaction, the transaction data is sent to the chip which encodes it with the private key. That encoded data is then sent to the credit card processor who has the corresponding public key. Only a transaction encoded by that private key can be decoded by that public key. If you try to fake the transaction with a different key, decoding it with the public key produces gobbledygook.

In other words, you must have the physical card in your possession to complete the transaction. None of this nonsense we have today where anyone who takes a picture of, memorizes, copies, writes down, or steals the card number has done the same thing as stealing your physical card.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 11:05:19 AM , Rating: 1
What is with you people constantly ignoring the one and only argument I'm making, which is that the smart card chip is USELESS for online purchases?

Stop talking about smart card readers and their encryption at a retail POS terminal. That is NOT what is being discussed.

I am talking about the irrefutable fact that the smartcard chip does NOTHING for you on online purchases - which is how the VAST majority of CC fraud happens.

And for the moron who keeps saying "dude, just buy a USB card reader for online purchases - how hard is that?" First of all, please STFU and GTFO. Secondly, NO ONE is going to do that. You could probably count the number of Americans willing to buy a USB card reader, and then carry it around with them in case they want to buy something off their laptop (or tablet or whatever) at some point when they're not at home, on ONE HAND.

If you try to tell 300 million Americans that they all have to buy and keep with them a USB card reader so they can buy crap on Amazon.com, you will just get laughed at. Not happening.

And yes, the retailers can't store your card data without your consent. The problem there is that everyone consents...because it's convenient to do so. The only way that would change is if you actually made it illegal for vendors to store your CC data.

Which would also irritate vast numbers of Americans, who'd be horribly inconvenienced by having to type their CC numbers in every time...but it would work. As opposed to forcing USB card readers down everyone's throats...which doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of working.


RE: Ummm...
By Rukkian on 2/5/2014 1:29:08 PM , Rating: 2
Just saying it is not possible does not make it true. All online companies would have to do is give the choice. Right now, you usually have payment options - 1. CC, 2. Paypal, 3. financing, etc. They could just add one more option of smartcard (requires reader). If the vendors explain it is more secure, most people would have no problem getting one. Places like Amazon could even send one out with their branding on it to people for free (or minimal cost), and have it be advertising (reminding users to use Amazon).

There is nothing about this that is impossible, no matter how much you want it to be.


RE: Ummm...
By tecknurd on 2/5/2014 2:07:01 PM , Rating: 2
Smartcards can easily be hacked on the user's side, so still online shopping is just as secure it once was. Also when there are people using Mac OS, Windows, and Linux, making smartcard readers for users will be a problem for support and security. Other devices like tablets and smartphones will increase the complexity of support and security. It just will not happen. A better way is setup a kiosk for people to buy products online instead going to the physical store. Going to a kiosk sometimes is just as inconvenient as going to the physical store. Something weird like owning a kiosk to be installed in homes could be done for just buying products online and use a computer to browse products.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 2:32:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If the vendors explain it is more secure, most people would have no problem getting one


No one would get one. Not beyond a statistical rounding error.

Not a chance in hell. I have no idea WTF you're smoking, but it must be good sh1t.


RE: Ummm...
By Nutzo on 2/5/2014 2:00:11 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
What is with you people constantly ignoring the one and only argument I'm making, which is that the smart card chip is USELESS for online purchases?


So lets solve the 1st problem (when you buy something at a store) with the smart card chip.

Then lets come up with a solution for online purchases.
Either a USB reader for your computer to check the smart card, or you have to log into your credit cards web site and request a single use number.

That should eliminate most the problems.

Of course the crooks will adapt. They will have to result to stealing cards or passwords which will be harder.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 2:33:40 PM , Rating: 2
Your "1st problem" isn't the first problem...at least, not in any rational sense. The vast majority of CC theft problems are purely online, and often a result of a vendor's database getting hacked.

Problems at the POS are virtually non-existant compared to online.

I see no point at all in even wasting any time on POS problems vs. online. Fix the gaping head wound before you worry about that hangnail.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 2:37:31 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, and as for:

quote:
Then lets come up with a solution for online purchases. Either a USB reader for your computer to check the smart card, or you have to log into your credit cards web site and request a single use number.


1. There's no chance in hell you're going to convince America to all buy USB card readers...and then carry them around at all times in the event they want to buy something while they're not at home. The sheer absurdity of even saying such a thing is mind-boggling. The chance that you're going to get people to accept, and do, such a thing on any vaguely valid scale is precisely zero.

2. Pretty much the same with forcing you to log into your CC site before every purchase and get a one-time code. It's just simply too hard for Americans to deal with. They'll just take their business to vendors who don't force that. And if all vendors online required that action, in all honesty it would probably drive people from online shopping back to B&M.

The better option is to make it illegal for all vendors to store CC data in the first place. That way it's not in their database for hackers to steal anyway. Any remaining online fraud would then have to be individual, one-off things that can be easily managed otherwise.


RE: Ummm...
By Rukkian on 2/5/2014 4:45:43 PM , Rating: 2
How often do people need to purchase online while on the go? You keep throwing more hurdles just because for some reason you are dead set there is no way something new would work.

I would be willing to bet that a large % of online purchases are at home. If you are out and about, why not just go to the store. There could probably be solutions for when somebody has to go mobile (maybe just use the old-fashioned CC #), even if it is not-secure. You would still be able to make a large % of online purchases more secure.

You also talk about how issues like this don't happen in store, but that is absolutely false, as the Target breach (there were actually 2), one was stealing the swipes at the store, which would be completely removed from the equation with a smartcard.

Put a smart card reader (have both the CC and smart card and give people a choice) for both online and in store, and it make things much more secure. Will it be foolproof? Absolutely not, but nothing is.

There will be many people who will never use an optional smart card, but if they get their cc stolen enough times, or hear about others getting them stolen, many will be willing to look into other options. There will always be some people *motoman* that cannot deal with change, and will only do if forced, but there is not much that can be done about that.


RE: Ummm...
By Motoman on 2/5/2014 9:00:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How often do people need to purchase online while on the go?


You have to be clinically insane to even ask that question.

I'm sorry, you're clearly just daft and refuse to take your head out of the sand. USB card readers as a mandatory item to make online purchases is f%cking retarded, and there is quite simply no f%cking way it would ever work.


RE: Ummm...
By Rukkian on 2/6/2014 1:28:27 PM , Rating: 2
Where are you getting mandatory? I have never said mandatory, you keep putting that up there. Read something before you respond. I said have the option of a more secure payment method. If you want to use it (and be much more safe) go ahead, otherwise you the old way, and be less secure.

The key here is to give the option.


RE: Ummm...
By Rukkian on 2/6/2014 1:31:20 PM , Rating: 2
Also - you say I have to be clinically insane, (maybe I am), but I can count on 1 hand how many times I have made an online purchase while out and about. The main time I want to make an online purchase is from home. The main reason most want to make online purchases is for the convenience of doing it from home, which means they are at home.

Maybe I am in the minority, and everybody is out there getting in their car and driving around just to make online purchases, but that seems like the exception rather than the rule (at least in my clinically insane mind).


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki