- From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 08:11:07 +0100
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, public-webpayments-comments@w3.org
On 2015-02-28 03:30, Manu Sporny wrote: <snip> > What you're suggesting, though, is a demonstrable non-solution. We were addressing different uses of payment instruments. In my example there's no magstrip only "cryptograms". Your example presumed card data. BTW, this actually raises an interesting question: How can you get away from unsecure card data but still be able storing something "card-ish" in places like PayPal? A possibility is creating a cryptogram with the payment credential which gives the specific party rights to withdraw money. Such a system would not be sensitive to theft. > What is > wrong with the current proposal of "don't expose the sensitive payment > data to any system held by the customer or the merchant?" Isn't this > approach simpler than creating a secure execution environment for Web > code (if that's even possible)? Both are needed. IMO. > I think you're right in that we need something like web intents to > transmit non-sensitive payment messages and cryptograms from browsers to > native apps (like wallets) and back. Yes, that's what I work with, currently on a PoC level. An "early version" is available today: http://www.cnet.com/news/google-paves-over-hole-left-by-chrome-plug-in-ban/ > I'm not so sure we need a secure execution environment for Javascript code. If you are going to expose things like EMV keys to web-code the code must (in order to pass EMV certification) be fixed in some way. I started here but have given up this path not because it is undoable, but because the number of things to be standardized could easily make this a 10 year project and I don't think we need such. Anders
Received on Saturday, 28 February 2015 07:11:44 UTC