【24h】

Are Payment Card Contracts Unfair? (Short Paper)

机译:付款卡合同不公平吗? (短纸)

获取原文

摘要

Fraud victims are often refused a refund by their bank on the grounds that they failed to comply with their bank's terms and conditions about PIN safety. We, therefore, conducted a survey of how many PINs people have, and how they manage them. We found that while only a third of PINs are ever changed, almost half of bank customers write at least one PIN down. We also found bank conditions that are too vague to test, or even contradictory on whether PINs could be shared across cards. Yet, some hazardous practices are not forbidden by many banks: of the 22.9% who re-use PINs across devices, half also use their bank PINs on their mobile phones. We conclude that many bank contracts fail a simple test of reasonableness, and 'strong authentication', as required by the Payment Services Directive Ⅱ, should include usability testing.
机译:欺诈受害者常常被银行拒绝退款,理由是他们不遵守银行关于PIN安全的条款和条件。因此,我们对人们拥有多少个PIN以及如何管理它们进行了调查。我们发现,虽然仅更改了PIN的三分之一,但几乎有一半的银行客户至少写下了一个PIN。我们还发现银行条件过于模糊,无法测试,甚至在是否可以跨卡共享PIN方面甚至相矛盾。但是,许多银行并未禁止某些危险行为:在22.9%的人跨设备重复使用PIN中,有一半还在手机上使用其银行PIN。我们得出的结论是,许多银行合同均未通过简单的合理性测试,因此,按照支付服务指令Ⅱ的要求,“强认证”应包括可用性测试。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号