Transcript INTERAC PowerPoint Presentation Template

Interac Association
Chip readiness program
Global Platform
August 21, 2002
Coverage
•
•
•
•
•
•
An introduction to Interac Association
Business context for the chip initiative
Objectives
Scope & timeframes
Draft requirements identified to date
Approach being considered for technology
acquisition
• Near term implications
2
Interac: A Canadian Success Story
• Resources & cooperation = national network
infrastructure
• 124 members
• Two core services:
– 1986 - Shared Cash Dispensing (SCD)
– 1992 - Interac Direct Payment (IDP)
• 325,000 Merchants
– with over 460,000 POS terminals
• 35,000 ABMs
• In 2001, Interac Direct Payment logged 2.2 billion
transactions, a 1000% increase since it was nationally
available in 1994.
3
INTERAC Services Have Canada
Leading the World
ABM Use
EFT/POS Use
54.3
53.4
39.9
Canada
U.S.
41.3
35.0
Sweden
38.6
33.1
U.K.
27.5
Canada
France
Belgium
U.S.
Transactions per Inhabitant
Source: Bank for International Settlement
(end of 1999)
4
Business context for the chip
initiative
• The Canadian Chip Migration Project (CCMP)
has been underway for 18 months, and is
intended to enable the successful delivery of
EMV-based chip payments infrastructure within
Canada
• To properly support CCMP the Association is
defining the common business rules and
infrastructure requirements needed to
implement Interac Shared Services on chip
• Chip specifications from the previous chip
program (IMVCCP) are no longer current and
need updating
5
Objectives
• The objective of the chip program is to make
Interac chip-ready ‘on paper’ if/when a Member
decides it would like to move to chip.
• Deliverables will include:
– Business requirements
– Operating rules and regulations
– Project plans for changes to the Inter-Member
Network
– Project plans for the implementation of a
Certification Authority
– Plans for the implementation of a chip
certification process
– Test plans….
6
Objectives
• Deliverables will not include:
– Development of plans for trials and roll-out
– Implementation of changes to Inter-Member
Network to accommodate chip
– Implementation of a certification process
– Implementation of a Certification Authority
7
Scope & timeframes
• Scope includes:
– Creation of technical specifications covering the
Interac Shared Services
– Stakeholder communications strategy
– Opportunities to leverage, where feasible, the
chip technologies developed by other card
associations
• Timeframe
– Chip ready ‘on paper’ by mid-late 2003
– Implementation decision is separate and involves
commitment of resources.
8
Draft requirements identified to date
• Basic requirement
– Replicate existing service functionality
(…
requires a multi-application chip card in order to address
both domestic and international utility)
• Possible Enhanced features to be included in the
specification:
– Provide cardholders with access to multiple accounts,
and customize account availability for each Interac
service
– For off-line operations, differentiate risk parameters by
account, by Interac service …… or share parameters
where it makes sense to do so
– Candidate lists presented for selection should be tailored
to the specific circumstances of each cardholder
– Position Members to offer multi-application (credit/debit)
cards, should they so wish
9
Approach being considered for
chip technology
• Interac Association’s intention is to leverage
existing chip infrastructures to the extent
possible
– reduce cost & complexity
– shorten development time frames
– minimize technology risk
• Preliminary discussions already held with
Visa, MasterCard, and AMEX, …. and with
the major card manufacturers
10
Leveraging existing chip technology
- evaluation criteria
• What options are available, and how
effective are they
• What are the operational implications
(risk, branding, cost, …)
• What are the rules and conditions to be
imposed
• Do any of the options present opportunity
to enhance existing services
11
Leveraging existing chip technology
- ideal capabilities
• For debit cards
– use the application, the data structures, and any
expected data values
– use selected parts of the application, but allow
for additional Interac specific processing
routines, data structures, and data values, if
required
• For multi-application cards
– use common application, common data
structures, common data values
– share particular aspects of the application, and
perhaps some of its data, but utilise also Interac
specific data and processing routines, if required
12
Leveraging existing technologies
- preliminary conclusions
• Basic requirements seem able to be
met using existing masks (M-Chip,
VSDC)
• Enhanced features require either
multiple instances of the
application to be replicated within
EEPROM, or development of an
Interac-specific mask
13
Near term implications of this
approach
Approach
Use either the M-Chip
or the VSDC mask
Pro’s
•Available today
•Relatively
inexpensive
•Supports basic
requirements
Develop Interacspecific mask
Flexibility to meet all
requirements
Con’s
•Inability to support
enhanced features
without replication of
the application within
EEPROM
•This may present
increased risk
Cost
14