With the new rules, whether you store the data or not is not a deciding factor of whether or not it applies to you. Even if you simply only transmit to a 3rd party processor, you're still in scope.
___________________________ Mangled by my iPhone. ___________________________ Tyler Treat Corn Belt Technologies, Inc. [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ___________________________ On Oct 28, 2015, at 7:59 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I think it was Visa processors that are causing this stink, Visa is trying to have CYA On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Eric Kuhnke <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: traffic between their credit card terminal and the processor should be end-to-end encrypted. Audits of their network equipment would be required for PCI compliance if they were storing card info in plaintext anywhere on their LAN, which they are not. On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I have always heard of PCI compliance in terms of a business like a gas station where customers swipe cards at the pumps. But I have a customer with a credit card reader terminal in their office that is making this big fuss because they annually do a PCI audit apparently to avoid a $20/month fee from their credit card processor. Maybe I don't even realize we pay that, there is some $200/year PCI compliance fee we pay. Anyway, this is not where some auditors show up, but rather a cloud based scan they run from one of their computers until they pass, then they print out the report and send it in. And apparently the customer decided to have us replace Frontier and then do their annual scan the next day. They claim they passed every year previous, hard to believe the Frontier modem they were using as their router having username/password set to admin/admin was not an issue. Their first complaint to us was their WiFi password was not complex enough. Well, we just set it to what you were already using. Then they had some complaint about DNS. Now they are saying they have to report that we manage the router remotely, and that may be a problem. Is it? We close off everything but Winbox. It seems a lot more secure to me than having a web interface with admin/admin. I told the customer they are welcome to supply and manage their own router, but if they get a leased, managed router from us, well ... we manage it. Remotely. Has anyone dealt with this issue already? -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
