Julian,
> But the 3D SET technical proposal is just a little bit more open approach to
> the issuer liability mainly based in standard plain SET, with the (wrong)
> assumption that is the simpler solution and the lightest wallet (or whatever
> you define the dedicated plug-in). In fact, in my opinion, is simpler the
> Easy-SET approach and has several advantages:
>
> - The private key is under the control of the cardholder
Server-based PKI achives this as well. It is just the "distance" between the user
and the private key that differs. And if you trust the banks to keep your money why
should they not be able to keep private keys (that probably belongs to certs
they issued BTW)?
Unlike other approaches 3D SET also stores the digital "slip" in a safe place.
> - It can be used in countries where there are more than one Card Processor
> (it is difficult to have several "server wallets" if you need to preserve
> certificates associated to banks belonging to competing payment networks).
I don't understand this one. There is just one certificate per FI and brand and
customer's never see it.
> Still, other solutions are appearing in the market. In Europe, watch what is
> happening with mobile phone enabled payments. (as Movilpago)
I could not find anything in English but the mobile phone is indeed the future
for all credit-card payments - Unless you put EMV-support in the phone as this
is "the old and wrong" way of doing things. 3D SET is the long-term solution
also for mobile phones.
Anders
