Verified By Visa / MasterCard SecureCode - Anybody Using Them?

[olimits7]

Hi,

To help stop future chargebacks I'm thinking of implementing "Verified By Visa" and "MasterCard SecureCode" to my website.

Does anyone use these services on their ecommerce site? If you do; would you recommend using these services to lower fraudulent orders/chargebacks?

Thank you,

olimits7

[ken_b]

As a customer I've run into that a couple times.

The result? No sale.

I just go shop somewhere else.

[piatkow]

My (UK) payment processor doesn't give me the choice to opt out.

I expect to use it on-line just as I expect to use chip and pin in-store.

[edited by: piatkow at 10:52 am (utc) on Jun 9, 2010]

[lorax]

A domain registrar I've purchased many domains through used to have this in place. It didn't stop me. The extra step was slightly annoying but I like the provider and their service and I know they're just trying to protect themselves (and me to some degree) so I've completed many purchases anyhow.

I would still complete the purchase at other sites too.

[Bewenched]

We're about to start using it do to the high rate of potential fraud we've been seeing.

[olimits7]

I do a lot of shopping online, and I don't think I ever ran across a site that has "SecureCode" and "Verified" on their checkout pages.

I like the idea of using these services to lower/stop fraudulent orders, but at the same time I could see dropped sales coming from these services too.

I know I would probably just go to another site that doesn't have this; if I see that I have to sign-up for these services with my credit card company.

olimits7

[sleepy_eye]

We considered using it, and it would be a great way to reduce fraud, only we felt it would also reduce legit orders too. Ive had to use it on some sites we bought company items, stationary etc, and its a pain. Online shopping is confusing enough for average people without the extra work.

[jwolthuis]

We tried it, and had customers complaining that they couldn't checkout because they weren't signed up for VbV. It's got to be the worst implementation of fraud protection on the planet; credit card companies don't want to impose it on their customers, so they push sign-up off to merchants at checkout-time.

[xshadow]

As a customer I've run into that a couple times.

The result? No sale.

I just go shop somewhere else.

Why is it a 'No Sale' for you, ken_b?
It only takes 30 seconds to register. Why would you spend longer finding a new website and entering your details again than simply registering?

One day, the vast majority of websites will require VbV and MCsC, and you'll be stuck without any websites accepting it.

[xshadow]

olimits7,

Obviously from my above post, i am an avid supporter of Verified by Visa and MasterCard Secure Code. I have implemented this on my website and i saw no change in conversions. But, every one else says it's a conversion rate killer

How do I know that it's not?

Well, i dont have a one-page checkout, and clearly payment is the last step in a check out process. My customers still enter all their details, choose shipping methods and then proceed to a seperate payment page.

There was no change for me, before or after implementation of VbV/ MCsC.

But... I think it can vary between continents. I predominantly sell to Europe.

In my personal opinion, USA consumers can be pretty backwards when it comes to these sorts of changes. A great example is Chip and Pin, which is popular all over Europe, and has seen a significant drop in fraud rates.

Why not have it in the USA? Because Americans are too accustomed to signing a check, and not entering a pin. Apologies for any offence, if any!

[enigma1]

As ken_b put it the more steps you have for the checkout the higher the number of abandoned carts. I don't want to go around to different domains and pages to complete a purchase.

Also knowing features of payment gateways, there are many which handle the verification reliably without the need of an extra Vbv step. Certain processors in their cpanel/details indicate if the order can be processed safely by checking the shipping address with the one entered for an order.

The simpler the checkout the less mistakes customers will make and therefore more sales for merchants.

[ergophobe]

As a customer, I've had endless problems

[webmasterworld.com...]

[jwolthuis]

Americans are too accustomed to signing a check, and not entering a pin.

I don't even know where my checkbook is; probably in the back of a drawer somewhere. I'm an American that uses PIN-based transactions daily, and I refuse to use VbV-enabled eCommerce sites.

If VbV is such a great idea, why doesn't Visa sign everyone up right away, as a condition of approval for a card-not-present transaction?

Visa needs to step up, sign-up their own cardholders for their program, and quit recruiting their sign-ups on our merchant websites.

My website caters to elderly shoppers, and my conversions cratered when I tried VbV. My inbox was full of customers wanting to place and order, but they couldn't because they were scared away by the banks' recruitment form.

Yes, it's free, yes, it only takes a few seconds to register, and yes, it's a significant barrier to checkout for a large segment of the population.

[gexor]

Risk vs Reward

What type of product are you selling? High ticket? High risk?

You do realize what the point of VBV/SC is right? An attempt to establish that the purchaser is the card holder. As a merchant this benefits you by providing a liability shift to the card holder or the issuing bank. Also, some merchant account issuers (TD Canada Trust) will offer a break on the discount rate if the merchant agrees to use set levels of fraud prevention.

Straight from the horses mouth (page 11):
[visa.ca...]
Canadian PDF Material from Visa but I'm sure the same PDF exists for US clients.

[Green_Grass]

Just for info.

This has been made mandatory by the Reserve Bank of India for any web transaction done in India ( only) and because every merchant HAS to implement it ( to sell in India), It has been a successs..

I have no problem using it and feel secure.

[enigma1]

You do realize what the point of VBV/SC is right?

No personally I haven't, aside of the technicalities. All I see is adding another level of complexity with extra digits and passwords and eventually a consumer looks for alternatives to buy online.

What's the point of having 2, 3, 4 or a dozen different sets of numbers and having the customer to sign-in/verify into different terminals?

I don't see how it will improve security. On the one hand, the customer's PC could be compromised so no matter how many numbers he has to enter, will be known to others, on the other hand, if the bank's server is compromised everything a fraudster needs to perform various transactions is right there.

CC companies validate for a very long time now: Name, Shipping Address on record, cc number, expiry on the card which is a good combination and the merchant has tools to verify if the shipping address matches which in most cases should protect the merchant because the consumer will receive what he orders.

If the customer's info is leaked will an extra number or password make a difference? Why you think the extra number or extra password isn't going to leak?

[lammert]

As a card holder I use Mastercard Securecode since about one year and I am happy with it. My experience is that many sites are already using it in their checkout procedure. The check is done by the creditcard issuing bank and seeing the URL change to that location is actually an extra assurance for me that I am buying from a credible website.

[George]

I have been using it for some time, and when it was implimented (over 12 months ago) it killed conversions.
However, I keep the basket of all failed transactions, and so was able to phone many customers up to follow the orders through.

now, we get fewer failed orders, so I think people are more used to it, and while it does not stop fraud, it does help alot.

[enigma1]

was able to phone many customers up to follow the orders through

you mean you are calling the customers and they give you their cc details over the phone?

[jwolthuis]

I was wondering the same thing. It seems ironic how hard we protect our card information from automated processes on a website, but freely give a card containing magnetic stripe information to a waiter in a restaurant, or a speak the numbers to a merchant over the phone.

[nafri]

i been told by natwest streamline and it also says on there site that any trasactions which are fully securecode ( 3d secured) cant be chargebacked.Atleast now i can ship anywhere the customer wishes.

[sleepy_eye]

( 3d secured) cant be chargebacked.

I don't want to seem contradictory, but that's pretty hard to believe.
Can't the person still claim someone else got thier info and made the charge? Would be nice to ship worry free to Nigeria, Indonesia...etc
I do know there are other reasons people can charge back an item. Didn't meet expectations, item misrepresented, didn't arrive, couple others I can't remember off the top of my head.

[enigma1]

( 3d secured) cant be chargebacked

A good story. The reality is if the customer disputes the merchant may get a chargeback no matter what you read. It theoretically covers cases the cardholder denies authorization and shifts the responsibility from the merchant to the cardholder's bank.

The whole process adds an additional step for the consumer to purchase something and impacts sales as on the one hand the consumer may abandon the purchase due to the extra step and on the other hand requires the merchant to deploy extra functionality to his checkout process having the client going back and forth between his server and the bank's server increasing the chances for errors.

[PCInk]

( 3d secured) cant be chargebacked

That's how the banks sell it.

They cannot do a chargeback to the merchant, if the card was used fraudulently.

They can do a chargeback for missing goods, damaged goods, duplicate processing, incorrect amount charged, goods not as described, faulty products and so on....