Of course it isn't as private as cash, but it is a step forward from mag-swipe.
Square has a good explainer if you want to read more: https://squareup.com/us/en/townsquare/what-does-tokenization...
Of course it isn't as private as cash, but it is a step forward from mag-swipe.
Square has a good explainer if you want to read more: https://squareup.com/us/en/townsquare/what-does-tokenization...
I agree with the GP, this is a huge privacy blind spot.
There are multiple attack vectors. One of them is "why did I just get another charge from that place we visited last June". Another being "oops, we plugged our pin into a skimmer", etc.
Agree that letting Visa/MC/whomever know everything about your transactions is a choice...
Otoh if they pay you 3ish % for it, you might decide you're more than happy to.
Basically like privacy.com, but why use a new card per merchant?
So now Apple gets to know what Visa knows. Still, for the time being, they don't seem to know individual items. And many here seem to think Apple is more trustworthy than random anonymous data broker.
Though at least in the EU the mag-swipe method was phased out and replaced with a chip based method years ago. (A chip with secure module, requiring PIN if you pay for more then a small amount, or otherwise unusual.)
And as far as I know that method is still more secure then Apple pay and similar.
More recently, an additional identifier uniquely identifying the underlying card has also been added [1]. That one persists even across multiple devices and token deletions.
[1] https://www.level2kernel.com/payment_account_reference.html
If it's actually encrypting information (not just signing it), then that's another thing entirely, but signatures don't hide data.
But that's not necessarily the case either, as somebody else brought up the fact that identifiers ARE in fact passed to the merchant.