CanDo

Naturally I assumed you had stolen the car

A man is being tailgated by a stressed-out woman on a busy boulevard.  Suddenly, the light turns yellow, just in front of him.  He does the honest thing, and stops at the crosswalk, even though he could have beaten the red light by accelerating through the intersection.   The tailgating woman hits the roof, and the horn, screaming in frustration as she misses her chance to get through the intersection with him. As she is still in mid-rant, she hears a tap on her window and looks up into the face of a very serious police officer.  The officer orders her to exit her car with her hands up.

He takes her to the police station where she is searched, fingerprinted, photographed, and placed in a cell.

After a couple of hours, a policeman approaches the cell and opens the door. She is escorted back to the booking desk where the arresting officer is waiting with her personal effects.

He says, “I’m very sorry for this mistake.  You see, I pulled up behind your car while you were blowing your horn, flipping the guy off in front of you, and cussing a blue streak at him. ”

“I noticed the “Choose Life” license plate holder,
the “What Would Jesus  Do” bumper sticker,
the “Follow Me to Sunday School” bumper sticker,
the chrome plated Christian fish emblem on the trunk. “

“Naturally I assumed you had stolen the car”.

Something to wonder about

What You Have

The Two Sided Market

When we think of investing in various macro business needs e.g. revenue. We see that establishing relationships with customers to stimulate sales is why we create the goods and services, hopefully, others want.

If the buyer has something the seller wants, in exchange for the good or service they desire, then a transaction occurs. The challenge is simple, each party defines the value of what they are providing or exchanging and presto the trade occurs.

When society grows and the complexity of what each of us produces and when our needs are not aligned to this process called barter, a means of monetization is established. Society creates a trusted form of exchange – pebbles, coins, money, a promissory note or now even cyptocurrencies.

In other words, society creates an answer to enable the exchange of goods and services between parties who do not have goods and services the other party seeks in exchange.

With cash, coins or other trangible representations of value, commerce is easy. When we complicate things and worry about carrying cash and seek to buy things with debt. A need for a Network emerges.

These payment networks, by necessity, add complexity. They create the need to establish two sides to the market, one focused on the relationship with the buyer and the other with the seller.

Issuance and Acceptance. Two words to descibe the two sides of a network. It’s only when the two sides of the market have sufficient participants. Only at the tipping point, enough critical mass exists, to create a self sustaining network. This is the network. At this moment the network blossoms. If either side of the market does not achieve critical mass, the network collapses.

Any two entities familiar and trusting in the Brand, or each other, can easily establish a temporary relationship. Adding anonymity to the requirements, increases the leave of trust and recognition the Brand must establish.

In a digital environment we have to define mechanisms to share and establish trust across trillions of electrons. The two sides will not pursue understanding of nor focus on security. Until the risk exceeds a threshold unique to each party on either side of the market.

To often in the past, the idea of the individuality of the individual or the need to design security in from the beginning. Has left us with a legacy of system all needing design of custom approaches to how to integrate security with requisites necessary to capture, calculate and manage risk.

The Artifact of Trust

When a mutually trusted set of parties gives the citizen, consumer, employee or courtier a card, a device or an object and provides every acceptor with a reader capable of recognizing the trusted thing; then the two parties are in a position to establish “trust”. The consumer has a thing which is recognized and trusted by the acceptor. This is often referred to as “What You Have”.

Once the thing is recognized by the acceptor, then, the process of identification and authorizations (the transaction) can take place. The object – the artifact – carries an identifier. It possesses characteristics that establish its unique character. The object also posesses a means of assuring the acceptor the presentation of that identifier repreents a unique entity.

The simplest artifact of establishing “trust” is a hand held thing, be it a key, fob, card, watch, pendant, phone, ear piece. It does not matter what it is, all that counts is that the merchant recognizes it and that the consumer is willing to carry and present it.

Trust, for the merchant, means they can, according to the rules, recognize and authenticate the thing. They are then in a possition to pursue a temporary and trusted relationship. What can be achieved during the time the relationship of trusted is bounded, is the constrained by an additional layer. In this layer the consumer, the acceptor and any third parties address which the rights and privileges are to be granted or pursued. This is when the exchange, sale, conversation, tranaction, event or access is granted.

Two sides meet several common mediums of exchange are available.

[contact-form][contact-field label=”Name” type=”name” required=”true” /][contact-field label=”Email” type=”email” required=”true” /][contact-field label=”Website” type=”url” /][contact-field label=”Message” type=”textarea” /][/contact-form]

Legacy the American disease

When we look at what this market have done my own journey parrallels.

The adoption of something new it is a human process influenced by culture.

1976 first programming job and exposure to OCR and timeshare

1978 cash management, electronic money transfer, ACH & Wire

1982 Digital, video and voice integration.

What happened to Marginal Satisfaction?

1986 fiber across the Atlantic

The wall

1994 Stir EMV, drive WWW payments, cryptography, MFA

1996 Convergence of leather and technology

2001

2003 EMV in Canada

2008 Lehman went bankrupt

2015 US EMV Liability Shift

2018 WebauthN Web payments Web of things

Now we think next. What next?

Digital Identity

Question for all those who advocate migration from card to electronic

We all are aware and many of us dream of a time when all of our physical identity artifacts are digital. We dream of consolidating these credentials in our electronic wallet, otherwise known as our mobile phone.

Today while visiting an outpatient imaging center, I was asked for my driver’s license. She would only accept the physical document, I offered to send an image by email. Her goal to scan my identity document into the electronic patient file she was creating. The idea of an image of the driver’s license in an email, well.

Sure the system could easily be changed to record digital credentials delivered by NFC or BLE. The first question, given the expensive medical system we have here in America; at whose cost?

Time could not be argued as a saving, she would only have saved a second or three of time to pass the card back to me.

People discuss contactless cards and contrast them to the convenience of a Mobile Wallet. What we often forget is the reality. As long as we need to carry other physical identity artifacts, the convergence of our leather wallet into our electronic device is not happening.

In my humble opinion, it is an all or nothing situation. Yes, I will add digital credentials into the mobile wallet. But, unfortunately, the leather wallet is still part of my attire.

Better still, it does not need to be recharged. My leather wallet still works after the phone’s battery has died.

Sunday Sermon July 8

Ashley stood before us.

The life of a small town, 2000 plus the 1500 students attending the University 9 months of the year, sets a scene for a conversation.
A conversation about community and who we are.

Do those that knew us then, know us now?
The issue of going back is hard.
There is clearly a difference between those that have roots and those like me without.
Who, save family, do I still know from then?
Who knows me, where?

The story of Jesus Mark 6:1-6 as he emerges and his mission becomes clear this passage reminds us.
When he went home he was ridiculed by many,
People who had known him then did not appreciating who he had become.

The story teaches us that we simply need to  stand up and go forth.
As he did we simply must continue forward.
The power of Jesus, therefore what each of us must do, is exemplified in the next section mark 6-7-12.
He simply instructs his disciples out to go out into the world and share in the glory of God.

Do we fit in a box because others think so?
Or, do we like Jesus simply continue in the direction?

Constantly moving forward?

We all belong, yet where is it we belong?

Who is God calling us to be?
Is it who we know we are?
No, it is who we are here to be.
Who is God calling each of us to be?
Who is God calling me to be?

It is the discernment I struggle with.

Who Am I

Letter to the American President

President Donald John Trump
White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500
United States of America

July 6, 2018 Ref. Mine thoughts and Those of My Canadian Friend

Dear Mr. President, Tuesday, June 19, 2018

Mr. President as an American who had the opportunity to work in five states (NYC, NJ, Georgia, MN, & NC), four countries (USA, UK, Belgium and Canada), two super cities & three major cities (Manhattan, London, Brussels, Toronto and Atlanta); I have had the chance to see and hear about our great country from multiple angles and perspectives.

August of 2008, after 23 years away, I returned home, after spending 7 years in Toronto; in a 35-foot motor home. Parked across the river from the town of my birth, near Liberty State Park and with the Statue of Liberty as my morning view. I learned about and had to accept the misfortunate of the recession. A recession resulting from the creation of those mortgage backed derivatives. Compounded by the devious behavior and the greed of the speculators, I brand “Wall Street”.

I will remember September 15th 2008, the day Dick Fuld, who I had worked with while with Shearson Lehman, made that fateful announcement. Newly returned to the United States, I had to learn about what 8 years of Republican control of the Executive branch of our country had achieved, what the heightened religious fault lines across this country were and the anxiety of the terror emanating from the middle east had done to this nation. Like 9/11, we were swept into another spiral of despair and anger.

We have been a great nation; for most of my life, we were seen as the great white hope. A country willing to stand up to tyrants, bullies, jihadists and anarchists. A great nation capable of reaching any part of the world. Strength built on the military and diplomatic respect we established with both our enemies and most importantly our allies and friends. I will admit I am an urban dweller. I have lived a good life. I found success in the world of Financial Services and the application of technology. I do not appreciate the struggle those in the manufacturing and agricultural economy feel.

Words like labor arbitrate, outshore resources and outsourcing are familiar. What stands behind these words has much to do with the state of our nation and the situation in most of the developed world. It is the result of these actions so many people in middle America feel left behind.

In 1982, when I first began to build a Wall Street trading room for Bankers Trust, I saw how Shareholder value not Stakeholder value, had become the most important factor within our capitalistic system.

People, be they customers or employees, no longer mattered. What I learned and frankly was disheartened by is that the only thing that matters anymore is the returns, as seen from the superrich executives, the shareholders’ and the financial analysts’ perspective. We had become a nation focused on the balance sheet and the quarterly report.

Yes, I have my views and recommendation as to the state of this nation and what we need to do to make sure we remain the great nation we live and believe in.

If I think about the economy. We do not need to bring the manufacturing or restart coal mining. We need to embrace the fact that our nations wealth is now in our service economy. A national of American healthcare works taking care of the sick and wounded, American call center operators serving Americans, American programmers developing systems for our digital world, American innovators creating for all and American business leaders is what we need. Yes, we need to rebuild our infrastructure and address public transportation. Yes, since 2010 our economy is growing, I hope we can sustain that growth and assure the people good wages, good jobs and a bright future.

If I think about healthcare. I felt the most exposed when I returned to the USA and discovered I did not have healthcare. I was unemployed and did not have the funds to simply go out and buy an individual healthcare plan. Healthcare was a big topic on the news as Washington worked through what ended up being a terrible mess of a healthcare plan. In my immediately family there are 5 Doctors. four practicing and one just finishing med school. As you can imagine it has been a topic of conversation since I was very young. Now the conversation is about how broken our system is. I take the view of someone who has lived within multiple national health programs. It bothers me that this great nation cannot figure out how to assure the health of every American, affordably.

If I think about education. We as a nation should make sure that every person living in this country is WELL EDUCATED. There should be no excuses. There should be no bias. Property taxes tend to pay for primary schools. It is primary education we must make the best in the world. Unfortunately, the way our system works the poor get poor schools – the rich have great schools. We need to figure out how to assure everyone an equal chance with a GREAT PRIMARY EDUCATION. Your idea of apprentice programs is exactly what our primary education system should assure exist. Everyone should be able to walk into the world with a set of skills at age 18. Graduating from primary school everyone should be able to go our and find a job, join an apprentice program, join the military or decide to invest in higher education. A college degree should not be required to succeed. A University education should be there to allow those who are gifted the ability to excel.

If we think about the environment. Please listen to the majority of scientist who know we are affecting the environment. It is the pollution we create and the materials we inject into our environment that is responsible for the state of our environment. We the people and our corporations are responsible for all the islands of floating plastic, all the Carbon, Sulphur or who knows what we inject into the atmosphere and all those chemicals we pour into our rivers and oceans. We must continue the good work, you and I saw, when we cleaned up the rivers around Manhattan. Environmental work making it possible to breath the air in central park, swim in the Hudson river or taking a cruise from the East 23rd street mooring, you used all those years ago.

If we think about our military and our role as the defender of peace. We need a strong and well-funded military. Not too much and not too little. We need to make sure we have strong alliances. Frankly, Mr. President, I would hope we would discourage other country form investing in military hardware. Our goal should be to have the best. Our goal should be to watch and gain as the cost of maintaining the peace and avoiding war and conflict falls to zero.

If we think of our role as a global leader. What more is there to say. We need to be diplomatic. We need to pursue the growth of democratic societies. We need to focus on quelling violence and protecting human rights. We need to be the partner everyone wants to have on their side and the enemy those who seek to do us harm; do not want to enter into a conflict with the United States of America, because they know they will lose, before they start.

If we think about the Statue of Liberty. She stands proud in the harbor of New York beaconing people to our shores. Yes, we need to manage the flow of immigrates into this great nation. We must remember those that come seek the opportunity this nation promotes. We need to accept all with kindness, grace and dignity. When necessary only then should we return those, who have not followed the published policy, back from where they came, gently.

We must also remember they come because they know they can find work. As long as employers can hire people who do not have the right to work in this nation they will come. Stop American companies from hiring illegal immigrants and they will stop coming. Simple economics – reduce the demand will eliminate the supply.

If we think of our nation and its people. You must lead by example. You are the President of all of us. Whatever our color, race, religious views, social position, economic situation or sexual preferences you are the President and you must be an example for our children and our nation.

We do not want our children to believe lying is OK. We do not want our children to believe bullying is ok. We do not want our children to shun someone because they are different. It is your role to bring the parties together, to lead the left and the right back to the middle ground and restore civil discourse.

On these next pages is the note my Canadian friend wrote.

Given you are into social media I will also post this via Twitter, Facebook and on my own website.

Yours sincerely,

Philip Andreae

Dear Mr. President:

I am writing you as an outsider, someone who has always loved your country for the values it represents and has fought for.

I was going to write you to express my appreciation for your efforts to dial down the risk of nuclear war by meeting with Kim Jong-Un and initiating a peace process which should make life less stressful for our Asian neighbours as well as for us here in North America.

But the euphoria didn’t last long, only because of the children. The ones separated from their parents at the US/Mexico border. You see them on either the front pages of the major newspapers or on the various media outlets and you know, this is not going away.

Children are ever the fly in the ointment which disturb our individual and collective conscience. Riding in the back seat of a car downtown on any New York or Toronto street and they are the ones asking, ‘Why is that man sleeping on the sidewalk?’ or ‘See that military vet begging in front of Dunkin Donuts? Is that the way we treat our soldiers?’

The children are invariably the ones who ask how did we let our world become so uncaring that we confine the elderly to institutions where nobody visits them, or send our street youths to jail when they had no opportunity to succeed?

And now they are congregating at the border asking ‘why are we being separated from our parents?’ ‘Is that how America treats its most vulnerable people?” ‘Isn’t this the land of the free, the land of opportunity, the land who has inscribed on its Statue of Liberty:

“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she

With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-lost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

However, it has occurred that there are now over 2000 children separated from their parents along your southern border, you are the one person who can fix this. It doesn’t mean you have to allow them all in – which would be my preference – or decide to send them all back home.

That’s not the issue. The issue here is the trauma your administration and by extension, all freedom loving grown-ups, are foisting on innocent children for which there are lifelong implications.

That is the issue which you alone can change.

Unzero the Zero in Attorney General Session’s Tolerance Policy, so the one thing that isn’t being tolerated is the confinement of children in cages and gymnasiums separated from the people who love them and who have risked everything, in the hope of a better life here.

Again, whoever is to be blamed for things ending up the way they are now is not the issue. The issue is – what is happening now is wrong, and you are the one person who can make it right.

I know as someone who relies on Christians of sincere conviction to help shape the bigger decisions one has to make in life, the one thing devout Christians all agree on is that God so loved the world, not that we would put our children in cages, but love them in such a way that regardless of who they are or where they are from, our treatment and care for them would reflect God’s thinking about them, that ’theirs in the kingdom of God.’

I can assure you, that kingdom does not include a cage. Nor should ours.

Thanks for hearing me out on this.

Sincerely,

John Deacon

Authentication or Identification

Two words Authentication and Identification.

Reading what Wikipedia had to say about authentication leads to an interesting array of discussions across a wide set of sciences and other social segments. The exploration led to a search for a definition of Identification:

  • The act of identifying, or proving to be the same.
  • The state of being identified.
  • A particular instance of identifying something.
  • A document or documents serving as evidence of a person’s identity.

Next exploring what Wikipedia had to say about Authentication leads to a much richer discussion aligned around the idea of assuring the truth of a particular attribute, someone is claiming to be true. Seeking to assure a degree of parallelism to the discussion:

Authentication is

  • something which validates or confirms the authenticity of something
  • computing proof of the identity of a userlogging on to some network

These two words: authentication and identification, some think represent the same act, yet when we bring into the conversation – privacy the two words have very different meanings.

We then have to think about the how and the what we are attempting to do.

In the physical world there are a set of situations and considerations. We will leave those for another article.

When we think about the digital world, this place were our physical presence is not present. We must find solutions that prove we are who we are without necessary needing another to vouch for our identity each time.

As a consumer we want the freedom to visit multiple sites and believe that where we visit and who we interact with is not open to all to know.

As I write, I can hear some say, all our stuff is known so why try to hide. They are correct and then they miss the concern – who knows. Not to get distracted.

Verification, a third word must enter into the discussion. In order for anything associated with only serving or sharing with a clear and identified party one needs to be able to provide Identity.

Trust – the truth of our identity

Such a big word.

This Sunday our minister spoke of Mark 5:20-43 and how we must trust in Jesus.

Her evocative sermon provoked a wider or is it broader question,

“What is Trust”.

First we must ask the classic question what does the Dictionary and Wikipedia say. This then leads us to have to think of the use of the term. Are we using it to describe a legal structure, the nature of a business, a computational concept or the name of a film, song or other human creation?

Given this discussion started as a result of a sermon, the best approach is to consider the social and emotion context of trust. Understand the sociology, psychology, philosophy, economics and systems perspective, may offer clarity to the words “we trust … “. In the first paragraph the Wikipedia authors condensed a lot of thought into a short paragraph. {formatting of my doing}.

Definitions of trust typically refer to a situation characterized by the following aspects:

  • One party is willing to rely on the actions of another party (trustee); the situation is directed to the future.
  • In addition, the abandons control over the actions performed by the trustee.
  • As a consequence, the is uncertain about the outcome of the other’s actions; they can only develop and evaluate expectations.
  • The uncertainty involves the risk of failure or harm to the trustor if the trustee will not behave as desired.

In this flow of thought it is clear this word trust carries with it risk. It assumes we are thinking of tomorrow and there is an expectation the trustee will act in a manner that is consistent with our “the trustors” wishes, hopes and desires.

Vladimir Ilych Lenin expressed this idea with the sentence “Trust is good, control is better”.

In the field I have spent the better part of my life, computers have played a big part. Be it as a tool we programmed to perform a function or task. Or, the systems supporting the products and services we sought to promote. More recently, as we look to this global village we are a member of. We think about the need to establish mechanisms to assure trust between parties. Parties who probably will never meet, in person or even by chance speak to. We must therefore establish acceptable social and psychological mechanism with machines which we inherently are wary of.

Looking to the sociology of trust set of sentences stands out

“It does not exist outside of our vision of the other. This image can be real or imaginary, but it is this one which permits the creation of the Trust.” … “Because of it, trust acts as a reductor of social complexity, allowing for actions that are otherwise too complex to be considered (or even impossible to consider at all); specifically for cooperation.”

All of this leads one to wonder how in a anonymous world can trust be established.

Trust is specifically valuable if the trustee is much more powerful than the trustor, yet the trustor is under social obligation to support the trustee.

In a social context this thought offers a view as to the dominance a position the trustee must have in society. It also frames the responsibility and the obligation established by the trustor in the trustee.

This then leads one think about Multi-Factor Authentication. MFA is emerging as the standard method companies are used to assure one of degree of “trust”. Trust in a claim of the identity of another, be it a customer, employee, citizen or recognized guest.

Is this enough? How can a company be assured of the identity of an individual? How can we, a third party, accept the claims or attributes offers when they are presenting themselves to us. Especially when they present themselves across a global digital highway, prone to the nefarious acts of those who seek to take advantage and profit.

Proof of identity therefore becomes the primary means of establishing trust in an seemingly anonymous space – Cyber Space. This need for proof of identity is the role of the Trustee. These parties who we instinctively have faith in can give us the ability to trust in the claims of identity and the associated attributes representing the characteristics, assets and relationships a person has.

For now I will stop. The next step is to think of and look at words. enrollment, proof, identification,registration, identifier, authentication, rights, privileges, claims, certificates and authority.

What Explains U.S. Mass Shootings?

In a NYTIMES article “What Explains U.S. Mass Shootings? International Comparisons Suggest an Answer” the following statistic jumped out

Americans make up about 4.4 percent of the global population but own 42 percent of the world’s guns. From 1966 to 2012, 31 percent of the gunmen in mass shootings worldwide were American, according to a 2015 study by Adam Lankford, a professor at the University of Alabama.

The article then goes on to show that most of the assumed contributor to why America has such a high rate of mass shooting. after demonstrating how none of these can be identifed as the contributor it makes th following statement

Rather, they found, in data that has since been repeatedly confirmed, that American crime is simply more lethal. A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, for instance, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process.

Our love of guns seems to be the major contributor.

More gun ownership corresponds with more gun murders across virtually every axis: among developed countries, among American states, among American towns and cities and when controlling for crime rates. And gun control legislation tends to reduce gun murders, according to a recent analysis of 130 studies from 10 countries.

The article relies on data to establish its argument. The net result, America is a culture unlike any other with a second amendment right, which one can argue, is the reason we are such a dangerous country to live in.

After Britain had a mass shooting in 1987, the country instituted strict gun control laws. So did Australia after a 1996 shooting. But the United States has repeatedly faced the same calculus and determined that relatively unregulated gun ownership is worth the cost to society.

The article concludes with the following statement that cause one to wonder who are we this country called the United States of America

“In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate,” Dan Hodges, a British journalist, wrote in a post on Twitter two years ago, referring to the 2012 attack that killed 20 young students at an elementary school in Connecticut. “Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over.”

Mobile Payment – Thoughts after listening

Thoughts resulting from The webinar Doug King of the Atlanta Federal Reserve gave on “Future Proofing Payments”

The long standing question of the future of Mobile Payments, again discussed and again similar conclusions.

  • Will the American market embrace the idea of mobile payments?
  • Is it a question of when or a question of why?
  • Why do emerging markets embrace new ways and mature markets resist?
  • Is it all about acceptance and the merchants investment in contactless reader capability?
  • Is it an all or nothing concern?
  • Could it be simply reality, as ling need our wallet with other cards e.g. our drivers license, why eliminate payment cards from the physical wallet?

Doug touched on all of these questions. He shared relevant statistics demonstrating the slow and possibly indistinguishable grow in usage of mobile wallets. He shared the success of several of the merchant proprietary mobile payment approaches.

Which leads me down the path of another question. What is the value proposition that will ignite the use of our phone and devices as carriers of our means of payment? The possibility to create value simply with a electronic wallet carrying only means of payment, does not create an exciting proposition.

Our mobile phones and connected devices provide us with such value

We have embraced dozens of apps. They help us to navigate, shop, explore, play and learn. Our phones are beginning to become security devices, taking advantage of sensors to integrate biometrics into how we access and authenticate ourselves as we browse and explore the ever increasing digital place we now call cyber space.

There is another phenomena emerging as a result of how we are transforming how we engage. Some called it the “Uberization” of payments, the ability to make payments frictionless. A change so profound we must stop and reflect and ponder what next.

I recognize there is a repetitive theme to my musing.

When physical world merchants fully embrace the concept of omni channel and build their virtual and physical experiences to complement and augment one another, then, with the ability to integrate payment seamlessly into the shopping experience a value proposition emerges.

What is EMVCo goal with the release of their SRC framework

October 2017 EMVCo published version 1.o of their Secure Remote Commerce Technical Framework.  Today I decided to read and appreciate what they are trying to accomplish and then consider how it ties into what I remember and think we need to do moving forward.

Clearly the challenge links back to the now infamous New Yorker Cartoon.  We have not successfully established a means of assuring the identity of an individual when presenting payment credentials (the PAN, Expiry date, name, billing address and CVV.  The first attempt, still not 100% implemented, was the introduction of CVV2, CVC2 or CID a 3 or 4 digit number printed on the back or the front of the payment card.

We then developed something called SET or Secure Electronic Transactions and unfortunately the payment networks were not willing to allow Bill Gates and Microsoft to earn 0.25% of every sale for every transaction secured by SET he proposed to build into Microsoft’s browser.  Without easy integration into the consumer browser, the challenges of integrating SET into the merchant web pages and the Issuer authorization systems caused this effort to fail the death of some many other noble but complicated attempts to create a means of digital authentication.

Next came 3D-Secure, a patented solution Visa developed.  It offered what was considered a reasonable solution to Cardholder authentication.  Unfortunately, given the state of HTML and the voracious use of pop-ups, the incremental friction, led to abandon shopping carts and consumer confusion.  Another aborted attempt at Internet fraud mitigation.

Yet 3D-Secure was not a total failure.  Many tried to enhance it, exploit it and avail themselves of the shift of liability back to the Issuer.  Encouraging consumer engagement and adoption was futile in some markets mandated and cumbersome in others.

Now let’s consider what EMVCo is attempting to do with their Secure Remote Commerce Technical Framework.  As I started to read, I ran into this:

“As remote commerce becomes increasingly targeted and susceptible to compromise, it is important to establish common specifications that protect and serve Consumers and merchants.”

Clearly the authors do not have institutional memory and cannot remember the various attempts alumni of these same organizations spent time on and encouraged many to invest in their implementing.  Clearly this lack of historic context will leave some pondering the purpose of this paper.

I then read this sentence and reflect back on a recent hearing on “Social Security Numbers Loss and Theft Prevention” in front of The House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security

“Over time the Consumer has been trained to enter Payment Data and related checkout data anywhere, making it easy for bad actors to compromise data and then attempt fraud.”

Once again, I stand  troubled by how the Payment Data clearly printed on the face of the card and especially the PAN, 11-19 digits, designed to simply be an identifier, was converted into an authenticator.  Like the social security number, the drivers license number, the passport number and your library card number, the PAN and other “Payment Data” was never designed to be an authenticator.  It was meant to be data a merchant could freely record.

The secure features of the card now the EMV cryptographic techniques otherwise referred to as the Application Request Cryptogram “ARQC” were meant to offer the “What You Have”  factor in a multi-factor authentication scheme.

As I began to appreciate the scope of this document, the term “Consumer Device” becomes critical.  I began to wonder if a PC is a consumer device or if a consumer device is only something like a mobile phone, watch or other like appliance.  Fortunately, later in the document, the definition clears up any confusion created by the earlier use of this term..  This said, I then wonder about the difference between what they define as Cardholder Authentication and Consumer Verification?

After reading through all the definitions, I ponder why the authors had to change terminology?  Why could they not embrace known and recognized nomenclature.  Do we need a new vocabulary?

I wondered:

If this is another attempt to create a revenue stream for the payment networks?

Or, is this the effort of a “closed standards” body to reduce the potential value of the W3C WebPayments activity?

 In search of an answer to this last question, I found this discrete comment inside the SRC FAQ.

9. Are any other industry bodies working in this area?

EMV SRC is focused on providing consistency and security for card-based payments within remote payment environments.

EMVCo aims to work closely with industry participants such as W3C to capitalise on opportunities for alignment where appropriate.

Having read bits and pieces of this and the WebPayments efforts one does wonder what is EMVCo trying to do.  We shall see?

Why do we need Tokens and Tokenization

Recently I was directed to a link http://paymentsjournal.com/tokens-work-because/ and wanted to write the author Sarah Grotta.  As I wrote the message crystallized in my head and maybe as this prior post already discussed, this idea of tokenization made me cringe.

I contend that Tokens exist because we turned the PAN Personal  / Primary Account Number, like we turned the SSN Social Security Number, into an authenticator.  One can must ask the question.  How can a random value (an identifier) become an authenticator and remain secure?

EMV works because it renders the Card unique, hence addressing the question of counterfeit, by employing the first factor of the classic MFA Multi-Factor Authentication concept “What You Have”.  EMV defined a common set of secrets and digital credentials; securely stored in a Secure Element or Chip Card.

We here in the United States decided not to implement the second factor, the Personal Identification Number or PIN, for a variety of reasons. Hence, why Lost and Stolen remains an issue or weakness in the American Card Payment environment.

Biometrics are emerging and could solve for the assurance of cardholder presence.  The challenge is how to effectively (cost and convenience) locate the biometric sensor and facilitate the matching of the sensors output to the persons registered biometric.  Let alone, how does one make sure the right persons biometric was registered and associated with the device.

In the mail order / telephone order, now cyberspace, we did not replicate merchant authentication, the first factor – “What You Have. The card, once was secured with things like the magnetic stripe, using CVV1, the Hologram and the other physical features.  We simply shifted the liability to the merchant and called it a “card not present” transaction.

People can claim all sorts of goodness because of tokenization.  They can talk about how the EMVCo’s tokenization framework describes the use of tokens in device and domain specific scenarios.  All of this, an issuer, could have done; if they, like some did, simply issued another number, a PAN, to the wife, bracelet, watch, ring or whatever other permutation they deemed appropriate.  They can talk about dynamic data.  yet what they often forget to include when they use the words “Dynamic Data” they are really talking about a cryptographic value as described in EMVCo Book 2.

Yes, this does mean the question of how the PAN and its digital credentials get deployed; has to be addressed.  This said, GSMA with EPC did offer some thoughts, last decade, when they described the Trusted Service Manager

Instead handset oligopolies replaced the MNO with the their Mobile Pay wallets.  They working with the Payment Networks and focused on control and the creation of income.  They, as monopolist will, have created barriers, restricting others from offering comparable services.  The TSP now becomes this restrictive service that guarantees the power of companies like Apple and Google, supported by their friends, the payment network operators.

The original article also spoke of the PAR; another data element merchants, processors and the industry, will have to invest in supporting.

I ask the question.

If we had assured the authentication and verification of every payment transaction
Using Multi-Factor Authentication
Why did we need to turn the PAN into a dynamic value? 

My contention, simply use the appropriate level of  cryptography.

If the Issuer or their processor is in control and understands basic EMV and Cryptography, then securing the PAN is not an issue.

Consider household financial management.  If each member of a household has a unique PAN; budget, tax preparation and understanding who spent what where is a lot easier.  The husband,wife and children should have their own unique PAN, stored in the clear in their devices and on their card.

The real requirement, my personal devices, including my payment card, simply need to be linked to one PAN their Personal Account Number, associated with the individual.  The PAN Sequence number could easily allows each device to be uniquely identified, if necessary.  The card and devices becomes the carrier of your identifier.  A thing that can be authentication as something you have.

Here is where the second factor comes in.  Is the person presenting the PAN the rightful and authorized individual? All this required, is assurance to the shareholders that the presentment of the PAN is a unique and authorized event.  This is best achieve by using either something you know or something you are to bind the individual to the instrument carrying the Identifier.

Yes, a bit of friction to assure the  consumer they are securely paying for what they want to buy

Since the World Wide Web came of age and merchants saw its potential.  The question of how to secure the Card Not Present space, this question of cardholder presence, has not been properly addressed.  Visa and MasterCard (when they were not for profit associations) created the utility of the Card Verification Result CVV2, CID or CVC2 which would be printed on  on the card and not part of the magnetic stripe, the problem the bad guys could still steal the card or get hte card number and capture CVV2..  MasterCard and Visa then created SET, 3D-Secure and now, as for profit owners of EMVCo, are proposing, maybe even will mandate, the industry implement EMV 3D-Secure.

Each, an attempt to provide some means of Authentication and Verification.

Each introducing a level of friction as a means of security.

This is the problem.  The market did not start by emphasizing the need for security by educating the consumer.  The industry needed to help the consumer understand they should care and want to securely pay for what they intend to buy.

Instead:

  • The Zero Liability Policy was adopted.
  • The merchant was more than happy to sustain a degree of lose (fraud) in exchange for sales and profits.

The result, as all anticipated would happen, was blissfully ignored and eventually they cried out about.

Fraud migrated to the weakest point
Just like water finds its way to the lowest point. 

EMV, introduced in the Face to Face card present environment, pushing the bad guys: be they criminals, state actors and terrorists to find alternate another channels for their financial gain.

EMV and now the recently published WebAuthN and FIDO specifications create effective mechanisms for Consumer Authentication.

Let us please remember – the PAN, a user name, your social security number or your email address are excellent Identifiers.  They should not be authenticators and they are not a means of “Identification”.

Let us also remember, the term Identification means that one is assured of the irrefutability of identity.

The big question:

  • Why did we have to get rid of or replace the PAN?
  • Why did we and continue to need to invent and invest in all this addition overhead?
  • Why did we not simply address authentication?

Some will argue the challenge of using the PIN or a Password, as a means of Verification, is because it is to hard to remember. Especially, if each password people use to access website, services, building, has to be unique.  Some will argue imposing friction to add security is not convenient.  Others will remind us that security is and has been a necessity since the beginning of time.

Why didn’t we when we created this great new digital shopping mall?

Bottom line each of the devices used to present or acquire the PAN, must be capable of authenticating the identity of the authorized presenter, in both the physical and virtual world.

At least these are the views of someone who believe history provides a baseline for tomorrow and tomorrow must be designed as a function of where you want to be, knowing where things came from.

 

A message unsubscribing to https://act.moveon.org

I agree with the actions you are all taking, yet. I am not a democrat nor a republican. Constantly begging me for a donation creates friction.

When a party emerges that is in the middle and represents

  • The fiscal values by focusing on the PEOPLE not the lobbyist, billionaires and companies with deep pocket.
  • The social responsibilities including but not limited to universal healthcare, the economy, equal education and the environment.

When these values which I hold dear become the focus on a party, then maybe.

All I see today is Greed, Pride getting in the way of common sense and mutual respect. All I hear is ugly noise from both parties. I see a city frozen. The election of President Obama created a racial divide. Washington now smelling like a cesspit, not just the swamp Trump spoke of.

We, through our electoral system, elected Donald Trump.

Am I happy

  • With the mess he has created with taxes, the economy, tariffs, immigration, the courts
  • With how he is treating Canada, Europe, Mexico and so many others
  • With what he has done to international treaties and trade
  • With his denial that humans have and do effect the planets environment climate Change is real

No!

Does it bother me that:

  • He is coddling the strong men of this world like Kim, Putin …?
  • The consequences of tariffs on Global trade are not part of the dialogue?
  • We do not understand the USA is no longer a manufacturer
    • We are a place where innovation drives invention.
    • We are a service economy and must focus on keeping these jobs here.

YES

Let him get on with doing his job. Yes the legislator must do its job and make sure we have a check and a balance. We must restore order and civil discourse.

That said, the press needs to spend less time talking about him. Yes, the press must do its job and be allowed and pushed to continue to do its job. They should highlight what is being done and what some think. But hours of talk only makes the divide wider. Today for any sensible individual to understand the reality one must watch BBC, CNN, FOX, CBS, PBS, NBC, and how many others to filter truth from spin.

We must restore respectful dialogue.

“Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.”
Romans 12:2

is this what it is really all about

June 25, 2018 I read this opinion piece –

White Extinction Anxiety – https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/24/opinion/america-white-extinction.html

And I reflected on the CBS News article my colleague sent me The message “86-ing” Sarah Sanders sent to conservatives – https://apple.news/AFUXCTyw5RS668F_2_ElK0A

When he and I we spoke earlier today, the following statement created the impetuous to write. He said the Sanders incident was “the step to far” I would argue it is simply another step in the wrong direction. Have we stepped over the line? Maybe yet all we have to do is read @realDonaldTrump tweets to wonder where the line is. I then think about:

  • The incident in Colorado, due to a difference in religious beliefs.
  • What happened as a result of white supremacists marching in Charlotte last year.
  • What is happening in restaurants in the DC area.
  • What is happening along our southern and northern borders.
  • What has happened to our legislator and our two-party system.
  • Trump and other conspirators issue over Obama and his place of Birth.
  • Pro-life versus woman’s rights.
  • The puritan right versus the socialist left.
  • Urban versus rural dwellers
  • Globalists versus nationalists
  • The issues of Palestine, Jerusalem and the Sunni Shite divide.
  • Pakistan, Israel, India, North Korea, Libya, Iran and all those others who sought, acquired or are seeking the power of the Atomic bomb.
  • Capitalism gone terribly wrong, with off-shore labor arbitrate killing American Jobs.

Adam Smith, I think, spoke in respect to a village economy. What I will call a closed system. Yes, this village can be free market. It is the ability to separate and push, that which is not part of our village, out; that defeats the equity built into that village.

This is further complicated by the divide between the rich and the poor, between the haves and have not and now between the Republicans and the Democrats. I could have spoken of race: Angle Saxon versus African versus Asia versus Japanese or Chinese and I am sure we could add a myriad of other point of contention. The issue is we are becoming less divided not more

It feels like we have devolved into a world that thinks – “If you are not one of us you are not my neighbor. How then do we find and restore balance? How do we merge these two Christian thoughts into one?

“The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

“How can Satan cast out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but his end has come.”

Earlier I was going to use the word Jihad. When I looked to the definition I had to hold that thoughts and use it in a different and more informed way. If I look at the two definitions 1. is what I planned to speak of. While 2. is what all of this is about.

Definition of jihad

  1. a holy war waged on behalf of Islam as a religious duty; also:
    a personal struggle in devotion to Islam especially involving spiritual discipline
  2. a crusade for a principle or belief

When Obama came into office our legislators found every reason not to work together. The Tea party emerged. The left drifted farther left.

Hillary divided this nation. There were those not willing to see the Clinton dynasty survive. There were those who wanted to turn inward, a protectionist state. There were those afraid of the future and the implications of the Fourth Revolution. There were those who did not believe in any form of social welfare, be it universal health, education or wealth.

All of this leaves me adrift.

Sunday, thinking of being in the boat in a storm

Listening to Brian our minister speak of today’s reading, he speaks of the challenge of the storm, we today, are surrounded by a storm set alight by division, fear and the confusion of what next.

Brian speaks of the love within. That love that rests inside each of us. He spoke if how we are turning away from religion.

This led me to ponder the demise of the gentle spirit Jesus tried to instill and restore in each of us. This thought often takes my heart to remembering how Jesus condensed the ten commandments down to two.

“The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

We have lost sight of this need to respect each other. We are torn apart by our differences. We are intolerant and believe we know better. We are divided as to our fiscal and social responsibilities.

The Lords and Masters who stand over us, insight dissension, foster racial attitudes, lie, and corrupt. Comedians, newscasters, authors and pundits make fun of the situation we are in.

Yet the sting of reality persists.

Of NFC, Mobile and History

Today I read Karen Augustine’s  Mobile Payments Use in the U.S. Lags

As I read and reflected on what Karen wrote, I reflected on my experiences as a sagged payment consultant and executive, with international experience.

What I see is an issue of legacy and muscle memory – setting a pattern for the future.  Said another way – our history defines the boundaries of our future.

Asia did not have electronic payments.  I am sure did not want to embrace the globally dominate American solution.  Therefore, they had the opportunity to start fresh.  It is very much like what Spain went through, went they moved from cash to electronic card-based payments.  They bypassed the check.

Her article brings back memories of life in Belgium in the 90’s.  Writing a check was a rare occurrence.  Direct debit mandates, a MisterCash card and a Eurocard was all we needed to buy and enjoy life.  Electronic payments was the norm, paper checks were a rare oddity and cash, well yes there was a very present grey economy.

Here in the USA we developed our payment systems off the back of regional or state banks with acceptance networks limited to a local domain.  Moving to a national system required early adoption of a common national currency.  We then went on to replace IOUs with paper checks and store cards with credit cards.  In time we enhances the ACH system and developed support for remote deposit and check capture.

Why do we need to move the card into the wallet?  Why change habits that are comfortable and work?  Most of us drive to shop and therefore must have our drivers license.  We must carry a physical document with us.  We simply carry two or more ID-1 sized cards.

You make the statement and was once again reminded of times past.

“… universal mobile wallets and more often driven from merchant based applications that often incorporate loyalty and rewards, which to date still remain nascent in universal mobile wallets.”

When I produced this rendering, back in 1996, I was on stage talking about a world where leather and technology converged.  I imaged Bluetooth, NFC, secure elements, GPS and our various credentials converging into this personal device.  Those credentials grouped into: travel, identity, membership, loyalty and payments; easy to find and present.

When contactless payments were  introduced, in 2004, by Visa’s with PayWave and MasterCard’s PayPass; I argued why contactless cards – how can the issuer afford the extra dollar per card (cost of the antenna and inlay) and the merchant the extra 60 dollars to enable the NFC reader?  The way Issuer income works, “Interchange”, the consumer would need to spend more on that issuer’s card.  For the merchant to justify the necessary POS investment, meant the retailer believed the consumers would spend more, because it was “easier”.  Was Tap To Pay going to make me spend more.  Maybe for small ticket purchases, I may use cash less; but at the merchants expense!  We argued the cost of cash was more than the Merchant Discount.  Some agreed.  Many wondered what the blank are they trying to sell us!

Around the same time America was exploring this contactless experience, the European Payment Council and GSMA debated and ultimately offered an approach for mobile card based contactless payments https://www.europeanpaymentscouncil.eu/sites/default/files/KB/files/EPC220-08-EPC-GSMA-TSM-WP-V1.pdf .  Handset manufactures like Nokia had already added NFC Antenna’s to their mobile phones and mobile network operators, the MNO, saw the SIM as the secure element capable of holding payment credentials.

Some tried, the Trusted Service Manager as a service was developed and deployed.  The challenge, the economics of the model.  In this case the MNO saw revenue and wanted to charge fees to load the payment credential into the phone and better yet charge rent to store these payment cards in our phones.  Again I ask the question, by changing the way we pay, do I cause us to want to spend more? I think not!

Maybe some would argue, with  a credit card people am able to buy things today that they cannot afford.  Let them end up in debt.  This is true.  But then is debt  at 18% a good thing?  Europeans simply decided to establish a line of credit, as a feature of a Current Account, at reasonable interest rates.

We could go on and talk about how Apple saw the possibility of a 0.15% income stream from ApplePay based mobile payments and how the EMVCo tokenization framework evolved to support their desire to protect the Apple Brand.

What is clear, we could solve George’s problem and replace his Full Grain Vegetable Tanned Cow Leather leather wallet with a Mobile Wallet managed by Apple, Google, Samsung or …

Or, we could think about the consumer and what they really want?

As your article made clear, and so many others have shared, Asia leaped forward.  Be it AliPay or WeChat, the device, the mobile phone, became the consumers wallet, their method of engaging, shopping, learning and exploring.

We need to accept to simply replace what we are comfortable with, with something new; which does not enhance our experience, is simply not worth it!

Many of us, like Karen, would argue the experience of shopping is what the mobile phone can enhance and let the act of payment become the afterthought.  A simple click to say – yes, I agree to pay.

Amazon got it right with One Click.  Others, as the patent expires, are embracing the same technique to simplify payment to a friction-less act of satisfaction.  When my favorite stores offer me an mobile app designed to enhance my shopping experience, to thrill me with offers and entice me with things I want; then yes I will become more loyal, I will shop at their store more frequently and maybe even buy a few things I did not intend to buy.

Many years ago while attending conference of groceries  in Abu Dhabi – one of the speakers share an experience.  when that supermarket executive instructed each store to put the beer across from the diapers, the intended result occurred.  The husband, sent to get the diapers, ended up buying  a six pack too.

Maybe, like this experience reveals, if we focus on the consumer experience and on delighting them.  They will embrace change.

If there is no value why should we?

Years ago I prepared and published an idea.  I called it Cando.  I was still committed to the idea of the mobile wallet.  I was an early adopter of the smart phone and saw its potential.

 

Cando

Block Chain. Hype, the future, fiction or a scheme?

A month or so ago I was asked to speak to an assembly of bankers and processors at the Atlanta Federal Reserve on Cryptocurrencies and blockchain.

 Yesterday over a lunch I ended up synthesizing my thoughts into a neat little package that I would like to start sharing.

Those who extoll the virtues of Block Chain  speak of:

  • Immutability – Cryptographers and mathematicians will prove the immutability of the algorithms, at least for now
  • Distributed – as long as there a multiple diverse and competing stakeholders this is great
  • Trustless – I keep asking the same question Who defines the content of the Block or the ledger or the transaction?  Everyone ultimately agrees a body of people and I sit there and say that sounds like a governance model.  Be it a currency, a ledger, a contract two or more must agree to structure format, content and rules.
  • Consensus – Great as long as we never exceed the 51% participation by A party, the model is superb.

I then think about Work and the reward

Be it Proof of Work or Proof of Stake the entities that do the work are intermediaries and will want to be rewarded for their work.

Then one must think about shifting from a solution that rewards someone with a coin to a system that rewards someone with a fee earned.

I then reflect on Bit Coin and its use of Proof of Work

Coins are created by the party who figured out the Nonce, as a reward for solving the cryptographic puzzle.

  • Once they earned 25 Bitcoins
  • Today they earn 12.5 Bitcoins
  • At some point, in the future, the reward will be cut in half and then half again

The challenge

As the chain gets longer the work gets harder

As time moves forward and the number of coins in circulation grows

The reward decreases in notation value. 

Sounds like inflation is built in. 

Real estate, computers and electricity cost money. 

As the work expands the costs increases!

In conclusion

There is inherent Inflation built into the Bit Coin Model.

We simply replace intermediaries with Nodes and Miners.

We require a governance model so we simply change the governor to another.

People will want to be paid for the work they do to build the block or assure consensus of the chain

What is truly revolutionary? 

The math, ok maybe. 

Immutability, it is done today with cryptography, without a block chain.

Multiple copies of the ledger spread around the world.  Yes, as long as we address confidentiality.

We have governance, sure we can always elect a new government

What is so magical?

 

Federation and the Identity Provider

This year, one of many discussions I’ve been involved in revolved around these two foundational terms. In our digital environment and in support of an ever increasing array of people – individuals – engaging and interacting in the physical and virtual world, the questions – who are you and who can prove who you claim to be – becomes a critical element of establishing business and social relationships.

“Once Upon a Time” we lived in villages and knew our neighbors. When we travel afar, we would go with a letter of introduction from a Lord or other important, known and recognized person. A credential signed and sealed would assure safe passage and presented as. Proof of Identity upon arrival. Trusted identify established via a signed and sealed inside a Letter of Introduction.

Federation is a mechanism to convey a proof of identity in a digital world.

of Tokens and Things

Things, now there is a big word.

  • I am a thing
  • It is a thing
  • I know a thing
  • Things must therefore be anything

The dictionary rambles on about things.

Tokens, What is this thing?

Tokenization why is everyone so excited?

Tokenization and the Search for Identity

The belief in tokens emerges from the need to address security in a world where an identifier becomes an authenticator.

The PAN on the front of a ID-1 Card defined and governed by the International standard IS)/IEC 7812-1. When it was originally conceived there was no desire to turn the PAN into PII Data. They simply wanted the PAN to be an index, “a pointer” “an Identifier”, to an account, or relationship, a card issuer (financial institution) created between itself and the cardholder. In our quest to take advantage of the telephone, the mail and ultimately the internet as a set of sales channel. The Payment System actors agreed if the card acceptor “merchant” would accept liability. Then, they could simply use the PAN, the expiry data and cardholders name to effect a card payment. This acceptance of liability was an acknowledgement they could not inspect the card and verify that the physical security features where present, hence the token was not present to be authenticated.

Society in its infinite wisdom followed another path with the Social Security Number. A number originally designed to act simply as a unique value representing each person here in the United States. Unfortunately, as is often true, we took the short cut, assumed this number, stored on hundreds of databases and recorded on an equally large number of forms, could be used to authenticate that you the individual was present.

mysteriously and without thought society allowed these numbers to take on values they where never intended to assume. They became “secrets” number that if known to another could be used to take over our identity. They can make payments in our name. They can apply for loans and take over our financial assets without the true individual being the wiser.

Those that seek to profit and do not share societies morality find ways of taking advantages of our desire to cut cost and reduce friction. They create near perfect counterfeits of these tokens, they take advantage of our naivety and they seek to disrupt and profit.

We could do as we have often done in the past – replace the token with a token. We could claim by tokenizing these identifier with another vale we were adding layers of security. We argued that if this new tokenized value could only be used by that merchant or with that physical device; security would be restored. The question how long would that new think provide the security its champions claimed it would offer.