Securing Transactions

822
-1

Published on

A presentation on the issues encountered implementing secure mobile transactions - from user acceptance to security.

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
822
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
32
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Securing Transactions

  1. 1. Tom Godber - CTO Masabi - Co-Founder MoMo Estonia
  2. 2. ESTONIAN NOT ESTONIAN
  3. 3.  The mobile experience is about PAIN  Texting on a Moto…  Nokia moves the S60 icons in every new handset  User experience is becoming important  Ex-RAZR users often don‟t Moto again  But nothing is perfect, even Steve
  4. 4.  Good ideas are common  Good ideas which actually work aren‟t  Given handset constraints  Given real world conditions  Compared to off-mobile alternatives
  5. 5.  A successful service must offer a significant advantage to the user  An mPayment must be easier than cash and cards  Just because a user can do something, doesn‟t mean they will  Offer net pain relief
  6. 6.  User probably moving  Must be simple  Must be resilient  Has user got alternatives?  Cash  Debit/credit cards  PC
  7. 7.  Lots of hype  (Almost) no handset support  NFC already embedded on cards  Habit: you pay with a card, why use phone?  BUT: NFC on SIM may be interesting  Launched last week in Thailand  For markets without much card use…?
  8. 8.  SIM Toolkit  SMS  Basic browser  AJAX browser  Installed application
  9. 9.  Runs on every handset  Simple UIs  Very big eg. in African banking  The operator is your customer  No potential to run “off-deck”  Only operator lets you on the SIM
  10. 10.  Good for simple transactions  Easy to set up, works on everything  High cost  30-60% operator cut  Best for low-value high-margin items  Insecure  Can be read on stolen phones  Can be read on the network
  11. 11.  Wap1 was insecure with “Wap Gap”  Plain text through gateway  Very low encryption strengths  Wap2 is better  Dumb client  Data mis-entry is painful  Repeat page loads slow and expensive  Hard to store tickets etc  SMS Picture Message – little data  MMS – can be mangled
  12. 12.  Offers great advantages to developer  No upgrade concerns, etc  Great on your desktop PC  Fast, free, always-on data connections  Plenty of speed, memory and electricity  Overhead of XML + scripts + repeat HTTP doesn‟t matter  Users all using mouse and big screen  Does that remind you of mobile?
  13. 13.  You don‟t have to be the „best‟  Sometimes being the only option is good enough  NOT suitable for everything  Remember, pick your services  Good for:  Recurring purchases  Flaky connections ▪ Retries, SMS fallback, fat intelligent client
  14. 14.  Ticket purchase in UK  Aimed at repeat users  Intelligent client  Helps user with data entry => minimises resends  Submits credit card purchase with one encrypted SMS  Good when signal strength low  2D barcode display for ticket  Optimised for on-screen scanning
  15. 15.  There is no single „best platform‟  Most topics expanded on the Masabists blog http://blog.masabi.com/

×