Hubbry Logo
Card security codeCard security codeMain
Open search
Card security code
Community hub
Card security code
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Card security code
Card security code
Card security code
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

The card security code is located on the back of Mastercard, Visa, Discover, Diners Club, and JCB credit or debit cards and is typically a separate group of three digits to the right of the signature strip
On American Express cards, the card security code is a printed, not embossed, group of four digits on the front towards the right

A card security code (CSC; also known as CVC, CVV, or several other names) is a series of numbers that, in addition to the bank card number, is printed (but not embossed) on a credit or debit card. The CSC is used as a security feature for card-not-present transactions, where a personal identification number (PIN) cannot be manually entered by the cardholder (as they would during point-of-sale or card present transactions). It was instituted to reduce the incidence of credit card fraud. Unlike the card number, the CSC is deliberately not embossed, so that it is not read when using a mechanical credit card imprinter which will only pick up embossed numbers.

These codes are in slightly different places for different card issuers. The CSC for Visa, Mastercard, and Discover credit cards is a three-digit number on the back of the card, to the right of the signature box. The CSC for American Express is a four-digit code on the front of the card above the account number. See the figures to the right for examples.

CSC was originally developed in the UK as an eleven-character alphanumeric code by Equifax employee Michael Stone in 1995. After testing with the Littlewoods Home Shopping group and NatWest bank, the concept was adopted by the UK Association for Payment Clearing Services (APACS) and streamlined to the three-digit code known today. Mastercard started issuing CVC2 numbers in 1997 and Visa in the United States issued them by 2001. American Express started to use the CSC in 1999, in response to growing Internet transactions and card member complaints of spending interruptions when the security of a card has been brought into question.

Contactless card and chip cards may electronically generate their own code, such as iCVV or a dynamic CVV.366

Naming

[edit]

The codes have different names:

  • "CSC" or "card security code": debit cards,[which?] American Express (three digits on back of card, also referred to as 3CSC)[1]
  • "CVC" or "card validation code": Mastercard
  • "CVV" or "card verification value": Visa
  • "CAV" or "card authentication value": JCB
  • "CID": "card ID", "card identification number", or "card identification code": Discover, American Express (four digits on front of card). American Express usually uses the four-digit code on the front of the card, referred to as the card identification code (CID), but also has a three-digit code on the back of the card, referred to as the card security code (CSC). American Express also sometimes refers to a "unique card code".[2]
  • "CVD" or "card verification data": Discover
  • "CVE" or "Elo verification code": Elo in Brazil
  • "CVN" or "card validation number", also "card verification number": China UnionPay, Google Ads[3]
  • "SPC" or "signature panel code"[4]
  • "CCV" or "card code verification": commonly used in Canada

Types

[edit]

There are several types of security codes and PVV (all generated from DES key in the bank in HSM modules using PAN, expiration date and service code):

  • The first code, 3 numbers, called CVC1 or CVV1, is encoded on track one and two of the magnetic stripe of the card and used for card present transactions, with signature (second track also contains pin verification value, PVV, but now it is usually all zeroed out and service code). The purpose of the code is to verify that a payment card is actually in the hand of the merchant (thus it should be different from CVV2). This code is automatically retrieved when the magnetic stripe of a card is read (swiped) on a point-of-sale (card present) device and is verified by the issuer. A limitation is that if the entire card has been duplicated and the magnetic stripe copied, then the code is still valid, notwithstanding the fact that cardholder signature will still usually be required (see: Credit card fraud § Skimming).
  • The second code, and the most cited, is CVV2 or CVC2. This code is often used by merchants for card-not-present transactions including online purchases. In some countries in Western Europe, card issuers require a merchant to obtain the code when the cardholder is not present in person. Uses service code 000.
  • Contactless and/or chip EMV cards supply their own electronically generated codes, called iCVV. Uses service code 999. It is described in public standards from EMVCo.
  • Consumer Device Cardholder Verification Method (CDCVM for short) is a type of identity verification in which the user's mobile device (such as a smartphone) is used to verify the user's identity; for example, it can use the device's biometrics authentication features (e.g. Touch ID or Face ID), or the device's set passcode. It is supported by a number of payment systems, such as Apple Pay,[5] Google Pay[6] or Samsung Pay.[7]

Location

[edit]
Some cards do not place card security code on the cards themselves, cardholders can look for it inside the bank's mobile application

The card security code is typically the last three or four digits printed, not embossed like the card number, on the signature strip on the back of the card. On American Express cards, however, the card security code is the four digits printed (not embossed) on the front towards the right. The card security code is not encoded on the magnetic stripe but is printed flat.

  • American Express cards have a four-digit code printed on the front side of the card above the number.
  • Diners Club, Discover, JCB, Mastercard, and Visa credit and debit cards have a three-digit card security code. The code is the final group of numbers printed on the back signature panel of the card.
  • New North American Mastercard and Visa cards feature the code in a separate panel to the right of the signature strip.[8] This has been done to prevent overwriting of the numbers by signing the card.

Generation

[edit]

The CSC for each card (form 1 and 2) is generated by the card issuer when the card is issued. It is calculated by encrypting the bank card number and expiration date (two fields printed on the card) with encryption keys known only to the card issuer, and decimalising the result (in a similar manner to a hash function).[9][10][11]

Benefits and limitations

[edit]

As a security measure, merchants who require the CVV2 for card-not-present transactions are required by the card issuer not to store the CVV2 once the individual transaction is authorized.[12] This way, if a database of transactions is compromised, the CVV2 is not present and the stolen card numbers are less useful. Virtual terminals and payment gateways do not store the CVV2 code; therefore, employees and customer service representatives with access to these web-based payment interfaces, who otherwise have access to complete card numbers, expiration dates, and other information, still lack the CVV2 code.

The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) also prohibits the storage of CSC (and other sensitive authorisation data) post transaction authorisation. This applies globally to anyone who stores, processes or transmits cardholder data.[13] Since the CSC is not contained on the magnetic stripe of the card, it is not typically included in the transaction when the card is used face to face at a merchant. However, some merchants in North America, such as Sears and Staples, require the code. For American Express cards, this has been an invariable practice (for card-not-present transactions) in European Union (EU) countries like Ireland and the United Kingdom since the start of 2005. This provides a level of protection to the bank/cardholder, in that a fraudulent merchant or employee cannot simply capture the magnetic stripe details of a card and use them later for card-not-present transactions over the phone, mail order or Internet. To do this, a merchant or its employee would also have to note the CVV2 visually and record it, which is more likely to arouse the cardholder's suspicion.

Supplying the CSC code in a transaction is intended to verify that the customer has the card in their possession. Knowledge of the code proves that the customer has seen the card, or has seen a record made by somebody who saw the card.

Limitations include:

  • The use of the CSC cannot protect against phishing scams, where the cardholder is tricked into entering the CSC among other card details via a fraudulent website. The growth in phishing has reduced the real-world effectiveness of the CSC as an anti-fraud device. There is now also a scam where a phisher has already obtained the card account number (perhaps by hacking a merchant database or from a poorly designed receipt) and gives this information to the victims (lulling them into a false sense of security) before asking for the CSC (which is all that the phisher needs and the purpose of the scam in the first place).[14]
  • Since the CSC may not be stored by the merchant for any length of time[12] (after the original transaction in which the CSC was quoted and then authorized), a merchant who needs to regularly bill a card for a regular subscription would not be able to provide the code after the initial transaction. Payment gateways, however, have responded by adding "periodic bill" features as part of the authorization process.
  • Some card issuers do not use the CSC. However, transactions without CSC are possibly subjected to higher card processing cost to the merchants,[citation needed] and fraudulent transactions without CSC are more likely to be resolved in favour of the cardholder.[citation needed]
  • It is not mandatory for a merchant to require the security code for making a transaction, so the card may still be prone to fraud even if only its number is known to phishers. For example, Amazon requires only a card number and expiration date to complete a transaction.
  • It is possible for a fraudster to guess the CSC by using a distributed attack.[15]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Card security code

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A card security code (CSC), also referred to as CVV (Card Verification Value), CVC (Card Verification Code), or CID (Card Identification Number), is a three- or four-digit alphanumeric code printed or encoded on payment cards such as credit, debit, and prepaid cards to verify the cardholder's possession of the physical card during transactions. This code serves as an additional authentication factor, primarily for card-not-present (CNP) transactions like online shopping, phone orders, or mail orders, where the card is not swiped or inserted, helping to prevent fraud by confirming the buyer has access to the card details not visible on the front. The location and format of the CSC vary by card network and issuer. For Visa, , and Discover cards, it is typically a three-digit number printed on the back in the signature panel or strip, adjacent to the magnetic stripe. uses a four-digit (CID) printed on the front of the card, above the card number. There are two primary variants: CVV1/CVC1, a encoded invisibly in the card's magnetic stripe for in-person point-of-sale verification during swipe transactions, and CVV2/CVC2, the visible printed designed specifically for remote CNP use to avoid exposure through magstripe skimming. Merchants are required not to store the CSC after , minimizing risks in breaches, and its use is mandated by payment network rules like those from Visa and for enhanced transaction security. Introduced to address rising in early , the CSC originated in the UK in 1995 as an 11-character alphanumeric code developed for mail-order , later simplified to its current numeric form. adopted it in 1997 as CVC2, followed by Visa in 2001 with CVV2, marking a key evolution in card payment standards amid the growth of online transactions. Today, it remains a foundational anti- measure, with innovations like dynamic CVVs—temporarily generated codes that change frequently—offered by issuers via apps or services to further thwart unauthorized reuse, though it does not protect against or in-person theft.

History and Development

Origins

In the early , the experienced a significant surge in , particularly in card-not-present transactions such as mail-order and sales, which lacked the physical verification of in-person purchases. This period predated the widespread adoption of the for , making remote transactions vulnerable to stolen card details obtained through or social engineering. losses from credit cards in the UK escalated rapidly, rising from £122 million in 1997 to £293 million by 2000, prompting urgent calls for enhanced security measures within the payment industry. To address this growing threat, UK-based engineer Michael Stone invented the card security code in 1995 specifically to combat mail-order fraud. Stone's initial proposal featured an 11-character alphanumeric code printed on the card's signature strip, designed to verify the cardholder's possession of the physical card during remote transactions without requiring additional equipment. This innovation aimed to add a layer of that fraudsters could not easily replicate if they only had the card number and expiration date. Following early testing, the concept received endorsement from the Association for Payment Clearing Services (APACS) in 1996, which streamlined the code to a simpler three-digit numeric format for practicality and ease of implementation. This refinement facilitated broader testing among UK issuers and merchants, laying the groundwork for its eventual global adoption by major card networks.

Adoption by Major Networks

Mastercard was the first major card network to adopt a card security code, introducing the Card Validation Code (CVC) in 1997 following initial trials in the . This three-digit code, printed on the signature strip of the card, was mandated for all credit and debit cards by January 1, 1997, to verify card possession during non-face-to-face transactions and combat rising fraud in early . American Express followed in 1999 by implementing its four-digit Card Identification Number (CID), positioned on the front of the card above the account number, to provide an additional layer of validation for mail-order and online purchases. Visa joined later, rolling out the Card Verification Value 2 (CVV2) in 2001 across the , building on ongoing industry discussions around chip technology standards that emphasized enhanced authentication for remote transactions. This implementation required all Visa cards to include the CVV2 by January 1, 2001, aligning with the growing need for secure online payments. The adoption of these security codes expanded rapidly to international markets during the , particularly in where e-commerce growth accelerated alongside the rollout of chip-and-PIN systems, reducing card-not-present through mandatory code verification at merchants. In the United States, widespread implementation occurred by the mid-, driven by surging online retail volumes that necessitated robust prevention measures beyond magnetic stripe data. A pivotal development came in with the launch of the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) by major networks including Visa, , and , which integrated security code requirements into global compliance frameworks, mandating their use in authorization requests while prohibiting post-authorization storage to minimize risks. By the 2010s, as chip cards gained traction worldwide—with 14.7 billion issued globally as of 2024—the static security codes evolved to support chip-based environments through dynamic variants like integrated CVVs (iCVV), which generate transaction-specific codes to further secure both contact and contactless payments while maintaining compatibility for card-not-present scenarios. This shift complemented the core PCI DSS guidelines, enhancing overall network resilience against evolving threats.

Naming and Terminology

Common Terms

The primary terms used in the payment card industry for the security code are Card Security Code (CSC), Card Verification Value (CVV), and Card Verification Code (CVC). These acronyms refer to the same type of verification feature, a short numeric code printed on the card to authenticate transactions without physical card presence. The term CVV originates from Visa's concept of a "verification value," a calculated designed to confirm card authenticity during remote transactions, while CVC stems from Mastercard's designation of a "verification " for similar purposes. CSC serves as a more general industry term encompassing these and other variants. In non-technical contexts, such as materials, the feature is commonly referred to simply as the "security code" to emphasize its role in prevention without delving into brand-specific acronyms. CVV is occasionally used generically for the security code across networks.

Variations by Issuer

Different card issuers and networks employ distinct terminology and minor format variations for their security codes, reflecting proprietary implementations while adhering to broader industry standards for fraud prevention. These differences primarily involve the acronym used and, in some cases, the number of digits, but the core purpose remains consistent across issuers. Visa designates its three-digit security code as the Card Verification Value (CVV), printed on the back of the card. Mastercard refers to its equivalent three-digit code as the Card Verification Code (CVC), also located on the back. American Express uses a four-digit Card Identification Number (CID), uniquely positioned on the front of the card above the card number. Discover employs the Card Identification Number (CID) for its three-digit code, similar in format to Visa and Mastercard but with issuer-specific branding. In regional contexts, JCB cards in Japan utilize the Card Authentication Value (CAV), a three-digit code aligned with international norms but tailored for the network's authentication processes. Some European issuers, particularly in payment processing for Visa and Mastercard transactions, refer to the code as a V-Code (verification code), emphasizing its role in transaction validation without altering the standard digit length. These variations help issuers differentiate their systems while integrating with global payment networks.

Types of Security Codes

Static Codes

Static codes, also known as CVV2 for Visa cards, CVC2 for cards, and CID for Discover and cards, are fixed three- or four-digit numerical values printed on the back or front of payment cards. These codes are not encoded within the card's magnetic stripe, distinguishing them from earlier verification values used in physical transactions, and are generated at the time of card issuance to remain constant throughout the card's validity period. For instance, a typical static code might appear as "123" on the signature panel of a Visa card, serving as a static identifier tied to the physical card. The primary purpose of static codes is to enhance security in card-not-present (CNP) transactions, such as , mail-order, or telephone purchases, where the merchant lacks physical access to the card. By requiring the cardholder to provide this additional detail alongside the card number and , issuers can verify possession of the physical card, thereby reducing the risk of from stolen card data alone. This verification occurs when the code is transmitted to the during , confirming its match against the recorded value without revealing full card details to unauthorized parties. In terms of format, static codes consist of three digits for Visa, , and Discover cards, while uses a four-digit code, often printed in a smaller font on the front of the card. These specifications ensure uniformity across major networks, facilitating seamless integration into merchant systems for CNP verification. Historically, static codes originated in the in 1995, developed by Michael Stone of and adopted by the Association for Payment Clearing Services (APACS), before gaining global traction. introduced CVC2 in 1997, followed by and Visa in the United States by 2001, marking their widespread rollout to combat rising CNP fraud in the pre-chip era. They remained the dominant security measure for CNP transactions from the early 2000s through the 2010s, particularly in regions slow to adopt chip technology, such as the U.S., where chip migration only accelerated in the mid-2010s. This period saw static codes integrated into virtually all platforms, significantly curbing unauthorized use until dynamic alternatives began emerging.

Dynamic and Chip-Based Codes

Dynamic and chip-based security codes represent an evolution from static codes, integrating cryptographic processes within -compliant chips to generate variable values per transaction, particularly for contactless payments. Unlike static codes printed on cards, these dynamic codes, such as the integrated Card Verification Value (iCVV), are produced on-the-fly by the card's embedded chip during interaction with a . This approach leverages the EMV chip's to create a unique, pseudo-random verification value based on transaction-specific data and cryptographic keys, ensuring that each code is valid only for that instance. The iCVV is specifically designed for chip-present and contactless transactions under standards, where the chip computes the value using advanced to authenticate the card and prevent unauthorized use of intercepted data. Introduced as part of EMVCo's specifications with enhancements in contactless protocols, this mechanism generates pseudo-random values that incorporate elements like the transaction counter and unpredictable numbers from , making replication difficult. In tokenization services, a similar dynamic Card Verification Value (dCVV) is employed; for example, Apple Pay uses a transaction-specific dynamic security code—a generated by the device's —while Google Pay incorporates a dynamically generated DCVV to replace the static CVV during mobile wallet transactions. These codes are validated by issuers in real-time, enhancing security for non-physical card interactions. A key advantage of dynamic and chip-based codes over static ones is their ability to mitigate replay attacks, where fraudsters attempt to reuse captured transaction data, as the values change with each use and cannot be predictably duplicated without the chip's private keys. Payment networks have integrated these into protocols; Visa's Visa Secure ( 3-D Secure) supports dynamic CVV generation for risk-based verification in card-not-present scenarios, while Mastercard's Identity Check employs similar dynamic elements to confirm cardholder authenticity during online transactions. By the , adoption has become widespread, with chip technology underpinning over 95% of global card-present transactions as of 2024, including more than 90% contactless in and substantial growth in the US exceeding 80% chip-based payments.

Physical Characteristics

Location on Cards

The card security code, also known as CVV or CVC, is typically located on the back of Visa, , and Discover cards, positioned in the signature strip to the right of the printed card number. This placement follows industry standards set by these major networks to ensure the code is not easily visible during physical transactions while remaining accessible for verification. American Express cards present an exception, with the four-digit security code (CID) printed on the front of the card, usually above the card number on the right side. This design choice aligns with 's unique card layout, where the full 16-digit account number appears on the front rather than the back. Debit cards issued under Visa or networks generally adhere to the same placement conventions as their credit card counterparts, with the code on the back in the signature area. However, some prepaid debit cards may omit the printed code entirely or position it on the front, particularly if they are designed primarily for in-person use without support for online transactions. Contactless cards, which incorporate chips for tap-to-pay functionality, still feature the static security code printed in the standard locations to support card-not-present transactions, though the chip generates dynamic data for physical contactless payments. To enhance security and deter casual copying or skimming, the security code is always printed rather than embossed and uses a small, non-standardized font size that is difficult to read from a distance.

Appearance and Format

The card security code, also known as CVV, CVC, or CID depending on the issuer, is standardized in its numerical length to facilitate consistent verification processes. For Visa, , and Discover cards, it consists of three digits, while uses a four-digit CID. These codes are printed using flat or techniques directly on the card's surface or within the signature panel, ensuring legibility and resistance to wear. On modern Visa cards, particularly Quick Read designs, the code appears below the account number and in a tone-on-tone format for subtle integration with the card's artwork. specifications similarly require flat printing in a color that provides sufficient contrast against the background, often in black or gray ink to match the overall card aesthetics. Premium cards may incorporate advanced elements, such as holographic overlays or micro-text integrated into the card's surface, to deter photocopying and counterfeiting attempts. These features shift appearance under light or magnification, adding a layer of visual verification. The format adheres to strict rules for validation: the comprises digits from 0 to 9, with no prohibition on leading zeros, allowing values like 012 or 000 in valid cases. It includes an embedded validation mechanism derived from the card's primary account number and service , enabling basic integrity checks during transactions without revealing the full generation process. Following the widespread adoption of chip technology in the , card issuers shifted toward laser-etched printing for security codes on many plastic and premium metal cards, improving durability against abrasion and environmental damage compared to earlier embossed or ink-based methods. This evolution aligns with broader trends in flat card designs, where placement variations—such as within or outside the signature panel—maintain consistent formatting for readability.

Generation Process

Algorithm Fundamentals

The card security code is generated through a cryptographic process that primarily involves encrypting key card details to produce a short numeric value, typically 3 or 4 digits long. The core inputs include the primary account number (PAN), the card's (in YYMM format), and the service code (a 3-digit value indicating card usage permissions per ISO/IEC 7813). This data is concatenated and encrypted using the (DES) or, more commonly in modern implementations, (3DES) with a double-length key known as the Card Verification Key (CVK). The resulting is then truncated or processed to yield the final code, ensuring it verifies the authenticity of the card details without exposing sensitive information. A critical component of the generation is the use of master keys to derive the CVK, which is combined with the card-specific data for uniqueness. The master key, often a double-length 3DES key (16 bytes), is used to perform the in a way that ties the code exclusively to the individual card instance. This derivation prevents the code from being reproducible without access to the 's cryptographic infrastructure, as the CVK is not stored on the card itself. The process incorporates a element, functioning as a proprietary validation digit that confirms the integrity of the encrypted output, akin to but distinct from standard methods like the used for the PAN. The fundamental algorithm can be represented in simplified pseudo-code as follows, where the encryption yields an 8-byte output from which the last 3 decimal digits are extracted:

Input: PAN (rightmost digits, padded), Expiry (YYMM), Service Code (3 digits) Data = Concatenate(PAN + Expiry + Service Code), padded to 16 hex bytes Key1 = Left 8 bytes of CVK Key2 = Right 8 bytes of CVK Temp1 = DES_Encrypt(Data[1-8], Key1) Temp2 = XOR(Temp1, Data[9-16]) Temp3 = DES_Encrypt(Temp2, Key1) Temp4 = DES_Decrypt(Temp3, Key2) CVV_Output = DES_Encrypt(Temp4, Key1) CVV = Decimal of rightmost 3 digits of CVV_Output (mod 1000)

Input: PAN (rightmost digits, padded), Expiry (YYMM), Service Code (3 digits) Data = Concatenate(PAN + Expiry + Service Code), padded to 16 hex bytes Key1 = Left 8 bytes of CVK Key2 = Right 8 bytes of CVK Temp1 = DES_Encrypt(Data[1-8], Key1) Temp2 = XOR(Temp1, Data[9-16]) Temp3 = DES_Encrypt(Temp2, Key1) Temp4 = DES_Decrypt(Temp3, Key2) CVV_Output = DES_Encrypt(Temp4, Key1) CVV = Decimal of rightmost 3 digits of CVV_Output (mod 1000)

This stepwise encryption, often referred to as a DES-based derivation function, produces the code. The security foundation of this lies in its resistance to reverse-engineering; without the proprietary CVK, the visible card data (PAN, expiry, and service code) alone cannot yield the code, as the provides computational intractability under DES/3DES standards. While core principles are standardized, issuer-specific customizations in key derivation or padding may apply.

Issuer-Specific Implementation

Visa implements CVV2 as a static security code derived from the primary account number (PAN), expiration date, and specific elements of the magnetic stripe track data, particularly the service code in Track 2, to ensure consistency with card-present verification processes. This derivation leverages a proprietary algorithm that incorporates track data to generate the three-digit code printed on the back of the card, distinguishing it from CVV1, which is encoded directly in the magnetic stripe. Furthermore, Visa integrates CVV2 verification within its 3D Secure protocol, where the code is required alongside other authentication factors to authorize card-not-present transactions, enhancing risk assessment during online payments. Mastercard employs CVC2 through a derivation process that utilizes unique keys associated with the Bank Identification Number (BIN), allowing issuers to customize security for specific card ranges while maintaining compatibility across networks. The three-digit CVC2 is generated offline using the PAN, expiration date, and a card verification key (CVK) derived from BIN-specific master keys, ensuring the code cannot be easily replicated without access to issuer systems. This BIN-tailored approach enables scalable key management, where each issuing institution applies its derivation parameters to produce the printed code on the card's signature panel. American Express utilizes a four-digit Card Identification Number (CID) placed on the front of the card, above the PAN, generated via a proprietary method that incorporates card-specific data to produce a unique, non-reproducible value. Unlike other networks, the front placement facilitates visual verification during issuance and integrates with Amex's fraud detection systems, where the CID is hot-stamped for tamper resistance. The method remains confidential to prevent reverse-engineering, but it aligns with general principles of combining account details and expiration for code computation. In chip environments, the integrated CVV (iCVV) is generated dynamically by the card's chip during transactions, employing session keys derived from the issuer master key and transaction-specific data to produce a one-time verification value embedded in the chip's Track 2 equivalent data. This process uses symmetric , such as 3DES or AES, with session keys created per interaction to authenticate the card without relying on the static printed code, supporting both contact and contactless modes. Post-2020, major payment networks have shifted toward AES encryption in key derivation for security codes, incorporating 256-bit keys to bolster resistance against threats that could compromise asymmetric elements in legacy systems. EMVCo updated its card personalization specifications in 2021 to mandate AES support for generation, enabling issuers to future-proof iCVV and dynamic codes while maintaining with existing infrastructure. This transition addresses potential vulnerabilities in older 3DES-based methods, prioritizing symmetric algorithms proven resilient to quantum attacks like .

Usage and Verification

Card-Not-Present Transactions

In card-not-present (CNP) transactions, such as those conducted online, over the phone, or via , the card security code—commonly referred to as CVV (Card Verification Value) for Visa and or CVC (Card Verification Code) for other networks—serves as a critical authentication element. Under payment network rules such as those from Visa and , merchants are required to collect the CVV for and other remote payments to verify cardholder possession of the physical card. For recurring transactions, the CVV is typically required only for the initial authorization, after which it cannot be stored under PCI DSS guidelines. Customers must enter this three- or four-digit code alongside the primary account number (PAN) and card during the transaction process, helping to distinguish legitimate users from those attempting to use stolen card details obtained without the physical card. Verification occurs in real-time through the , which forwards the submitted CVV to the card 's secure database for an exact match against the encoded value associated with the card. If the codes align, the approves the request; however, any mismatch triggers an automatic decline of the transaction to block potential . To counter repeated guessing attempts, processors enforce limits, restricting the number of CVV submissions per card or within a short timeframe, such as multiple failed tries in minutes. These measures collectively form a frontline defense in CNP environments, where the absence of physical card heightens vulnerability. The CVV is frequently integrated with advanced protocols like 3D Secure (3DS), including Verified by Visa and Mastercard SecureCode, to provide . In these systems, after CVV entry, the cardholder may receive a (OTP) via , , or app push notification for final confirmation, shifting liability for from merchants to issuers in compliant transactions. This layered approach has proven effective in reducing rates in CNP scenarios. Unlike card-present scenarios, where the CVV can be automatically read from the chip or magnetic stripe, CNP relies entirely on manual entry to maintain .

Card-Present and Contactless Transactions

In card-present transactions using traditional magnetic stripe swipes, the CVV1 (or CVC1 for ) serves as a static security embedded in Track 2 of the card's magnetic stripe data, verifying physical possession of the card during . This , typically three or four digits, was integral to swipe-based payments before widespread adoption, but its verification has become rare in the EMV era, as terminals prioritize chip data over fallback stripe reads to mitigate risks. With the shift to chip technology, the initiates an process by communicating directly with the card's embedded microchip, which generates a unique, one-time —a dynamic code—for each transaction to validate authenticity and prevent counterfeiting. This chip-based flow replaces static codes like CVV1, as the terminal requests and receives the (often incorporating elements like iCVV) from the chip without manual entry, ensuring encrypted data exchange compliant with EMV specifications. In contactless transactions, (NFC) enables tap-to-pay interactions where the chip dynamically generates an iCVV—a transaction-specific code equivalent to the CVV—for seamless without requiring manual input of any security code by the user or merchant. Unlike static CVVs printed on the card, the iCVV varies per use, enhancing security by making intercepted data useless for subsequent transactions, and is transmitted automatically via NFC to the terminal for verification. For low-value transactions, contactless payments often serve as a fallback option without PIN entry if under issuer-set thresholds, such as £100 in the UK or $50–$100 in the US, allowing quick taps while still leveraging dynamic chip codes; exceeding these limits typically prompts chip insertion or PIN for added verification. By 2025, approximately 95% of global card-present transactions utilize EMV chip or contactless methods, significantly reducing reliance on static magnetic stripe codes like CVV1 and minimizing exposure to associated vulnerabilities.

Benefits

Fraud Prevention Mechanisms

The card security code provides a critical barrier against skimming attacks by being excluded from the encoded on a card's magnetic stripe or embedded chip. Skimming devices, which capture information from the stripe during physical card use, cannot retrieve the code, thereby preventing sters from obtaining complete card details needed for unauthorized remote transactions. This design ensures that even if primary account details are compromised through physical or capture, the absence of the code limits the utility of stolen information for high-risk activities. In card-not-present (CNP) transactions, such as online purchases, the security code verifies the cardholder's physical possession of the card, blocking fraudulent use even when the primary account number and are known to the attacker. By requiring this additional validation at checkout, merchants can filter out many unauthorized attempts, significantly lowering the incidence of CNP . When integrated with (AVS), which cross-checks billing addresses, the security code strengthens overall fraud detection and can reduce chargebacks from stolen card use by up to 70%. This combination forms a foundational element of layered security strategies, serving as an initial defense mechanism alongside advanced tools like tokenization and real-time monitoring to mitigate multi-vector threats.

Role in Payment Standards

The card security code, also known as CVV or CVC, plays a pivotal role in Co specifications by enabling secure chip-to-magnet stripe interoperability through the integrated Card Verification Value (iCVV). Introduced as part of chip card standards, the iCVV generates a dynamic verification value embedded in the chip's Track 2 equivalent , allowing terminals to validate transactions even in fallback scenarios without exposing the static CVV. This feature, mandated for chip cards issued after January 1, 2008, ensures global consistency in authentication across contact and contactless environments, reducing in regions transitioning from magnetic stripe to chip technology. Within the () protocol managed by EMVCo, card security codes support transactions as part of standard card details, while the protocol itself enables risk-based authentication, particularly in released in October 2016. 3DS 2.0 uses device data and behavioral analytics to enable frictionless flows for low-risk transactions while prompting stronger verification for higher-risk ones, such as one-time passwords or . This enhancement shifts from static password reliance in earlier versions to dynamic, data-enriched assessments, improving approval rates and reducing cart abandonment in online payments. Card security codes synergize with tokenization in mobile payment systems like Apple Pay, launched in 2014, where a Device Primary Account Number (DPAN) replaces the actual card number, paired with a dynamically generated CVV for each transaction. This approach, using network tokenization standards from Visa and Mastercard, ensures that even if intercepted, tokenized data remains useless without the ephemeral CVV, bolstering security for contactless and in-app payments. Apple Pay's implementation provisions a unique CVV per use, generated via the Secure Enclave processor, aligning with EMVCo's secure element requirements. In the , under the effective from 2018, card security codes facilitate secure recurring payments by supporting initial (SCA) exemptions for subsequent transactions in fixed-amount subscriptions. After the first SCA-compliant setup—often involving CVV verification via —merchants can process recurring charges without repeated authentication, provided the amount and payee remain consistent, thereby streamlining while maintaining safeguards. This exemption, detailed in PSD2's Regulatory Technical Standards, has enabled broader adoption of subscription models across EU payment service providers. Looking ahead, card security codes are aligning with messaging standards for real-time payments, with full cross-border adoption targeted by November 2025 under SWIFT's migration timeline. 's structured data format in the "Cards" domain supports enriched transaction details, allowing secure integration of dynamic CVV elements in instant payment rails like , which has used the standard since its launch in July 2023. This evolution enhances interoperability for tokenized and chip-based verifications in high-speed environments, reducing latency in global settlements.

Limitations and Risks

Vulnerabilities to Attacks

Card security codes, also known as CVVs or CVCs, are susceptible to various attacks that exploit , technical vulnerabilities, and data marketplaces. and social engineering represent a primary , where impersonate legitimate entities to deceive users into disclosing their security codes. For instance, fraudulent websites or emails mimic trusted merchants, prompting victims to enter card details including the CVV during simulated transactions. In 2025, and smishing scams accounted for 18% of reported digital payment fraud attempts globally. These attacks often succeed due to the urgency created in scenarios like fake order confirmations or account alerts, leading to unauthorized card-not-present transactions. Malware and keyloggers pose another significant risk by capturing security codes entered during online purchases. On user devices, trojans such as employ form-grabbing techniques to intercept CVV data before it is encrypted in browser forms, or use keyloggers to record keystrokes and transmit them to attackers. At the merchant level, web-based keyloggers injected into payment pages extract CVV alongside other details during checkout, even in secure sessions, enabling real-time skimming. Such is a major factor in online incidents by stealing personal information for resale or direct use. Insider threats within payment processing environments further undermine security code protections. Employees or contractors with legitimate access to transaction systems may intentionally or negligently expose CVV data before it is required to be wiped under PCI DSS rules, which prohibit storage post-authorization. According to the 2025 Ponemon Cost of Insider Risks Global Report, the average annual cost of insider incidents has reached $17.4 million per organization. These risks highlight the challenges in enforcing strict access controls despite regulatory mandates. Shoulder surfing enables physical observation of security codes in public settings, facilitating preparation for card-not-present . Attackers position themselves to visually capture CVV entry on devices or keypads at locations like ATMs, gas pumps, or , using tools such as cameras or for distance viewing. This low-tech method contributes to broader , with stolen codes leading to fraudulent online purchases; total U.S. fraud reports in 2022 exceeded 3.7 million, though shoulder surfing's specific role remains unquantified. Evolving risks include AI-driven exploitation and dark web proliferation of partial card data, amplifying traditional vulnerabilities. AI tools enhance phishing kits, appearing in 35% of those sold on dark web forums, by automating personalized attacks that guess or infer CVVs from incomplete datasets. Stolen card records, including partial details usable for code derivation, constitute 12% of dark web content, with financial fraud listings rising amid recent major data breaches. AI involvement in dark web transactions reached 32% in 2025, underscoring the need for adaptive defenses against these accelerating threats.

Evolving Countermeasures

To address vulnerabilities in static card security codes, financial institutions have increasingly adopted biometric pairing in applications. Since 2018, platforms like have integrated fingerprint () and facial recognition () to authenticate transactions, eliminating the need for manual entry of the card verification value (CVV) by tokenizing payment details and relying on device-based for approval. This approach secures card-not-present transactions by verifying user identity without exposing the CVV, reducing fraud risks associated with code interception. Similarly, Google Pay employs biometric to authorize payments, further minimizing reliance on static codes in digital wallets. Dynamic tokens represent another key evolution, providing one-time codes for high-risk transactions, particularly in card-not-present scenarios. Under protocols like , issuers generate temporary passcodes delivered via or dedicated mobile apps, which expire after a single use and replace or supplement the static CVV during verification. This method thwarts replay attacks where stolen CVVs are reused, as the token's short validity period—often minutes—limits exploitation windows. For instance, Visa's implementation allows issuers to select or app-based delivery channels, enhancing flexibility while maintaining compliance with EMVCo standards. Adoption has grown with , where such tokens are triggered for transactions exceeding risk thresholds set by issuers. On the issuer side, (AI) and enable real-time to flag suspicious patterns involving security codes. Banks deploy AI models trained on transaction histories to identify deviations, such as unusual CVV usage frequencies or geographic mismatches, often preventing before it materializes. These systems process vast datasets to score transaction risks, integrating with existing verification flows to block or challenge potentially compromised codes without user intervention. IBM's AI detection frameworks, for example, emphasize issuer-led monitoring that has improved detection accuracy in banking environments by analyzing behavioral signals alongside CVV inputs. Such proactive measures complement static code limitations by focusing on contextual threats like phishing-derived credentials. Education campaigns by issuers play a vital role in mitigating human-related risks, such as attempts targeting CVV disclosure. These initiatives, including targeted warnings via apps and emails, inform cardholders on recognizing fraudulent requests and secure practices, leading to measurable reductions in incidents. Structured programs have been shown to lower internal occurrences by approximately 30% in financial institutions, extending to efforts that curb voluntary code sharing. The U.S. supports such campaigns by promoting scam prevention education, which correlates with decreased victimization rates through heightened vigilance. Hardware innovations, including tokenized smart cards with e-ink displays, offer physical countermeasures by generating rotating CVVs. These cards feature embedded screens that update the displayed code at set intervals—typically every few hours—rendering stolen static details obsolete over time. Launched in 2025, such as Giesecke+Devrient's Convego SecureCode, integrate e-ink technology for dynamic verification, aligning with Visa and specifications to combat card-not-present fraud. Early trials by banks partnering with providers like demonstrate feasibility, with the changing codes synchronized via tokenization to systems, providing a seamless from traditional embossed CVVs. As of 2025, these solutions are in advanced testing phases, promising broader rollout to enhance overall card ecosystem security.

Regulations and Standards

PCI DSS Requirements

The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) establishes mandatory security requirements for organizations handling cardholder data, including card security codes such as the Card Verification Value (CVV) or Card Verification Code (CVC), to mitigate risks of unauthorized access and fraud. These requirements classify security codes as sensitive authentication data (SAD), which must be protected during processing and transmission but not retained post-authorization. PCI DSS applies universally to merchants, payment processors, and service providers that store, process, or transmit such data, regardless of transaction volume. A core mandate under Requirement 3.2 prohibits the storage of CVV or CVC after the initial transaction , even for recurring or card-on-file scenarios, to prevent long-term exposure of this dynamic verification element. This rule extends to ensuring that security codes are not retained in any form, including databases, backups, or logs, following approval by the payment network. For transmission, Requirement 4 mandates strong cryptography, such as TLS 1.2 or higher, to encrypt CVV during transit over open or public networks, rendering it unreadable to unauthorized parties. Additionally, in logging and display contexts, security codes must be masked or truncated to limit visibility, aligning with broader data protection controls under Requirement 9, which restricts physical and logical access to sensitive elements. Compliance with PCI DSS is tiered into four levels based on annual transaction volume, with all entities required to validate adherence annually through self-assessments (SAQ) for Levels 2-4 or on-site audits by a Qualified Security Assessor (QSA) for Level 1, alongside quarterly vulnerability scans. Non-compliance incurs severe penalties, including fines from card brands ranging from $5,000 to $100,000 per month until remediation, plus full liability for fraud losses, as the liability shift to issuers or networks only applies to compliant entities. The standard's Version 4.0.1, released in June 2024 following the initial v4.0 in March 2022, with all requirements mandatory since March 31, 2025, reinforces these protections by prioritizing tokenization and dynamic data elements over static security codes, introducing customized control approaches and enhanced multi-factor authentication to adapt to evolving threats.

International and Regional Variations

In the European Union, the Revised Payment Services Directive (PSD2), effective from 2018, mandates strong customer authentication (SCA) for electronic payments to enhance security beyond static card security codes like the CVV. SCA requires at least two independent factors—such as knowledge (e.g., password), possession (e.g., device), or inherence (e.g., biometrics)—for authentication, often replacing reliance on static CVV with dynamic methods like one-time passwords (OTPs) or biometric verification to reduce fraud in card-not-present transactions. The upcoming PSD3, proposed in 2023 and expected by 2026, aims to further enhance open banking and authentication standards. This approach applies across the European Economic Area (EEA), where issuers and acquirers must comply to validate transactions securely. In the United States, there is no specific mandating the use or protection of card security codes such as the CVV; instead, compliance relies on industry standards like the Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), which is voluntary but contractually enforced by card networks and processors to prohibit storage of CVV post-authorization. Fraud disputes involving unauthorized card use are governed by the Fair Credit Billing Act (FCBA), which limits consumer liability to $50 for and requires issuers to investigate billing errors promptly, providing a mechanism for resolution without direct regulation of security codes themselves. In the region, practices diverge significantly from traditional CVV reliance. India's (UPI), managed by the (NPCI), prioritizes OTP or UPI PIN for authentication in digital transactions, often rendering CVV unnecessary for tokenized cards linked to UPI apps, as per (RBI) guidelines emphasizing two-factor authentication via mobile-linked OTPs. Similarly, China's system incorporates verification codes as a primary layer for card addition and online payments, where users receive and enter dynamic codes sent to registered mobiles to confirm transactions, supplementing or replacing static CVV in mobile and contexts. In parts of the and , regulations emphasize layered security by mandating 4-digit PINs alongside card security codes, particularly under chip standards adopted regionally to combat fraud in both card-present and card-not-present scenarios. For instance, countries like the and require PIN entry for chip-based transactions at point-of-sale terminals, with CVV or equivalent codes enforced for online use, as outlined in network rules from Visa and to ensure dual verification. Global harmonization efforts are led by Co, which promotes standardized secure elements like card verification values (iCVV) within EMV specifications to enable dynamic code generation from chip cards, aiming for widespread adoption to unify protections across borders and reduce vulnerabilities in international payments. These initiatives build on PCI DSS foundations by focusing on interoperable, technology-agnostic standards for evolving threats.

References

  1. https://www.discover.com/credit-cards/card-smarts/what-is-cvv-number-on-credit-card/
  2. https://www.americanexpress.com/en-us/credit-cards/credit-intel/what-is-cvv/
  3. https://eu-gateway.mastercard.com/api/documentation/mso/glossary/index.html?locale=en_US
  4. https://developer.visa.com/capabilities/pav/docs-how-to
  5. https://chargebacks911.com/cvv2/
  6. https://www.hostmerchantservices.com/articles/what-is-a-cvv2-code/
  7. https://www.uspaymentsforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Static-Card-Security-Code.pdf
  8. https://payabl.com/news/what-is-a-card-security-code
  9. https://blog.itsjack.com/insight-en/debit-card-cvv/
  10. https://developer.visa.com/use-cases/enable-generation-of-dcvv2-codes
  11. https://projecteuclid.org/journals/statistical-science/volume-17/issue-3/Statistical-Fraud-Detection-A-Review/10.1214/ss/1042727940.pdf
  12. https://www.verinite.com/the-fascinating-story-of-payment-cards.html
  13. https://www.hostmerchantservices.com/what-is-a-cvv-number/
  14. https://ianano.org/CVC.htm
  15. https://pay.com/blog/what-is-mastercard-cvc2-fee
  16. https://www.xsnoize.com/all-about-cvv-in-your-credit-card/
  17. https://www.openbankingexpo.com/insights/insight-what-can-open-banking-payments-learn-from-the-adoption-of-card-payments/
  18. https://secureframe.com/blog/pci-history
  19. https://www.emvco.com/about-us/worldwide-emv-deployment-statistics/
  20. https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/page-one-economics/2016/03/01/the-smart-chip-credit-card-a-current-solution
  21. https://sycurio.com/knowledge/glossaries/card-security-code-csc-cvv-cvc-cvn
  22. https://www.moneyfit.org/credit-card-security-code/
  23. https://stripe.com/resources/more/what-is-card-verification-value
  24. https://www.chargebackgurus.com/blog/card-security-code
  25. https://www.consumer-action.org/helpdesk/articles/card_security_code
  26. https://www.creditcards.com/education/credit-card-verification-numbers-security-code-1282/
  27. https://kount.com/glossary/card-security-code-cvc2-cvv2-cid
  28. https://thepointsguy.com/credit-cards/credit-card-security-code/
  29. http://www.premierbiosoft.com/support/faq/card.htm
  30. https://www.kasikornbank.com.vn/EN/Blogs/Pages/ma-cvv-cvc-tren-the-tin-dung-la-gi.aspx
  31. https://developer.fiserv.com/product/CommerceHub/docs/?path=docs/Resources/FAQs-Glossary/Glossary.md
  32. https://www.ecsi.net/help_cvv2.html
  33. https://www.chargebacks911.com/cvv2/
  34. https://developer.payone.com/en/payment-methods-and-features/advanced-features/cvv
  35. https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/glossary/
  36. https://www.kansascityfed.org/research/payments-system-research-briefings/did-card-present-fraud-rates-decline-in-the-united-states-after-the-migration-to-chip-cards/
  37. https://intellipay.com/understanding-icvvs_-purpose-in-emv-transactions/
  38. https://www.emvco.com/emv-technologies/emv-contact-chip/
  39. https://www.emvco.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/EMVCo_QRG_EMV-CONTACTLESS_FINAL.pdf
  40. https://support.apple.com/en-us/101554
  41. https://jasshah.substack.com/p/under-the-hood-how-googlepay-works
  42. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/role-icvv-emv-transactions-enhancing-security-chip-based-hani-fahmi-mnt8e
  43. https://developer.mastercard.com/product/identity-check/
  44. https://www.cnbc.com/select/how-to-find-your-credit-card-security-code/
  45. https://www.audioauthority.com/cvv.html
  46. https://www.chase.com/personal/banking/education/basics/debit-card-security-code
  47. https://www.helcim.com/guides/what-is-the-cvv-on-credit-cards/
  48. https://www.entrust.com/blog/2022/02/contactless-credit-card-and-its-security-understanding-the-facts
  49. https://www.pay.gov/public/collection/payment/plastic/cardSecurity
  50. https://bd.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/merchants/New_VBM_Acq_Merchant_62714_v5.pdf
  51. https://www.arroweye.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Mastercard-Plastic-Card-Artwork-Design-Guide_V4.pdf
  52. https://tblprints.com/2024/07/19/how-credit-card-holograms-combat-fraud/
  53. https://www.nab.com.au/content/dam/nabrwd/business/merchants-and-payments/documents/credit-card-security-features.pdf
  54. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5333754/can-a-credit-card-cvv2-start-with-a-0
  55. https://neapay.com/online-tools/calculate-cvv-cvc-icvv-cvv2-cvc2-dcvv.html
  56. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/americas-transition-to-ch_b_7182402
  57. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/payment-cryptography/latest/userguide/use-cases-issuers.generalfunctions.cvv.html
  58. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/linux-on-systems?topic=services-how-visa-card-verification-values-are-used
  59. https://developer.visa.com/capabilities/dps-card-and-account-services/docs-how-to-cvv2
  60. https://docs.clowd9.com/docs/key-type-descriptions
  61. https://www.americanexpress.com/content/dam/amex/hk/en/staticassets/merchant/pdf/support-and-services/useful-information-and-downloads/GuidetoCheckingCardFaces.pdf
  62. https://www.emvco.com/knowledge-hub/quantum-computing-and-emv-chip-whats-the-threat/
  63. https://www.scribd.com/document/608242850/EMV-SWG-NK15r4-EMVCo-Card-Personalisation-Specification-with-AES-4August2021-2
  64. https://www.mastercard.com/content/dam/mccom/shared/news-and-trends/stories/2025/quantum-explainer-and-white-paper/Migration-to-post-quantum-cryptography-WhitePaper_2025.pdf
  65. https://paykickstart.com/complying-with-visas-cvv2-mandate/
  66. https://www.spreedly.com/blog/what-are-cvc-cvv-codes
  67. https://financial.ucsc.edu/Pages/Missing_Overview.aspx
  68. https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/faq/articles/Frequently_Asked_Question/can-card-verification-codes-values-be-stored-for-card-on-file-or-recurring-transactions/
  69. https://docs.solidgate.com/payments/card-payments/card-payments-insights/avs-and-cvv-codes/
  70. https://chargebacks911.com/issuer-declines/
  71. https://chargebacks911.com/velocity-checks/
  72. https://payadmit.com/blog/how-verified-by-visa-works-and-why-you-should-use-it/
  73. https://usa.visa.com/run-your-business/small-business-tools/payment-technology/visa-secure.html
  74. https://www.clearlypayments.com/blog/credit-card-fraud-statistics-in-2024-for-usa/
  75. https://www.nationaltransaction.com/credit-card-merchant/tag/icvv-or-dynamic-cvv/
  76. https://www.emvco.com/knowledge-hub/how-do-emv-chip-specifications-tackle-card-fraud/
  77. https://www.emvco.com/emv-technologies/contactless/
  78. https://www.aciworldwide.com/blog/when-everything-goes-dynamic-emv-tokens-and-cv2
  79. https://www.pymnts.com/news/regulation/2025/uks-fca-proposes-letting-psps-set-contactless-payment-limits
  80. https://www.chargebackgurus.com/blog/cvv2
  81. https://stripe.com/resources/more/what-is-card-not-present-fraud-what-businesses-need-to-know
  82. https://www.entersekt.com/resources/encyclopedia/tpost/cni2fty251-card-verification-value-cvv
  83. https://www.clearlypayments.com/blog/what-is-friendly-fraud-in-payments/
  84. https://www.experian.com/blogs/insights/payment-fraud-detection-and-prevention/
  85. https://www.capgemini.com/co-es/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2022/12/EMV_Compliance_in_the_U.S..pdf
  86. https://www.emvco.com/emv-technologies/3-d-secure/
  87. https://cdn.answeroverflow.com/1131854695799988315/EMV_3-D_Secure_Protocol_and_Core_Functions_Specification_201610.pdf
  88. https://www.meawallet.com/en/news/how-apple-pay-tokenisation-works
  89. https://www.visa.co.uk/content/dam/VCOM/regional/ve/unitedkingdom/PDF/sca/visa-psd2-sca-regulatory-guide-v1-december-2020.pdf
  90. https://corporate.visa.com/content/dam/VCOM/regional/na/us/sites/documents/veei-whitepaper-decoding-iso-20022.pdf
  91. https://www.frbservices.org/news/fed360/issues/070125/wires-confirmed-iso-20022-implementation-july-14
  92. https://www.dtexsystems.com/blog/2025-cost-insider-risks-takeaways/
  93. https://www.aura.com/learn/shoulder-surfing
  94. https://developer.visa.com/pages/visa-3d-secure/payment-flows-otp
  95. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/ai-fraud-detection-in-banking
  96. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110016824015254
  97. https://admisiones.unicah.edu/virtual-library/cEMhr3/2OK048/fraud_training-for-bank-employees.pdf
  98. https://www.paymentscardsandmobile.com/gd-launches-next-gen-payment-card-with-dynamic-cvv/
  99. https://seshaasai.com/media-news/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/36.-FS-report-Global-Payments-Select-BFSI-Services-Market_A-Frost-Sullivan-Report-Aug2025-1.pdf
  100. https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/document_library?category=pcidss&document=pci_dss
  101. https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/documents/PCI_DSS-QRG-v3_2_1.pdf
  102. https://blog.pcisecuritystandards.org/faq-can-cvc-be-stored-for-card-on-file-or-recurring-transactions
  103. https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/pdfs/pci_fs_data_storage.pdf
  104. https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/documents/PCIDSS_QRGv3_1.pdf
  105. https://www.globalpaymentsintegrated.com/en-us/blog/2020/01/14/card-verification-codes-pci-rules-for-data-storage
  106. https://www.exabeam.com/explainers/pci-compliance/the-4-pci-compliance-levels-explained/
  107. https://www.securityjourney.com/post/the-true-cost-of-pci-dss-non-compliance
  108. https://blog.pcisecuritystandards.org/just-published-pci-dss-v4-0-1
  109. https://www.adyen.com/knowledge-hub/psd2-understanding-strong-customer-authentication
  110. https://www.aciworldwide.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/PSD2-and-SCA-An-Issuer-Guide-thought-leadership-US.pdf
  111. https://finologee.com/the-next-evolution-of-eu-payments-an-update-on-psd3-and-psr/
  112. https://www.findlaw.com/smallbusiness/business-operations/card-payment-security-pci-standards.html
  113. https://consumer.ftc.gov/articles/using-credit-cards-and-disputing-charges
  114. https://www.npci.org.in/product/upi
  115. https://m.unionpayintl.com/en/servicesProducts/MobilePayment/UnionPayAPP/
  116. https://corporate.visa.com/en/resources/pin-security.html
  117. https://www.mastercard.us/content/dam/public/mastercardcom/na/global-site/documents/SPME-Manual.pdf
  118. https://www.emvco.com/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.