W3C

3DS Task Force

01 Mar 2018

Agenda

Attendees

Present
Ian, stpeter, AdamSolove, ThomasB, alyver, gildas, RahulDeshpande, Kristina, Ken, dezell, mikehorne, tabithaodom, jimmywardrope
Regrets
Chair
Ian
Scribe
Ian

Contents


payment handler initiated flows

Adam: We had several flows we considered...
... arbitrary handler scenario would not likely work with 3DS spec as written
... another scenario is where the merchant side implements the payment handler, and represents the communications that would already be in place today
... that approach is do-able, but the question is "why do it that way"?
... if the merchant knows about the payment handler, why go through PR API at all instead of JS in the page?
... it's not clear to me that having the full power of payment request API and arbitrary paymnent handlers would work, or merchant-based apps would not add much value

IJ: did you think about what modest changes might enable the arbitrary payment app scenario?

adamsolove: If the payment app comes from the issuer (and the payment app does the flow) that is a workable
... the tricky part is a couple-fold:

- the merchant doesn't know in advance that they need it to be the chase payment handler

scribe: they don't know in advance what card the user will enter
... the merchant could accept getting back a card and an auth if the payment handler is "the right one" but not clear how to specify that

stpeter: That makes sense.
... the merchant wants to handle any card that comes up...so it makes sense for the acquirer to do the work.
... one topic that came up in the tokenization calll..there's a separate cryptogram for 3ds
... we don't want a 3ds payment handler, we want 3ds on top of the payment handler that gets invoked
... from a user perspective, I want a payment handler associated with the card I have in hand

(IJ wondering if we need an auth() step between show() and close())

stpeter: We have a technology at w3c for authentication (WebAuthN)
... 3DS is doing that in a different way..if we go down WebAuthN, that's a different approach
... suppose I'm a regular shopper at a merchant... the merchant could register an authenticator on my device (E.g., smart phone)...I could authenticate with the merchant since I am a frequent shopper there.
... then essentially staples does some sort of authentication, but that information is then passable on the backend
... I'm not sure how that factors in and doesn't help us with first time use at a new merchant

alyver: Regarding 3DS using tokens..won't that be a problem (e.g., for ApplePay) ....since data slots are already being used?

stpeter: We may need 2 cryptogram fields; that came up in the call the other data

https://github.com/w3c/3ds/issues/3

Rahul: This is a good issue to track
... we are looking at combining the cryptogram that comes from the token with the cryptogram we have from 3DS-2 and giving a combined cryptogram in the response. That's one idea we have

https://github.com/w3c/3ds/wiki/request_params

MikeD: It sounds to me like you are talking about orchestration...whether we get a host-based token and cryptogram...or
... your talking about some simple request from the merchant, and a second flow
... for getting a cryptogram

[IJ: Yes, WebAuthN does that, I think]

MikeD: EMVCo is working on an orchestration spec
... there's more to come here with a close tie to 3DS
... I would be a little worried about taking the payment flows off the merchant site for this
... if we need a second flow to help with this, that's something we are also thinking about on our side

Rahul: Going back to the information sharing that may be needed (from the merchant)
... I think the key goals for 3DS 2 is risk-based authentication
... that's using data that the merchant has
... solving for the info imbalance between merchant and issuer
... either that could be proactively sent from the handler,
... or the app could have a hook to get the data..

stpeter: I have two questions ... I would like to hear more about what EMVCo defines as orchestration
... the other is that my understanding of 3DS 2.0 is that network or issuer needs the auth information
... the auth is not between the merchant and cardholder
... let's say we go down a path where the merchant requests user verification on behalf of the issuer or network
... what does that look like from a user interaction standpoint and a fraud responsibility standpoint

MikeHorne: We've been thinking about this more...it might be possible technically where the browser or third party app is the requestor, but each scheme might need additional data such as merchant id
... whether that information is sensitive is one thing
... another issue is tampering
... when the areq hits the directory server, it does some checks to make sure that the merchant has been enrolled in the program
... if the 3ds requestor id is given to the browser we want to make sure that the merchant behind the browser is legit

https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-crypto/wiki/Signatures

IJ: Where does added confidence comes from with signatures?

Peter: presumably the key comes from a certificate authority the network finds acceptable
... whether that's an architecture we want is another story

IJ: Does it make sense for business reasons to have payment apps talking to their own 3dS servers?

MikeD: What's happening on the ecommerce side is that we are being asked to do multiple types of services we haven't done previously
... there is not a lot of secondary data that requires confidentiality
... we have had debates relative to privacy and those points are well-taken
... the baseline is an integrity service for non-PII non-track2 core PAN data
... that's where we landed...personally I don't see a problem with the payment handler providing certain types of data.

stpeter: That is helpful
... from a privacy perspective we could have some conversations about whether the device information did a lot of PII but that's a separate topic
... I think that one of the challenges we have in this space is that we don't know what the users will do
... we can speculate that it would be great for the user to have a payment app, but if users don't have those things, that model that we find attractive won't take off

(IJ: I wrote it down this way: "The way 3-D Secure 2 is deployed today (on the merchant side) is that the user has no software installation obligation. There will be challenges in getting user adoption of payment handlers. That challenge might go down in the case of browser-as-payment-handler."

MikeD: 3DS 2 is designed to reduce user friction

======

1. Theoretical benefits of moving the authentication to the user side

2. Network and issuer buy-in to that model

3. Test it to see if it creates a better UX

scribe: including data model

https://github.com/w3c/3ds/wiki

IJ: Built into #2 is getting consensus from the EMV side that this approach is compatible with the 3dS vision

stpeter: Fraud prevention is an important priority ...
... what we are trying to do is make it happen in a way that is both appropriate in the web architecture
... e.g., using web auth
... I can talk to our user research folks to see how we can fit this discussion into their schedule
... we need to figure out whether cardholders are going to go through some of these flows
... what will step-ups look like?
... will people do them? U2F and U2A are becoming more common...can we build that into existing apps or password managers?
... we need to figure out how to leverage some of the work already happening.
... can some of the web auth happen happen in more of a frictionless way? That's another interesting topic to follow up with them about

MikeD: From an Amex perspective we'd be open to that.
... we are working with FIDO
... we'd be open to that sort of thing in web-centric environment
... it's not just about security, it's about interop, functionality capabilities, and compliance
... e.g., what gives us confidence in security levels of authentication?
... it's conceivable to modify 3DS protocol to add data fields (e.g., that identify different stakeholders)
... there's openness to explore that type of effort
... needs openness on the browser side as well regarding integration of both types of work

stpeter: Great to hear. The browsers are new here, and you've done a lot of work on this for many years
... the browser is a new entrant to the conversations...we also care about functionality, interop, security....compliance is new to us as well
... I think there is definitely an opportunity here to work on solutions that will be adopted

MikeD: I think the power of this effort is to deal with that acceptance
... we recognize that there are potential benefits and efficiencies that are possible.

==> https://github.com/w3c/3ds/wiki

https://github.com/w3c/3ds/wiki/request_params

IJ: Any volunteers to work on code / flows with Singapore presentation in mind?

Rahul: Mastercard is continuing its commitment to the work; we are looking to backfill a position
... Brian Piel is going to have a more prominent role in this task force

asolove: I volunteer for discussion on this
... we represent several merchants interested in this and could help in prototyping

Next meeting

22 March

https://github.com/w3c/3ds/wiki

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2018/03/01 17:11:01 $