LG Joins NFC Payment Party With LG Pay (cnet.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Apple and Samsung have been fattening their pockets with digital wallets for years, and now LG wants in. The company rolled out LG Pay in South Korea on Friday, it said in a statement. South Korean users of the LG G6 will be the first to be able to use the service. LG Pay allows users to register up to 10 of their frequently used cards, including credit, membership and transportation cards. To make payment with LG Pay, users tap their phone against a credit card terminal and scan their fingerprint.

Comments

WTF is an "LG"?

[Anonymous Coward]

https://xkcd.com/927/

Thanks, LG!

Re:WTF is an "LG"?

[omnichad]

LG is an electronics company. This is not a new standard. This is just another contactless EMV proxy payment service. It uses the same "standard" as Apple Pay, Android Pay, and Samsung Pay (and doesn't actually require special support to accept payment).

Re:WTF is an "LG"?

[mccalli]

That's true but not quite the full picture, at least in the UK. Terminals which support Apple Pay allow people to go over the normal contactless limit of £30. I don't know about Android Pay but I would imagine it's similar.

Re:WTF is an "LG"?

[omnichad]

It's still the same standard. They're just able to identify the provider in the data stream somewhere. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have a contactless limit that is variably enforced.

Re:WTF is an "LG"?

[Wing_Zero]

Actually, it's the same thing as mastercard/visa tap and go. you just wave the phone/card over the POS and proceed as normal. the android/apple/samsung/lg pay is just the companies going through regulatory checks, then they just get seen as another chase/capitol one clone.

if you see this, it should work. (although i've only seen it without the hand)

http://i1.wp.com/www.economica...

Re:WTF is an "LG"?

[omnichad]

AKA contactless EMV, which is what I said.

Re:WTF is an "LG"?

[UnknownSoldier]

> WTF is an "LG"

Gee, if only there was a place that consolidated information and was discoverable. I know! I'll "link" information together forming a network. Now there could be a multiple networks -- so we could call the network of networks, an Intra-Net.

Timeline of LG

* 1947 Lak-Hui Chemical Industrial Corp established
* 1958 Goldstar established
* 1958 Lucky-Goldstar merge
* 1995 Lucky-GoldStar Corporation renamed to "LG"

References:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:WTF is an "LG"?

[mccalli]

Oh yes, agreed. Just noting that the practical usefulness of these schemes are higher than standard card contactless, because you can avoid the £30 limit.

Why not just a single standard

[CastrTroy]

Why not just make a single standard NFC Pay that any phone with NFC can implement? We already have Android Pay. What is the advantage of having LG Pay vs. Android Pay on an LG phone that already has Android installed? I have a Samsung phone that supposedly supports Samsung Pay, but I've never even configured it as I don't think I've seen a single store that advertises accepting Samsung Pay.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[unixisc]

Good question. And have an app that can ride on any phone - Android, iOS, even Windows Phone. Right now, companies make this a feature for top end phones: Apple only has it for iPhone 6 & above, Microsoft only had it for the Lumia 950/XL, and so on. And they are all different and competing standards. Have one across the board that one can use regardless of their phone (it just needs be a smartphone), and let it be as basic a function as text messaging.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[omnichad]

Why not just make a single standard NFC Pay that any phone with NFC can implement?

Because someone has to move the money. These don't store the card so much as proxy charges to the card.

The standard is contactless EMV. But someone has to actually handle moving the charging your real card whenever the virtual EMV card is charged.

No one has to accept Samsung Pay or Apple Pay or Android Pay, because on the hardware side your phone just looks like a contactless chip card (aka PayPass, ExpressPay, payWave, etc)

Re:Why not just a single standard

[93 Escort Wagon]

Right now, companies make this a feature for top end phones: Apple only has it for iPhone 6 & above, Microsoft only had it for the Lumia 950/XL, and so on.

This is not correct. Once Apple introduced Apple Pay, it's been on every new phone they've developed since - including the iPhone SE. The only exception was the iPhone 5C, which was introduced as a low end option when the first iPhone with TouchID (the 5S) was introduced.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[XXongo]

Why not just make a single standard NFC Pay that any phone with NFC can implement?

That question was addressed by the first post: https://xkcd.com/927/

Re:Why not just a single standard

[SScorpio]

I'm not sure of the others, but ya Google Wallet used to do the proxy thing.

Android Pay on the other hand contacts the credit card issuer and generates a new unique credit card number per card and device. Charges are made directly against the credit card without a proxy.

Google Wallet used to just show the changes as from them. With Android Pay it shows the actual business and rewards points for different categories work the same as if you were paying directly with your card.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[Chris Mattern]

Because it involves the possibility that somebody somewhere might pay LG money for it. Therefore LG has to have it.

Re: Why not just a single standard

[Anonymous Coward]

While technically true because they're masters of BS, the phones you mention do not have NFC and therefore cannot have the full Pay experience.

For android, you can install Android Pay on devices without NFC too. It'll just function as the payment service that has been present for pretty much the entire life of Android.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[omnichad]

Not that I trust Google as the arbiter of my finances, but this beats card issuers directly issuing your phone as a card. Imagine having a different app for each issuing bank, and having to switch apps before scanning at the register.

And an open standard is just wide open for abuse, as the details for how the security tokens are stored on the phone is public knowledge - not something card issuers are going to want to do. And that would open up the end-user to having to maintain PCI compliance - banks won't take that liability. They need someone to blame.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[sexconker]

Everything that accepts a mag swipe accepts Samsung Pay. I've never used it, so I don't know how well it works (such as for recessed readers like at a gas pump), but that's the claim.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[stephanruby]

I have a Samsung phone that supposedly supports Samsung Pay, but I've never even configured it as I don't think I've seen a single store that advertises accepting Samsung Pay.

Samsung Pay will work everywhere Android Pay and Apple Pay work.

But it will even work on most old magnetic-only terminals that do not support NFC, because in addition to NFC, Samsung Pay can also spoof a magnetic card (assuming the magnetic reader is not deeply embedded in the machine).

And like Android Pay, Samsung generates a unique one-time number, so it's safer to use than the credit card itself. After all, a credit card number is almost like a password and it doesn't make sense to use the same password with different vendors. As soon as one vendor gets compromised, your credit card number is at risk.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[farble1670]

Why not just make a single standard NFC Pay

Are you talking about a protocol or an app? All of these "X Pay" apps do use a standard protocol to communicate to the payment terminal. It's the same used by your physical contactless-enabled chip card.

If you are talking about the app, the obvious answer is that LG wants to driver users to other LG-branded services, and mine user data around payments. Other than preference on the user interface, there's no reason to use LG Pay over Android Pay they are going to be functionally identical.

I've never even configured it as I don't think I've seen a single store that advertises accepting Samsung Pay

That's not how it works. Any terminal that supports EMV contactless payments will support Samsung Pay. The terminal actually has no idea it's not talking to a real card.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[farble1670]

let it be as basic a function as text messaging

Because taking a secure payment is a little more complicated than sending a text message?

Have one across the board that one can use regardless of their phone (it just needs be a smartphone)

For the same same reason you can't download Angry Birds for iOS and run it on your Android phone.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[thegarbz]

Why not just make a single standard NFC Pay that any phone with NFC can implement?

We have that. We have always had that. I happily make NFC payments with my phone without the approval of Samsung, LG, Apple or Google. NFC is just a communication technology. Unless some fruity asshat company locks down their side of the communication anyone is free to provide an app that can make a payment, like e.g. my bank.

Side note: I was confused when Apple Pay was announced as a new technology and people were blowing their loads at the announcement. Google Wallet had no problem at NFC terminals for several years prior with my credit cards, even though Google Wallet wasn't launched in my country and even though my banks had nothing to do with allowing or denying the payment process.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a standard. The whole Samsung Pay vs Apple Pay vs Android Pay vs LG Pay is largely a marketing thing. Okay, that's not 100% true, since Samsung Pay supports magstripe emulation and each payment solution has to independently negotiate contracts with banks and credit card providers. But the phone reader part is standard.

From a consumer perspective it's a complete mess though. This would all be a lot easier if there was a single, easily recognizable symbol for all of these "Pay" options so you don't look like an idiot figuring out if a terminal supports it or not.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[Anonymous Coward]

From the terminal and processing side, you can't even tell if it was an Android or Apple phone that made an NFC payment. When we enabled this I was hoping to be able to tell, but can't. If a store has contactless enabled, doesn't matter which platform they advertise as supported, NFC is supported in general...

Re:Why not just a single standard

[unixisc]

Actually, no. Even on the iPhone 5s, one couldn't get it. And when Apple Pay was introduced, the iPhone 4s was still being sold: not sure about the 4c.

Re:Why not just a single standard

[unixisc]

But all the 3 platforms have Angry Birds, don't they. Similarly, NFC could develop apps for the lowest common denominators - Android 4, iOS 7 and Windows Phone 8.0. That way, all the platforms would have it.

NFC?

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean that thing that allows thieves to steal your money?

Re:NFC?

[Aaden42]

Nope. The thing that has prevented thieves from stealing my money several times since I've started using it.

A couple of vendors I've used have been "hit" since I started paying exclusively with ApplePay when shopping with them. My one-time-use card number was useless by the time thieves got it. No fraud, no need to get cards reissued. I might actually have a credit card survive until its expiration date without having to get a new one. Probably the first time in a decade if that manages to happen.

Granted, that's ApplePay's one-time function on top of NFC, not purely NFC. Still a BIG improvement over swiping my magstripe all over town for anyone to capture.

Re:NFC?

[omnichad]

I guess they're referring to non-authenticated plastic cards with NFC. Kind of off-topic, really. Thieves in close proximity could get a one-time use token to charge once that way. With a phone, it has to be unlocked/authenticated before a transaction is actually processed.

It's not Apple's own one-time function. It's just contactless EMV, which uses NFC. It works more or less the same as chip cards, just wirelessly. It works exactly the same as standard contactless chip cards (e.g. payWave, PayPass, ExpressPay).

Re:NFC?

[thegarbz]

Swiping mag strip? Payment without some form of security code? This is the kind of stuff the rest of the world teaches in history classes.

Re:NFC?

[mjwx]

I might actually have a credit card survive until its expiration date without having to get a new one. Probably the first time in a decade if that manages to happen.

That indicates you've been using it wrong.

I only use my cards in secure machines, meaning machines the owners take a modicum of care to protect. Anywhere I don't trust emphatically receives cash.

Just like your penis, if you stick your card into all and sundry without any care what so ever., don't be surprised when it ends up regularly becoming a source of crippling pain.

Confusion from Korean Domestic Market?

[Luthair]

I sometimes wonder if Korean manufacturers are mislead by their position home market into believing that there is a desire for them to duplicate everything already provided by Google & al. Is there really anyone outside of Korea interested in using LG Pay or Samsung Pay over Google? Similarly I struggle to envision the person interested in Bixby instead of Google Assistant.

Re:Confusion from Korean Domestic Market?

[tlhIngan]

I sometimes wonder if Korean manufacturers are mislead by their position home market into believing that there is a desire for them to duplicate everything already provided by Google & al. Is there really anyone outside of Korea interested in using LG Pay or Samsung Pay over Google? Similarly I struggle to envision the person interested in Bixby instead of Google Assistant.

The point is for Samsung that they are not going to be dependent on Google. To use Android and ship Google's apps with it requires following Google's rules which can be onerous (for a manufacturer). Since Google's apps provide much of the functionality over AOSP (the AOSP versions are generally very sad limited functionality versions), if you wanted a full featured Android phone you're really having to go with Google.

But Samsung decided they didn't want to be beholden to Google, so for every Google app they license, they developed a version of their own. Should Google decide to screw Samsung over, Samsung would simply withdraw licensing Google's apps, use AOSP and ship their own versions.

And because of this, Samsung is also huge in the Android world, so Google cannot make huge changes to Android's licensing terms without risking Samsung's departure. And with a full suite of replacement apps, that would fork the Android ecosystem.

In the end, it's Google versus Samsung in a massive showdown, and Samsung has basically told Google that Samsung doesn't need them. If you wonder why Google doesn't force every OEM to provide software updates, you can bet Samsung would be a reason.

Re:Confusion from Korean Domestic Market?

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe you are correct. It seems to apply to culture too. There's a new Snow White cartoon made in South Korea that's having problems in the West because of an ad that shows Snow White as a fat slob. In Korea, physical image is very important and fat is ugly. So the ad is culturally appropriate there. But in the US, the ugly leftist fattards got triggered real bad by it.

International market research is very important and South Korea seems only so-so at it!

Re: Confusion from Korean Domestic Market?

[Anonymous Coward]

People are generally happy with what they have on their device.

Re:Confusion from Korean Domestic Market?

[Luthair]

The point is for Samsung that they are not going to be dependent on Google. To use Android and ship Google's apps with it requires following Google's rules which can be onerous (for a manufacturer). Since Google's apps provide much of the functionality over AOSP (the AOSP versions are generally very sad limited functionality versions), if you wanted a full featured Android phone you're really having to go with Google.

But Samsung decided they didn't want to be beholden to Google, so for every Google app they license, they developed a version of their own. Should Google decide to screw Samsung over, Samsung would simply withdraw licensing Google's apps, use AOSP and ship their own versions.

Again, this is a lack of understanding of the market. If Samsung were to ship their next generation flagship without Google it would struggle to sell any devices. An analogy would be HP deciding to drop Windows in favour of Linux, their sales would fall over night and they'd have massive returns

And because of this, Samsung is also huge in the Android world, so Google cannot make huge changes to Android's licensing terms without risking Samsung's departure. And with a full suite of replacement apps, that would fork the Android ecosystem.

No, the issue Google has is that it must tread very carefully because of anti-trust laws.

Universal tracking

[DogDude]

As a retailer, I say, "Bring it on". It's more data for us to use. In all honesty, though, we've already got tons of data just from people using regular credit cards. People are tracked across all of their purchases with their credit/debit cards, already, and that data is available to all retailers. But if people want to give us even MORE data, hey, better for us retailers!

FWIW, as a consumer, I always use cash.

Re:Universal tracking

[grumpy-cowboy]

I pay my "day to day" expenses using cash only.

Re:Universal tracking

[Aaden42]

How do you figure you're getting more data this way? You get a one-time-use card number that never gets used at any other vendor including you ever again. That's less data than being able to correlate multiple purchases to the same customer based on the same card number used over time.

Granted, I've got a smartphone, and you could be sniffing my WiFi MAC trying to track me. My payment method doesn't affect that. Also, MAC randomization FTW there.

Not saying cash isn't still the most anonymous option, but NFC with single-use card numbers is certainly better than using a physical credit card.

Re:Universal tracking

[omnichad]

I'm pretty sure that in addition to the on-time-use token, you also get a lot of the same data that's stored on the mag stripe - including the primary card number. In multiple places.

Re:Universal tracking

[DogDude]

It's all tied back to your credit card accounts. The merchant providers all swap data, and all of that data is given to retailers today (for free). We can even see all of the other places our customers shop, too. It's pretty cool for us.

More fragmentation of a boring market

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a mobile developer, so I use both an iPhone 6 and a Samsung s6; both have mobile pay options. I have tried them off and on at different places and have yet to find them any more simple or handy than just inserting my debit card.

I don't know what the Next Big Thing(R) is, but the entirety of the mobile market is getting boring as hell.

Why are we doing this more?

[Rick Schumann]

It seems like every freakin' day I hear about one hack or another into someone's POS payment system, or banking information, or whatever, yet we're expanding our ability to pay electronically for everything? Some people talking about doing away with cash? Seriously? This week I had to get my bank to deactivate my debit card and go get a replacement because of a POS breech at Chipotle restaurants; I'd already been thinking about starting to pay for everything I could with cash (just to reduce the number of receipts I have to enter into my checking account ledger), but that has got me thinking it's time to stop using electronic payment methods entirely and go back to paying cash for everything and mailing paper checks for my monthly bills, just so I don't get my bank account drained. So why, in the face of more and more hacks, are we expanding this?

Re:Why are we doing this more?

[UnknownSoldier]

With apologies to Ben Franklin:

Those who would give up privacy for a little temporary convenience, deserve neither privacy nor convenience.

His original quote is

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Re:Why are we doing this more?

[Rick Schumann]

So, basically, if you fall for the 'mobile payment' meme, you're failing a basic intelligence test?
I should write things like this down, for those days when I'm not feeling at my best, to remind myself that I'm still smarter than the average human, even on my worst days. xD

Re:Why are we doing this more?

[Gavagai80]

I've had to replace a credit card that got skimmed once in my life, and despite the thief spending thousands of dollars there was no risk of my being responsible for any of it because credit cards protect the consumer against that. On the other hand, if you carry a wad of cash you can be robbed and you won't get any of that money back. Credit cards aren't just hugely more convenient, they're infinitely safer for the consumer.

Re:Why are we doing this more?

[UnknownSoldier]

I'm not sure I would go THAT far and make that judgement -- but it certainly seems to fit with people being blissfully unaware of how the companies are data mining the shit out of them and profiting off that very information that people _willingly_ give to the companies in the first place!

Technology is neither evil, nor good -- the exact same technology can be used for good, or abused just as equally.

The fundamental problem is people are NOT conscious of the choices they are making.

People have become "The Product" via "free" apps, don't understand how "Social Media" such as FecesBook track them, and the big 3 -- Apple / Google / Microsoft -- do not give a shit about your privacy -- because they are too busy making money hand over fist over providing a "convenient" service to you. They will only do the bare minimum to comply with the Law.

We have no legal guarantees that your own data will not be abused, or used against you.

The bigger moral question is, and should be:

Why are they collecting this information in the first place?

The scarier question is:

Why don't most people care? Why are they so blind to how potentially this is rife for abuse

Have we become that lazy as a species that we no longer cares who spys on us??? We just blindly accept whatever bullshit corporations and government tell us -- and when they get caught with their pants down absolutely nothing happens???

i.e.
WTF does a game even need access to your Contacts???
Why isn't there _fine_ grained control over what permissions I can give an app?

We have completely forgotten the wisdom of Abraham Lincoln

America will never be destroyed from the outside.
If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.

And Thomas Paine

It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government.

But alas, those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

Re:Why are we doing this more?

[Anonymous Coward]

Answer: Because they don't care. Period.

You cannot make them care, for they are too stupid to consider your argument.

You cannot make them consider your argument, because they've never had to do so, and were raised to respect authority without question.

In short they are sheep. They will do as they are told and their numbers far outweigh yours. Therefore, the sheep (and their corrupt overlords) win.

A good indicator of the health of a nation is how many of it's people will blindly accept the BS that's given to them. If that percentage goes down, then it's more likely that BS will be caught by the people and corrected, as well as being more likely that the people will reinforce that responsibility on future generations. If that percentage goes up however, then it's more likely that BS will go unnoticed by the people, the people will be more susceptible to abuse, and that the people will be less likely to reinforce the responsibility of fact-checking authority with future generations. This is especially true for nations where the people are in charge of their government.

Now, guess which side of the fence the US is on....

Re:Why are we doing this more?

[hackel]

> checking account ledger

Um, what? Are you 90 years old? Who the hell does that? Seriously, go get Mint or any other budgeting software. That's a ridiculous argument.

Re:Why are we doing this more?

[hackel]

You could pay for the same kind of theft insurance that the credit card companies have. The problem is that card companies transaction fees don't get passed onto the consumer. (At least in the U.S.) If they actually had to compete with cash, people might start to wake up to what is going on.

Re:Why are we doing this more?

[Anonymous Coward]

... to reduce the number of receipts I have to enter into my checking account ledger

Wow. How old are you anyway?

Android Pay and LG G6

[ArkiMage]

I'm already using Android Pay on my G6. What would compel me to use their app instead? Either of them (as well as Samsung/Apple) Pay all already follow the same phoneterminal standard. NFC... So, nothing to see here, don't install LG's app, use AndroidPay, move along...

too bad

[Anonymous Coward]

too bad their hw fails miserably after 2 yrs, I'm not even sure they will release aw 2.0 for my watch urbane 2 before it fails because of poor soldering like my g3 and my brother's g3.

WHY?!?!?!?

[hackel]

I just don't understand this. Do these companies get a cut of the transactions? Why are they all investing in this? How does having a bunch of competing standards benefit the mobile manufacturers? Because it sure as hell doesn't benefit consumers. This is an area just begging for a standard. And it would be easy to do! (I thought we already had one, but now it seems as if everything has changed.) Does LG's solution work without SafetyNet getting in the way trying to control what you do with your own device? Have any of these competing payment solutions done *anything* different to differentiate themselves? Because that's what competition is for, but it sounds as if they *all* work identically.

Will I use it?

[Hognoxious]

NFC - No Fucking Chance.