Ecommerce Cybersecurity Measures

What is "𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐏𝐚𝐲𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬"? by Checkout.com 👇 ► 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 is the process of replacing sensitive card data (like PANs) with a non-sensitive equivalent known as a 𝐭𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧. This ensures that actual card details are never exposed or stored during or after a transaction. ► The Goal → reduce fraud, simplify PCI compliance, and power secure, scalable commerce. — 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 — Step by Step 1️⃣ Merchant (GoDaddy, Nike, Sony) ► Captures the customer’s Primary Account Number (PAN) through their website or app. 2️⃣ Vault / PSP (VGS, Checkout.com, Braintree) ► The PAN is sent to a token vault (merchant, third-party, or PSP-owned), where it’s replaced with a network token or PCI token. 3️⃣ Acquirer (Checkout.com, Adyen, Stripe, Nuvei, Getnet) ► Receives the tokenized transaction, which now contains a network-issued token rather than the actual PAN. 4️⃣ Card Network (Visa, Mastercard, American Express, GIE Cartes Bancaires) ► The token is translated back into the actual PAN so the transaction can be routed to the cardholder’s issuer. 5️⃣ Issuer Bank (Citi, Chase, Capital One) ► Validates the original card, checks for fraud, and approves or declines the transaction. — 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐓𝐲𝐩𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 🔹 𝐍𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐬  → Issued by card networks (Visa, Mastercard)  → Enhances approval rates by keeping credentials fresh (via account updater)  → Replaces PANs at the scheme level  → Example: Visa Token Service, Mastercard MDES → Provided by Network directly or 3rd Parties (Vault, PSPs etc…) - Checkout.com, VGS 🔹 𝐏𝐂𝐈 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐬 (Merchant Tokens)  → Issued by a token vault provider (VGS, Checkout.com)  → Designed to remove PCI scope from merchants  → PAN is encrypted & stored in a secure vault; merchants only handle tokens 🔹 𝐃𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐥 𝐖𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐭 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐬  → Managed by wallets like ApplePay, Google Pay, Samsung Pay  → Device-specific tokens issued for in-app or contactless payments  → Never exposes the actual card number to the merchant — 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐔𝐬𝐞 𝐂𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐬 — Real-World Applications ✅ 𝐎𝐧𝐞-𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐤 𝐂𝐡𝐞𝐜𝐤𝐨𝐮𝐭 — Amazon & Shopify store network tokens to enable fast, secure repeat purchases  ✅ 𝐒𝐮𝐛𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 — Netflix and Spotify use PCI tokens to safely charge recurring payments  ✅ 𝐃𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐥 𝐖𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐬 — ApplePay leverage device-based tokenization for in-store tap payments  ✅ 𝐂𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬-𝐏𝐒𝐏 𝐑𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 — VGS and 3rd party vaults, create merchant token vaults transmit the token to route transactions across multiple acquirers — Source: Checkout.com x Connecting the dots in Payments...  ► Sign up to 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐲𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐁𝐫𝐞𝐰𝐬 ☕: https://lnkd.in/g5cDhnjC  ► Connecting the dots in Payments... | Marcel van Oost

Processor 🆚 Network Tokens 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐍𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐏𝐚𝐲𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬: 𝐍𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 (𝐍𝐓) is an industry standard published by EMVCo. First introduced with the launch of ApplePay and the payment networks, NT is gaining traction in the Card-on-file and wallet markets 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐫 𝐯𝐬 𝐍𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐬: ▶ Processor Tokenization is a proprietary service offered by PSPs, Acquirers, and Processors to minimize a merchant’s PCI scope. The generated token, a replacement for a Personal Account Number (PAN), is restricted to the merchant and PSP limiting its value in the event of a data breach ▶ Network Tokenization goes further by generating tokens in cooperation with the Card Issuer and Card Network (i.e. Visa & Mastercard) to offer additional benefits to the merchant and protect the PAN throughout the value chain 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐍𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐌𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐬: 🔸 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐎𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 - Merchants can optimize costs with Visa’s pricing changes. Security and compliance costs can be reduced since NT reduces the scope of PCI DSS. 🔸 𝐑𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐅𝐫𝐚𝐮𝐝 - Implementing NT offers a higher level of security for CNP transactions. The impact of any potential data breach is greatly reduced since the data is useless when stolen (i.e. 26% decline in Fraud rates). 🔸 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐝 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐑𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬 - NT involves card issuers, unlike processor tokenization. NT can be limited in scope and offer additional payment details (i.e. 2.1% increase). 🔸 𝐁𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐂𝐗 - Card issuers can update NT in real-time replacing the need for card members to update the information periodically (i.e. 35% of cardholders stop shopping after one decline). 𝐍𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐓𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 — 𝐚𝐧 𝐎𝐦𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐥 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐲: 👉 𝐖𝐞𝐛𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐞 - Token information is captured by the merchant and shared with the Token Service Provider (i.e. VGS) and Card Issuer to validate the token and authenticate the transaction. Card Issuer then shares PAR along with the token to complete the transaction. 👉 𝐈𝐧-𝐀𝐩𝐩 - Token information is shared from the digital wallet with the token service provider and card issuer to validate and authenticate the requests. Card Issuers authorize the transaction and share customer PAR information back to the merchant PSP along with the token. 👉 𝐈𝐧-𝐒𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐬 - The Payment Terminal captures the card data and shares it with the card issuer to authorize the transaction. Card issuers authorize transactions and share with merchants the response and PAR while the processor provides the Processor Token. Source: Deloitte — “Network Tokenization for Merchants” edited by Arthur Bedel 💳 ♻️ ( 👈 Follow this guy) Find this helpful? [ 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘁 ] Anything to add about this subject? [𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁] Nice story, Marcel. Next! [ 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 ] 

Network Tokenization for Merchants 💡 Network Tokenization is an evolution in payment card data protection and transactional services for remote commerce and wallet-based transactions. Network Tokenization is an industry standard published by EMVCo and open to anyone in the payment ecosystem. First introduced with the launch of Apple Pay and the payment networks, Network Tokenization is gaining traction in the Card on File and wallet markets. Processor Tokenization is a proprietary service offered by PSPs, Acquirers, and Processors to minimize a merchant’s PCI scope. The generated token, which is a replacement for a Personal Account Number (PAN), is restricted to the merchant and PSP limiting its value in the event of a data breach. Network tokenization goes further by generating tokens in cooperation with the Card Issuer and Card Network to offer additional benefits to the merchant and protect the PAN throughout the value chain. 👨💻 Website Customers utilize previously entered card information for Card on File or Subscription payment transactions. Network Tokens are used to maximize the effectiveness of Card on File transactions. Token information is captured by the merchant and shared with the Token Service Provider and Card Issuer to validate the token and authenticate the transaction. Card Issuer then shares PAR along with the token to complete the transaction. 🙋♂️ In-App Customers purchase goods or services through in-app payment flows or through various digital wallets. Network Tokens are leveraged to complete and secure the transaction. Token information is shared from the digital wallet with the token service provider and card issuer to validate and authenticate the requests. Card Issuers authorize the transaction and share customer PAR information back to the merchant PSP along with the token. 📱 In-Store Wallet & QR Code Customers increasingly leverage wallets like Apple Pay or Google Pay or QR Code-enabled apps for in-store payments. Network Tokens are utilized for these proximity purchases to secure the payment data. The Payment Terminal captures the token information and shares it with the card issuer, and in return the card issuer shares the PAR information along with the token back to the merchant to complete the transaction. 💳 In-Store Card When customers use physical credit cards, Processor Tokens are still returned in the transaction response as Network tokens are currently not enabled for physical card transactions. The Payment Terminal captures the card data and shares it with the card issuer to authorize the transaction. Card issuers authorize transactions and share with merchants the response and PAR while the processor provides the Processor Token. Source: Deloitte - https://bit.ly/3Lxedlt #Innovation #Fintech #Banking #Ecommerce #Retail #Merchants #FinancialServices #Payments #PSPs #Processing #Acquiring #Tokenization #Tokens #Wallets

Payment Tokenization Explained If you’re handling payments in 2026, understanding tokenization is a must. Here's what caught my attention: 62% of merchants and 92% of financial institutions already use tokenization. But many teams still aren't clear on how it works or why it matters for their business. ____ What is Payment Tokenization? Think of it as a security swap. Instead of storing actual credit card numbers (like 4532-1234-5678-3511), you store a random token (like 4532-8716-5413-2416). That token links to the real payment details stored in a secure, PCI-compliant vault. When you process a transaction, you send the token. Your payment provider swaps it for the real card details behind the scenes. Simple concept, massive implications. ____ Why It Matters -> Security: If you're breached, hackers get worthless tokens, not card numbers. The token can't be reverse-engineered. -> PCI Scope Reduction: Tokens can reduce your PCI compliance scope by up to 90%. Less data = less liability. -> Faster Checkouts: Returning customers do not need to re-enter their payment details. The friction disappears. -> Multi-Processor Freedom: With the right tokenization strategy, you're not locked into a single payment provider. ____ The Three Types of Tokens This is where it gets interesting: 1. PSP Tokens: Issued by your payment service provider. Great for getting started, but they lock you to that provider. 2. Network Tokens: Created by card networks (Visa, Mastercard, Amex). They boost authorization rates and reduce interchange fees, but require network-specific integrations. 3. Merchant Owned or Universal Tokens: Provider-agnostic tokens that work across all your processors and channels. Maximum flexibility, zero vendor lock-in. Most sophisticated merchants combine universal and network tokens strategically based on their infrastructure and goals. ____ Whether you're scaling globally, managing subscriptions, or trying to reduce fraud, tokenization is foundational infrastructure. The question isn't whether to implement it, but how to do it right for your specific use case. The payments landscape has shifted from single-processor setups to multi-processor strategies. Independent tokenization is what makes that transition possible without creating a data management nightmare. 👉 Subscribe for more insights https://lnkd.in/d94JgWBU #paymenttechnology #fintech #tokenization

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗮 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗠𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗶𝘀 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗹𝘆 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗜𝘀 𝗩𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗣𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗦𝗮𝗳𝗲𝘁𝘆 In medical cannabis, consistency is not a luxury, it is a clinical requirement. When a patient relies on a specific product to control pain, anxiety, epilepsy, or any other condition, the stability of that product is fundamental to their treatment. A secure supply chain underpins this stability, yet it is often the most overlooked part of the industry. The most successful pharmaceutical systems in the world rely on predictable, validated, & repeatable supply chains. Medical cannabis should be no different. If the raw material changes from one batch to the next, the patient experience changes with it. When there are delays, stock-outs, or last-minute substitutions, the impact is felt directly by the people who rely on these medicines every day. A secure supply chain ensures several critical outcomes. It makes consistent cannabinoid & terpene profiles across every batch, allowing clinicians to prescribe confidently & patients to trust the product they receive. It reduces the risk of contamination, mislabelling, or degradation during transport & storage. It also ensures that each step of the process, from cultivation to processing to packaging, is carried out under audited & compliant conditions. The consequences of an insecure supply chain are significant. Patients can experience sudden changes in efficacy, unexpected side effects, or a complete loss of therapeutic benefit. Clinics face reputational harm, pharmacists struggle with unpredictable stock, & regulators lose confidence in the system. Ultimately, when supply chain integrity fails, patient safety is compromised. A strong supply chain is built on three pillars. The first is cultivation partners who follow GACP & produce stable, validated genetics. The second is processing facilities operating under EU GMP, delivering pharmaceutical-grade consistency. The third is a logistics pathway that protects product integrity & ensures uninterrupted supply. The industry must recognise that competition based solely on price is short-sighted. Medical cannabis must be treated with the same seriousness as any other medicine, where quality, consistency, & reliability define the value. Companies that prioritise secure supply chains earn trust, build long-term partnerships, & ultimately deliver better outcomes for patients. If we want medical cannabis to stand shoulder to shoulder with established therapies, then the industry must commit to stable, secure, & compliant supply chains. This is not only good practice, it is an ethical obligation to the patients who depend on us. If you would like support strengthening your supply chain, auditing your partners, or validating your products from seed to sale, I can assist with a full review of your operations and compliance readiness. Note: Picture is not real and made for illustration purposes only.

MCP just changed its default OAuth model. This is a big deal! The latest MCP spec shifted client registration away from Dynamic Client Registration (DCR) and toward Client ID Metadata Documents (CIMD). This is a major improvement for MCP's scale and security model. DCR works by allowing clients to auto-register with an authorization server. This created a few problems for MCP: • Public registration endpoints are vulnerable to abuse • Authorization servers become a bottleneck with too many clients • Clients end up with a pile of identities scattered across servers • Many companies block self-registration, so this model doesn't work CIMD solves all of those issues. Now, instead of per-server registration, clients register using a URL-based client identity. A client hosts its own metadata at a stable HTTPS endpoint, and servers fetch and validate it on demand. This model solves some of the MCP's fundamental scaling problems: • There's no longer a single registration endpoint to protect • There's no server-side client database • Clients now have one stable identity across all servers • Native support for stronger client authentication (e.g., private key JWT) Bottom line: With CIMD, MCP authentication is now a web-native, scalable model. We don't have to deal with the operational issues native to DCR. Huge step forward!

➽ RBI Proposes New Framework On Additional Factor Of Authentication For Digital Payments ❝ This week , I got 3 Fraudulent Calls. I am sure many of us is having similar experiences. Its very important to safeguard banking with authentication and consent mechanism.. ❞ In February 2024, the RBI declared its plan to publish a Framework on Alternative Authentication This Week , The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) issued a draft framework for alternative authentication mechanism for digital payments, wherein it has mandated that all digital payment transactions would have to be authenticated with an additional factor of authentication (AFA), except small value contactless card. 📢 Read - https://lnkd.in/d4Hx9nBM –––––––––––––––––––– Additional factor authentication (AFA) in digital payments, includes options such as passwords, PINs, software tokens, and biometrics. These methods are categorized based on something the user knows, has, or is. Most digital transactions will need a dynamically created authentication factor unique to each transaction. –––––––––––––––––––– ➜ Additional Factor of Authentication (AFA) is Use of more than one factor for authentication of a payment instruction  - All digital payment transactions shall be authenticated with an additional factor(s) of authentication (AFA), unless exempted otherwise in this framework. - All digital payment transactions, other than card present transactions, shall ensure that one of the factors of authentication is dynamically created, i.e., the factor is generated after initiation of payment, is specific to the transaction and cannot be reused. - Issuers may adopt a risk-based approach in deciding the appropriate AFA for a transaction, based on the risk profile of the customer and / or beneficiary, transaction value, channel of origination, etc. - Issuers shall obtain explicit consent before enabling any new   factor of authentication for the customer. The customer shall also be provided a facility to deregister from using the new factor of authentication. –––––––––––––––––––– ➜ Exemptions from customer authentication - Small value card present transactions for values upto ₹5000/- per transaction in contactless mode at Point of Sale (PoS) terminals. - Offline payment transactions up to a value of ₹500/- - E-mandates for recurring (other than the first) transactions - Utility through select Prepaid Instruments / NETC –––––––––––––––––––– 💡In my view , Let's see if we can bring Innovation with Technology - Use of AI for raising AFA based on user behavior pattern & risk level understanding - Use of Blockchain for consent mechanism 🚩 Bottomline - ❝ Let's appreciate the way RBI is driving its amazing innovations with regulation. Ultimately its benefit to safeguard customer trust on Banking Ecosystem , I am sure this will add additional security levels for banking ecosystem ❞

£300 million in profit. Gone because a supplier got phished. That’s what happened to a major British retailer known for its food halls and mid-range fashion over Easter weekend in 2025. A trusted third-party vendor was compromised. - No ransomware. - No malware. - No headline-grabbing zero-day. Just a simple social engineering attack that brought down the company’s entire online clothing and homeware operations during a peak retail period. This wasn’t an IT failure. It was a failure of resilience. ✅ On paper: - ISO 27001 certified - Vendor SLAs signed - Security audits passed - Dashboards all green ❌ In practice: - Third-party had backend access with no geofencing or conditional access - No phishing simulations extended to vendors - No MFA enforced at the supplier level - Incident response plan didn’t cover vendor compromise scenarios - Comms team caught unprepared customer backlash spread quickly Brand trust took a measurable hit. They didn’t just lose sales. They lost customer confidence. And investor credibility. 💣 The damage: - £300M in lost profits - £750M drop in market cap - Public trust shaken - Supplier relationships under audit - Internal review exposed systemic third-party blind spots ❓CISO, ask yourself: - How quickly can you revoke supplier access in a crisis? - Does your incident response plan extend beyond your own systems? - Are your highest-risk vendors the least visible in your dashboards? Who owns digital trust across your supply chain? If you’re not sure that’s the breach waiting to happen. ⚠️ The real threat wasn’t malicious code. It was misplaced confidence. In contracts. In checklists. In “we’ve got that covered.” ✅ What we’ve since helped others do: ↳ Map and monitor access paths across all vendors ↳ Tier suppliers by blast radius, not just spend ↳ Embed red team testing in supplier relationships ↳ Extend phishing training and MFA requirements beyond org walls ↳ Build a multi-team incident comms matrix ↳ Reframe third-party risk ownership: Procurement ↔️ Security ↔️ Ops 📊 New KPIs for the board: ↳ % of critical suppliers with enforced MFA + audit logging ↳ Mean time to revoke third-party access during incident ↳ % of vendor-originated breaches detected internally 🧠 Bottom line: In 2025, you don’t just secure your company. You secure your ecosystem. And if your vendors hold the keys, your customers are trusting someone they’ve never met. 📩 DM me if your IR plan doesn’t include your suppliers. What’s the riskiest third-party in your business today and who’s actually watching them?

As an SMB owner, you have a long list of trusted vendors, partners, and third-party services that keep your operations running smoothly.  But each connection is also a potential backdoor for hackers to sneak in and wreak havoc on your systems. Don't believe me?  Ask the folks at Target, who suffered a massive data breach in 2013 all because cybercriminals gained access through their HVAC vendor's credentials.  Or the countless small businesses that got hit hard when their cloud storage provider got hacked. You don't need to have the same experience. So here are my top 5 recommendations for SMB owners: 1. Do your due diligence on every vendor, partner, and third-party service you work with. Thoroughly vet their security practices, policies, and incident response plans before signing contracts. 2. Insist on robust security requirements and data protection clauses in your vendor contracts. Make sure they're held accountable for any security lapses or breaches on their end. 3. Implement strict access controls and segregate your networks. Only give vendors and partners the bare minimum access they need to do their jobs and keep their connections isolated from your most sensitive data and systems. 4. Monitor your vendors' security posture and any potential threats or incidents that could impact your business. Don't just assume they've got it covered – stay vigilant. 5. Have an incident response plan in place that accounts for supply chain breaches. Know exactly what steps to take and who to contact if one of your vendors gets compromised. Managing cyber risks can feel daunting, especially for SMBs. But, the consequences of ignoring these vulnerabilities could be catastrophic.  So, prioritize supply chain cybersecurity as much as you would for your internal systems.  A business is only as strong as the weakest link in its vendor ecosystem. 

𝗢𝗻𝗲 𝗖𝗮𝗿𝗱. 𝗙𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗧𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻𝘀. We throw around the work "token" a lot in payments And when people hear that, it's easy to assume there's only one type of payment token When in reality, the same card can be represented by multiple different tokens Each is created by a different party and designed for a different reason Let's break it down 👇 ___ 𝗧𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻 #𝟭: 𝗖𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗼𝗻 𝗙𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗡𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝗧𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻𝘀 When you save your card with an online merchant, they may request a network token from Visa or Mastercard via their TSP → Designed for stored credentials and recurring payments → Automatically update when your card expires/ changes → Often improves auth rates compared to PAN These tokens are built to make card on file payments more secure, reliable, and frictionless 𝗧𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻 #𝟮: 𝗗𝗣𝗔𝗡𝘀 & 𝗠𝗣𝗔𝗡𝘀 Not all network tokens are the same Some are provisioned to a specific device or merchant context • DPANs are commonly used for digital wallets like Apple Pay/ Google Pay • MPANs give merchants specific eComm token that persist across devices • Transactions are paired with cryptograms that verify authenticity Same network Different use cases 𝗧𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻 #𝟯: 𝗩𝗮𝘂𝗹𝘁 𝗧𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻𝘀 Independent token vaults create their own tokens instead of relying on a gateway or network → Sensitive card data is stored in a secure vault → The same token can be used across multiple gateways/ PSPs → Merchants maintain greater flexibility over their payment stack These tokens help reduce vendor lock in while protecting cards 𝗧𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻 #𝟰: 𝗚𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘄𝗮𝘆 / 𝗣𝗦𝗣 𝗧𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻𝘀 Pretty much all gateways and PSPs tokenize cards too • Created by providers like Stripe, Adyen, or Payoneer • Allow merchants to safely store payment methods • Typically only work within that provider's platform These tokens simplify payment processing, but they're usually tied to a single payment provider 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗧𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗮𝘄𝗮𝘆 Not all tokens are interchangeable, and not all are created equally They might all represent the same payment card, but they're issued by different organizations and optimized for different use cases 👉 The question is 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘬𝘦𝘯, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘰? ___ 🔔 Follow Jason Heister for daily #Fintech and #Payments insights