Comment by greenyoda | Hacker News Reader

Comment by greenyoda | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

"we've had over 2 decades to become used to them"

Every day, there are lots of new online shoppers making their first transactions: young people who have just gotten their first credit card, and older people who have never bought anything online before.

A 21 year old who just got their first credit card yesterday has not had two decades of experience with CVV codes.

Someone who has had their card for years but has never bought anything online before has not had two decades of experience with CVV codes (since they're never used for in-person transactions).

"Can't we just put a little lock icon next to the CVV on a card, and then put the same icon on the site."

A lock icon would be confusing, since a lock icon is already used to indicate a secure web site. And if someone has never used a credit card online before, they may not have noticed the lock icon on their card.

And good luck trying to get all credit card issuers to agree on a standard icon, when they can't even agree on the format and location of the CVV code. For example, on an Amex card, the CVV code is 4 digits, and is on the front of the card.

Agreed on many of your points - a lock icon was a bad suggestion on my part, given its use for HTTPS/SSL indication.

I suppose what I'm really asking here is this:

When you ask someone to enter their credit card number on a checkout page, that number is so glaringly obvious that it doesn't necessitate explanation. Everyone seems to know that it is the 16-digit number on the front of your card. You don't need to explain to people via text and diagrams that it is such.

So why isn't the CVV also self-explanatory? How could we make it so? If things like the card number or expiration date don't require documentation, why are cards not designed to make the CVV easily understandable?

Perhaps because everyone looks at the front of their card every day and in doing so, catches a glance of the expiration and card number. The front of most cards is also much less "busy" than the back, allowing for things to pop out.

Put these numbers on the back of the card, and I think they'd be fairly hard to find for first time buyers. So, to answer your question, maybe the solution is to bring the CVV to the front of the card? ...or does that defeat the purpose?

AmEx has theirs on the front, but I don't know if that says anything about it defeating the purpose or not.

Having it on the back prevents getting both cc number and cvv off single picture.. so I guess that's something.

My Chase Sapphire has both the CC and CVV numbers on the back.

My AmEx cards have a 3 digit CVV seeming number on the back in addition to the four digit one on the front.

We used to have lots of failed transactions until we explained to users that the CVV on an Amex is the 4-digit number on the front.

But why does Amex does it differently with their 4 digit CVV? Goolge search doesn't reveal any good answer. Thats a big confusion. Anyway cards could have put CVV beside the number if they wanted. In that case I think people would have found them.

Confusingly Amex has both a 4 digit CID (Front) and 3 digit CSC (Back). The latter I think is only ever used internally by Amex, not for transaction processing.

Different systems which use different fraud algorithms proposed by different people from the other credit card issuers.

> ..that number is so glaringly obvious that it doesn't necessitate explanation.

Not 2 months ago I had to point it out to my friend because she had accidentally written her signature across it, making it nearly invisible.

I wish all designers of new products would read this answer. It’s amazing how many products assume that all users have the same knowledge.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com