<?xml version="1.0"  encoding="utf-8"?>
	<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
		<title>Comments to PCI Compliance Is &quot;Industry Self-Regulation&quot;</title>
		<link href="http://www.practicalecommerce.com/atom/article/723/" rel="self"/>
  	<updated>2008-04-29T13:38:30-07:00</updated>
		<author>
  	  <name>Practical Ecommerce</name>
			<email>info@practicalecommerce.com</email>
  	</author>
  	<id>http://www.practicalecommerce.com/</id>
		<rights>Copyright 2007 Confluence Publishing DBA Practical Ecommerce</rights>
		<entry>
			<title>Dave</title>
			<link href="http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles/723/PCI-Compliance-Is-Industry-Self-Regulation/#comment9628" rel="alternate"/>
			<id>http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles/723/PCI-Compliance-Is-Industry-Self-Regulation/#comment9628</id>
			<updated>2008-04-29T13:38:30-07:00</updated>
			<summary>Everyone is in favor of high security and protecting card holder information. That is not the issue. But levying fines or denying processing privileges to merchants who have been processing securely for years if they don&#039;t comply with a blanket set of guidelines (one size does not fit all),  and pay third parties for certification services, feels like extortion.</summary>
			</entry>
			
				<entry>
			<title>Teresa</title>
			<link href="http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles/723/PCI-Compliance-Is-Industry-Self-Regulation/#comment9617" rel="alternate"/>
			<id>http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles/723/PCI-Compliance-Is-Industry-Self-Regulation/#comment9617</id>
			<updated>2008-04-29T07:33:26-07:00</updated>
			<summary>This is an over simplification of this subject.  
Fines for a breach are more than heavy.  Unless you have Wal-Mart like deep pockets a breach of more than one card # will put you out of business!
Please do not put this off.</summary>
			</entry>
			
				
	</feed>