An exemption requested by a merchant, if approved, will make that merchant liable for that transactions. There will not be a liability shift transfer to issuer if requested by the merchant.
Your sources are ambiguous on this precise topic, which is exactly what it made it so difficult for me to fully understand exemptions.
Multisafe pay doesn't make any distiction on exemptions. They say that they allow your payment to "be processed without needing a 3DS authentication", and that "if a transaction is routed through 3DS, the liability for the transaction lies with the issuer". So an exemption routed through 3DS is...undefined?
Same with primer.io: "By bypassing 3DS, the merchant assumes the liability for potential fraud" doesn't consider the possibility that an exemption may be applied within the 3DS authentication.
And Checkout.com talks about "exemptions directly in the authorization stage of the payment flow", aka over the authorization request. In this case, yes, there's no liability shift.
You might be right, but the sources you shared don't make the distinction clear, and they implicitly assume that all exemptions are made over the authorization request. In this case, yes, there's no liability shift. But they aren't the only exemption type...
An exemption requested by a merchant, if approved, will make that merchant liable for that transactions. There will not be a liability shift transfer to issuer if requested by the merchant.
See a few public sources for this information e.g. https://www.multisafepay.com/blog/everything-you-need-to-know-about-3ds-22-exemptions-liability-shift
https://primer.io/blog/sca-exemptions-guide
https://www.checkout.com/docs/payments/authenticate-payments/3d-secure/standalone-sessions/3ds-exemptions
Your sources are ambiguous on this precise topic, which is exactly what it made it so difficult for me to fully understand exemptions.
Multisafe pay doesn't make any distiction on exemptions. They say that they allow your payment to "be processed without needing a 3DS authentication", and that "if a transaction is routed through 3DS, the liability for the transaction lies with the issuer". So an exemption routed through 3DS is...undefined?
Same with primer.io: "By bypassing 3DS, the merchant assumes the liability for potential fraud" doesn't consider the possibility that an exemption may be applied within the 3DS authentication.
And Checkout.com talks about "exemptions directly in the authorization stage of the payment flow", aka over the authorization request. In this case, yes, there's no liability shift.
You might be right, but the sources you shared don't make the distinction clear, and they implicitly assume that all exemptions are made over the authorization request. In this case, yes, there's no liability shift. But they aren't the only exemption type...
Nice one,what about 3D secure in Africa
Great I'm trying to work on this project which is using auto encoder in python to detect credit card fraud.