Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 30


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 29
Findings of Peer Review of Interoperable Smartcard Programs 29 Orlando Regional Alliance for Next Generation Electronic Payment System (ORANGES)-- Central Florida (http://www.pbsj.com/what/Core/ITS/projects/ORANGES/) Go Ventura--Ventura County, CA (www.goventura.org) Transit Access Pass (TAP)--Los Angeles County, CA (www.mta.net) Compass--San Diego County, CA (sdcommute.com) EZ-Link--Singapore (www.ezlink.com.sg/index.html) Octopus--Hong Kong (www.octopuscards.com/eng/customer/apply.jsp) Oyster--London (tube.tfl.gov.uk/content/ticketsoyster/asp) This chapter is organized as follows: Section 3.1 presents an overview of the above programs with respect to their smartcard, reader, and hardware design. It also discusses their business policies and related data elements. Section 3.2 identifies the commonalities in the information shared among agencies partici- pating in the listed interoperable programs. Section 3.3 discusses current trends and new developments being considered or pursued within the smartcard programs, including Payment for parking, bridges, and highway tolls; Applications for financial institutions and retail; and Expanded security and biometrics features. 3.1 Survey of Interoperable Agencies Surveys were conducted to gather current data on the following elements of each interopera- ble system: Physical Elements--Physical characteristics of the cards and communication protocols; Data Elements--"Essential" and "optional" data elements required for financial settlement between participating operators; and Security Elements--Security architectures and the security devices used. For data gathering purposes, the security element information was included in the data ele- ments portion of the survey. The physical-layer results of the survey are presented in Table 7. The data-layer results of the survey are presented in Table 8. The optional data results of the survey are presented in Table 9. 3.1.1 SmarTrip In May 1999, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) introduced the SmarTrip card based on Cubic Transportation Systems' (CTS) proprietary Go CARD tech- nology. WMATA has issued approximately well over 1 million SmarTrip cards for Metrorail, Metrobus, and station parking fare payment. Cardholders add value to their SmarTrip cards at Metrorail vendors or at Metrobus fareboxes. Metrorail vendors also vend magnetic tickets for non-SmarTrip cardholding customers; these tickets can only be used in the rail system. An implementation that will expand the SmarTrip functionality to surrounding transit providers is under way. Additional smartcard-enabled equipment, including vending devices, fareboxes, and readers will be deployed in support of the regional program. An integral feature of the SmarTrip program will be the implementation of the Regional Customer Service Center (RCSC). The RCSC will provide services to all SmarTrip participants and operators in the DC, Maryland, and Northern Virginia regions. The RCSC will consist of the customer service center,

OCR for page 29
30 Smartcard Interoperability Issues for the Transit Industry Table 7. Survey results: physical layer. Physical-Layer Features Ventura County, Go Ventura Central Florida, ORANGES San Francisco, TransLink10 Washington, DC, SmarTrip Minneapolis, Go-To Card Chicago, Chicago Card San Diego, Compass10 Hong Kong, Octopus Singapore, EZ-Link LA County, TAP10 London, Oyster Seattle, RFC10 1. Is the card ISO 14443 compliant? No1 No 5 No6 No No7 2. Is the reader ISO 14443 compliant? No2 No No 8 3. Does the reader modulate between Types A and No2 No No No No B? 4. Is the command set ISO 7816 compliant? No 9 No No No4 N/A No No No No No If yes, which APDUs do you use and how DNA N/A DNA DNA DNA N/A DNA DNA DNA DNA DNA N/A many? If no, what do you use? PRO DNA PRO PRO PRO DNA N/A PRO PRO PRO Felica PRO 5. List the type of card security used. DES DES3 PRO N/A PRO PRO 3DES PRO PRO PRO 3DES 3DES Notes: Key 1Currently, Cubic's Go CARD is used, which is not compliant, but they are taking steps toward using a compliant card. = Yes 2The current reader for rail (Cubic's Go CARD reader) is not compliant, but they are procuring a system of buses that DNA = Does Not Apply will use Cubic's Tri-Reader, which is compliant and would modulate between Types A and B. PRO = Proprietary 3The card security is a variation of 3DES. N/A = Not Available DES = Data Encryption Standard 4The cards are not compliant, but the system could be compliant if compliant cards are used. 3DES = Triple DES 5The card type is Mifare Type A, which is compliant for Parts 1 and 2, but not fully compliant for Part 4. 6The most commonly used card (Cubic's Go CARD) is not compliant. 7Compliant with Part 1 only. 8Compliant with Part 2, Type B only. 9As allowed by ISO 7816, a subset of APDU commands has been implemented. 10Full project rollout has not ocurred. Listed information is "as planned."

OCR for page 29
Table 8. Survey results: data layer. Data-Layer Features Washington, DC, SmarTrip San Francisco, TransLink Minneapolis, Go-To Card Chicago, Chicago Card San Diego, Compass Hong Kong, Octopus Ventura County, Go Singapore, EZ-Link LA County, TAP Central Florida, London, Oyster Seattle, RFC ORANGES Ventura 1. What types of cardholder data are exchanged? -Card ID # -Card Issuer ID # No -Patron Profile Code (Age/Disability) No -Patron Language No N/A No No No No No No No No N/A No 2. Do you have product data? 3 3 3 3 -Fare Product ID # N/A -Fare Product Validity Period 3. Do you collect journey data? -Agency ID # N/A Findings of Peer Review of Interoperable Smartcard Programs -Date/time of specific transaction 7 -Entry/exit location of patron No 4. Do you process and send configuration/mgt. data? -Autoload No No -Hotlist -Others? No 1, 4 2 1, 4 No No 5 No No No No 4 5a. What types of security algorithms do you use? 3DES DES DES 3DES 3DES 3DES N/A 3DES 3DES 3DES DES 3DES 5b. How many key sets? One N/A N/A One One Two 6 N/A One One One N/A One Notes: 1The ability to block products Key 2Hot = Yes list goes to aging list if the card is not used in 2 months PRO = Proprietary 3This number is based on a set of data elements that when complete forms a unique N/A = Not Available number DES = Data Encryption Standard 4Device hotlist 3DES = Triple DES 5Remote loads, configuration data to buses, future data (such as fare change) 6One key set for the smartcard and second key set for the transponder. 7Entry or Exit (not both) captured depending on agency implementation 31

OCR for page 29
32 Smartcard Interoperability Issues for the Transit Industry Table 9. Survey results: optional data. Optional Data Results Ventura County, Go Ventura Central Florida, ORANGES Washington, DC, SmarTrip San Francisco, TransLink Minneapolis, Go-To Card Chicago, Chicago Card San Diego, Compass Hong Kong, Octopus Singapore, EZ-Link LA County, TAP London, Oyster Seattle, RFC 1. Are the following data types exchanged? -Pretax/employer-based transit benefits No 3 No No UC UC No N/A No -Pretax/employer-based parking benefits Yes No No No 3 No No UC N/A No No -Bridge/highway tolls No No No No 3 No No No No No No -Loyalty programs Yes 3 4 No UC No No N/A No -Multiple purses UC No No 3 No No No No -Universities No No 3 No No UC No No No -Retail No No No No 3 No No No No No Future 2. What other data are exchanged that might be Nil 1 2 8 Nil 5 6 UC Nil Nil 7 Nil unique? Notes: Key 1Transaction/purse sequence numbers serve to identify gaps in data = Yes N/A = Not Available 2The back-end system does not carry any value so the server will charge the patron's account, and when the threshold goes below UC = Under Consideration 10 dollars, an email is sent to the patron. Also, there is a bonus program that provides 1 dollar back for every 10 dollars spent on the card. 3For this system, all these data types could be exchanged; however, to date they have not been used 4Members of the field operation test are provided incentives to participate in the form of discounts 5A smartcard transponder can be used to pay for parking or bus fare 6Automatic passenger counting 7Access to recreational facilities; access to gated communities 8Non-fare counting data (e.g., wheel lift and bike rack use)

OCR for page 29
Findings of Peer Review of Interoperable Smartcard Programs 33 POS devices and network, walk-in centers, and WMATA's data network concentrator. ERG Group received the contract award in July 2003 to install and implement the RCSC. CTS also received a contract in July 2003 to supply POS devices and the data network concentrator and to make upgrades to existing systems to support the regional program. CTS and ERG are working with WMATA to integrate their respective systems. Upon full implementation, the SmarTrip program will include the following regional bus and rail participants: WMATA Metrorail-heavy rail; Maryland Transit Administration (MTA)-light rail; Virginia Railway Express (VRE)-commuter rail; MARC-commuter rail; Baltimore Metro--rail; Annapolis Transit--bus; Arlington Regional Transit (ART)--bus; MTA Bus; WMATA Metro Bus; Corridor Transit Corporation--bus; Fairfax City CUE--bus; Alexandria DASH--bus; Fairfax Connector--bus; Frederick Transit--bus; Harford County Transportation Services--bus; Howard County Transit--bus; Loudoun County Transit--bus; Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission (PRTC)/OmniRide--bus; Montgomery County Ride On--bus; and Prince George County-TheBus. 3.1.1.1 Fare Policies The following fare policies and customer features define the SmarTrip program: Card Fee--$5 card purchase fee; Fare Products--Bus and rail fares, parking; Fare Categories--Full fare, senior/disabled, peak, off-peak, distance; and Other Features--Balance protection/fare replacement, negative balance. 3.1.1.2 Transit Benefit Program As of September 2000, SmarTrip cardholders could receive direct deposited transit benefits on their SmarTrip cards using the SmartBenefits program. In the Washington region, employers may participate with Metrochek, a fare card voucher program provided as an employee benefit by more than 2,500 public and private employers. In the past, employers were burdened with hav- ing to distribute paper Metrochek fare cards and vouchers. The SmartBenefits program allows employers to access a secure website where the benefit is transferred electronically to the employee's SmarTrip card. SmarTrip cardholders then claim their transit benefits from specific WMATA rail ticket vending machines (TVMs) located in each station. 3.1.1.3 Loyalty Program With WMATA's planned Fair Fares loyalty program, cardholders will pay the lowest possible fare based on their card usage. This allows a cardholder to receive the benefit of an unlimited ride pass without having to actually purchase the pass. A counter on the card will log the rides, and if