Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39685959›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Near-Field Communication (NFC) Cyber Threats and Mitigation Solutions in Payment Transactions: A Review.

Princewill Onumadu, Hossein Abroshan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Princewill OnumaduSchool of Computing and Information Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge CB1 1PT, UK.
Hossein AbroshanSchool of Computing and Information Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge CB1 1PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9315-4428

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Today, many businesses use near-field communications (NFC) payment solutions, which allow them to receive payments from customers quickly and smoothly. However, this technology comes with cyber security risks which must be analyzed and mitigated. This study explores the cyber risks associated with NFC transactions and examines strategies for mitigating these risks, focusing on payment devices. This paper provides an overview of NFC technology, related security vulnerabilities, privacy concerns, and fraudulent activities. It then investigates payment devices such as smartphones, contactless cards, and wearables, highlighting their features and vulnerabilities. The study also examines encryption, authentication, tokenization, biometric authentication, and fraud detection methods as risk mitigation strategies. The paper synthesizes theoretical frameworks to provide insights into NFC transaction security and offers stakeholder recommendations.

Indexed as

contactless payment regulationscyber riskscyber securitydigital money transactionsdigital privacyEMV cardsNFCNFC-enabled devicesRFID

Identifiers

PMID39685959
PMCPMC11644477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.