<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PCI Data Available</title>
	<atom:link href="http://newschoolsecurity.com/2009/05/pci-data-available/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://newschoolsecurity.com/2009/05/pci-data-available/</link>
	<description>The Blog Inspired By The Book</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 16:05:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://newschoolsecurity.com/2009/05/pci-data-available/#comment-104</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2009 03:28:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newschoolsecurity.com/?p=152#comment-104</guid>
		<description>Ben, we life in a world of bounded rationality and limited information.  The stats are based on reported information.  Also, these are not &quot;compliance&quot; numbers but rather &quot;validation&quot; numbers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ben, we life in a world of bounded rationality and limited information.  The stats are based on reported information.  Also, these are not &#8220;compliance&#8221; numbers but rather &#8220;validation&#8221; numbers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://newschoolsecurity.com/2009/05/pci-data-available/#comment-102</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 22:19:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newschoolsecurity.com/?p=152#comment-102</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m confused... are we supposed to take L2-3 &quot;compliant&quot; numbers at face value? How do we know these merchants are actually compliant? Filling out a SAQ is very easy, but validating those claims is a completely different story, isn&#039;t it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m confused&#8230; are we supposed to take L2-3 &#8220;compliant&#8221; numbers at face value? How do we know these merchants are actually compliant? Filling out a SAQ is very easy, but validating those claims is a completely different story, isn&#8217;t it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

