Christopher

Yes and No. Many vendors don't have this as an option because PayPal only allows a few select vendors to operate their merchant account if they sell e-cigarettes. More often than not, most vendors at least SSL their checkout process. The merchant, if legit, usually has modest security in place. The vendor normally doesn't have access to your full string of CC information. Even still, as mentioned above, there's more to it than simply ensuring the checkout is secure. How your vendor handles your info offsite is important as well. (It's funny now that DL's are becoming a thing people are starting to think about security. But how many vendors simply toss order slips in the trash without shredding? That may not have your CC on it but it has your address and full name) In saying all this though, people are worried about their DL info getting out while having no problem placing CC orders with sites based out of China. (Not that all Chinese sites are not secure, I just personally air on the side of caution) Use gift cards in place of your usual CC, that'll help a great deal on it's own. EDIT: By the way sorry if I want off on a tangent here Hopefully I answered everyone's question sufficiently. In case you can't tell, I love what I do

I completely understand. This is something we're still looking into as the actually law surrounding this isn't completely clear. But in a worst case scenario situation (in which you have to provide an ID online) there are a couple ways vendors can verify age. One is using a 3rd party like this for example: http://integrity.aristotle.com/ basically the vendor integrates their system into their website, you input your DL number and they run it to verify it's genuine. These systems are independent and the security is managed by them. They work most of the time, in the event they don't, you have to send in your driver's license. How the vendor handles that, is up to them. Some keep a copy in a locked file cabinet accessible only to management. (This really isn't ideal) In the event Vapor Talk had to do something like this I would never keep a hard copy. I trust my employees but some things are just too sensitive. I'd likely set up a check and review process, once approved and your DL was verified, the digital copy would be completely deleted from the server and an approval by signature would be applied to your account. (guest checkout would no longer be an option) But, as you mentioned, verifying with us doesn't mean you'd be verified with another vendor. VT also doesn't keep your CC info on file. (This is why the Vapor Talk store has no save your credit card for next time option) We can refund your order but nobody, even myself has access to the full string of your CC info. Only the merchant has this and I prefer it that way. How much each vendor values and take your security seriously, is the tricky part. For example, Vapor Talk is fully PCI compliant, we have been for years. This means each year we have to go through a set of tests our online areas must pass. (The forum included) Only after we've passed (our servers must have certain procedures in place in order to pass the security tests) we're given a certificate. You should always ask for this. In fact I won't' buy from a vendor that doesn't have this information on file. The scary thing is, some vendors haven't even heard of PCI compliance. Even worse, some use bare minimum SSL requirements. Vapor Talk's lucky in the fact that I own a web development company and do this by trade. You'll notice the Vapor Talk store isn't just SSL'd at checkout, the entire process, even simply browsing items, you're in a secure environment. (Notice our entire domain is on HTTPS: https://www.vaportalkstore.com/. Go visit your favorite vendor and many of them are only SSL when you actually checkout) We also don't keep your searches on record. (As a web guy I'm naturally paranoid, I've done this for users since the beginning as I know how much a data breach can become a complete nightmare) We're also required to notify users within 72 hours of a breach. (And in the event we don't, we lose our certification) Unfortunately it doesn't stop there. Many business don't take online security as seriously as they should. (We have clients who opt out the extra cost all the time). For example, let's say you need to send in your DL. You do this by some secure method, maybe through an online upload platform that has SSL. The problem is what about their email system. Perhaps Dan the owner has to send Jane the admin an email to update your account. For example, most stores have support@mystore.com. (personalized email addresses) These aren't run by major companies like Google. It's on the vendor to secure their environment. Hopefully they're using a trusted hosting company. They might SSL their front end but not their back. So you go to mystore.com/mailsystem and they don't have an SSL installed. (Because it costs another 100 bucks a year) and when they're logging into their mail system, the information is sent plain text. You'd be amazed at how common this is. Some online vendors are setup like this because of pure neglect others by ignorance. Neither is an excuse. So really, it boils down to how much you trust the name and person running the store. Additionally, there is another thing to consider. Every online store has a web guy. The web guy usually takes backups for the site. When they take that backup (Usually the SQL database and the PHP/html files) they download it to their PC. That likely contains your personal info. Does the webguy just drop that onto his USB drive? Does he use a VPN? Is he accessing your info from the local starbucks Wifi connection. In the case of Vapor Talk the download goes to a hot swap drive, this drive is setup to encrypt on the fly using 256 AES. In the event I have to use the data it's decrypted on a machine in my office that's not connected to the internet. (I do this even for the forum). Employees cannot access anybody's info outside of the retail store. (and even at that it's extremly limited) I can, but am always connected through a VPN. Ideally these vendors are using 3rd party, respected setups. (In which case they handle none of that. This would be e-commerce system like Volusion, Bigcommerce or Shopify) I actually witnessed a fairly popular retail in China access his customer orders from a convention room in Shanghai. When I go to China, I take a newly formatted laptop. When I return to the states, that laptop is zero bit wiped and never touches one of my networks. As for the notary idea, it might work. It really depends on the laws being applied in that vendors state. It's on the vendor to prove they verified your age in court. What qualifies will depend. Another thing to keep in mind, most vendors and businesses hate these things. They'll push back, they'll also do just enough to be compliant. For example certain laws were passed in the 90's to ensure online age verification was done. Guess what the lawyers figured out? So long as you asked their age via some kind of box, you were legally fulfilling the law. (You see this often with pornorgraphy websites) Nobody ever asks for your DL. Ensuring your security online and what to look for is a pretty complicated process. I could write a very long post and what you need to ask and what a vendor should have in place internally to secure your information but really, you have to make the ultimate decision. Do you trust the vendor, do they have the budget to ensure their software is secure and do they have someone knowledgeable enough on staff to ensure their system/setup is as secure as possible. I can tell you as a developer, who visits many supplier websites (simply keeping up with the competition) the answer is an oustanding no. Many online (not all) have some serious security flaws.

Folks, please see updated FDA thread here:

Hey Vapor Talkers, So as most of you have probably heard by now the FDA has release their deeming regulations for electronic cigarettes. It's extremly broad and a potential devastating blow to the industry. Especially for small to medium sized vape shops that produce their own hardware or e-liquids. I'll leave my own opinion out of the top post and reserve this for the most current information. There seems to be a lack of simplified summaries so I'll do my best, with what we know so far, to explain the situation. UPDATED 7-1-2016 Hi folks SFATA provided a great breakdown that makes things very easy to understand. You can view that document - HERE Here is a summary for everyone: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA” or “the Agency”) issued a prepublication version of its final Deeming Rule on May 5, 2016. This Rule extends FDA’s authority to all tobacco products, products derived from tobacco, and devices used with tobacco products (except accessories). With this action, and as of the Rule’s effective date, the FDA will or could have authority over the following products: ● Liquids containing nicotine (products without nicotine are not under FDA’s authority) ● Batteries ● Tank systems ● Cartomizers ● Atomizers ● Digital Displays ● Device Software The Rule was published in the May 10, 2016 edition of the Federal Register. The Rule’s effective date is 90 days from publication in the Federal Register ( i.e. , August 8, 2016). Once the Rule is published in the Federal Register, it starts the clock ticking on a number of dates. The Deeming Rule also creates a distinction among businesses in the industry: retailers and manufacturers. Retailers: Means any person who sells tobacco products to individuals for personal consumption, or who operates a facility where vending machines or selfservice displays are permitted. Manufacturers: Means any person, including any repacker and/or relabeler, who manufactures, fabricates, assembles, processes, or labels a finished tobacco product. As explained below, if an establishment mixes or prepares eliquids, or creates or modifies aerosolizing apparatuses for direct sale to consumers, such a firm would be a tobacco product manufacturer. A manufacturer could also be any business that rebuilds coils or devices beyond simple repairs. Depending on number of employees and annual revenues, it is possible that a manufacturer could qualify as a “small scale tobacco product manufacturer.” Qualifying for this designation will not reduce the compliance requirements, but will afford such firms with additional time to comply with certain requirements under the Rule. Under the Rule, a “smallscale tobacco product manufacturer” is a manufacturer of any regulated tobacco product that employs 150 or fewer fulltime equivalent (“FTE”)employees and has annual total revenues of $5,000,000 or less. FDA considers a manufacturer to include each entity that it controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with such manufacturer. In other words, if a firm employs 150 or less FTE employees and has $5,000,000 or less in annual total revenues, but is controlled by, controls, or under common control with another manufacturer that puts them over the 150 FTE/$5,000,000 revenue thresholds, they would no longer be considered a smallscale tobacco product manufacturer. IMPORTANT DATES: May 10, 2016 - The Deeming Rule is officially published and will be effective 90 days thereafter. August 8, 2016 - The Deeming Rule is effective, as it is 90 days after the Rule is published in the Federal Register. This starts the clock on the various premarket pathway options and it also implements some key changes in the near term. December 31, 2016 - As a result of The Deeming Rule manufacturers will now need to submit a list of all products twice a year December and June of each year. Because the Rule will go into effect August 8 th December of this year will be the first time that vapor product manufacturers have to submit this information. February, 2017 - Manufacturers will need to submit an ingredient list of all products that are manufactured in February of 2017. It is not clear at this time what items the FDA will be expecting although we do expect that the level of detail required will be significant. As we know more, we will provide updates. August 8, 2018 - Premarket tobacco product application (“PMTAs”) are due. August 8, 2019 -Three years after the Rule’s effective date. By this time, all products on the market must have been grandfathered or the subject of an FDA marketing authorization order. How Suppliers must obtain FDA authorization Manufacturers of newlydeemed products that are "new tobacco products” will be required to obtain premarket authorization of their products through one of three pathways: (1) substantial equivalence (SE): This will require a manufacturer to show that a new product is substantially equivalent to a product on the market as of February 15, 2007. As I'm sure most of you know, It is unlikely that many products will be able to demonstrate SE given both the lack of comparable products on the market in February 2007 and the differences between products then and now. These submissions are due 18 months after the effective date (Anyone remember the old pen style 801's? Yikes...) (2) exemption from SE; This pathway is intended primarily for cigars and is unlikely to be an avenue for vapor products. These applications are due 12 months after the effective date. (3) premarket tobacco product application (PMTAs): This will be the path that almost all vapor products will need to follow. Manufacturers for both eliquids and devices will have 24 months to submit a PMTA application. After an application has been submitted, manufacturers will have an additional 12 months to market products. At the close of these compliance periods, products will be subject to FDA enforcement unless they are grandfathered or are the subject of a marketing authorization order. It should be noted that the administrative costs of compiling a PMTA will cost at least a few hundred thousand dollars PER product. This conservative estimate does not account for the testing that will be required to generate data sufficient to inform a PMTA submission. Such testing could cost at least $1 million per product. Short Term: Nothing will significantly change the way you operate your business until August 8 th . Beginning on August 8 th , the FDA can and likely will, to some degree, begin to enforce the following requirements: ∙ Products may not be sold to persons under the age of 18 (both in person and online); ∙ Age verification required by photo ID; You've no doubt run across a few suppliers already requests age verification documents. These are suppliers getting ahead of the curve, expect this to become more normal. Vapor Talk Quite a few members have PM'd me asking how this will affect Vapor Talk and what our stance is. (.... the PR firm kindly requested I refrain from using the exact words I'd like to express. But I'm sure you can take an educated guess if you know my history here!) First, the forum will always remain! No doubt forums are a gateway to the most current information. Secondly, I've taken back a large controlling share of Vapor Talk. We've just closed a joint, multi-million dollar venture and I can assure you, we're in this for the long haul (PR Release will be available at the end of the month). Vapor Talk started in 2008 and since then we've gone through early year bans, border seizures, California state ban (then reversed by good ol' Arnold) and much more. We've been doing this well before many of the new vapers arrived. I'll be working to expand the Vapor Talk online store, get the forum backup to spec (Many updates and bug fixed have been applied to the forum today.) as well as open new locations. VT is currently managed by the Whitney Group out of New Jersey but we'll be reopening offices in Los Angeles, a new office in Beijing (I'm flying out in two weeks so be sure to check the VT blog!) and finally England (Location TBA). Many of you have supported not just me personally but Vapor Talk as a company and community for a long time. As such we plan to stay for many, many years to come.

Hi Folks, I will be repairing a number of issues with the forum this evening. Some have been reported by the members (thank you) and others by the VT tech team. Below is the changelog if you so desire to read it - Bug: Floated search trigger has # as HREF. Needs to be linking to search page - Bug: Follow button unstyled inside topic view - Bug: RTE editor “Size” dropdown has weird vertical alignment - Bug: Activity feed & mark site as read links stacking onto new line when ‘restore breadcrumb’ feature is enabled - Bug: Various main titles missing - Bug: Notification counts has bad positioning in footer navigation block fixed - Bug: Logged out view - “Sign Up” user nav button has weird vertical alignment fixed. Also tweaked style - Bug: login bar responsiveness messed up in tablet portrait views fixed - Fixed issue where back to top covers multi quote button - Fixed issue with blog post posted date corrupted - Fixed user nav height being intermittent depending on what items are active - Latest updates to become more compatible with the latest version of the forum software. (This will fix a number of occasional oddities on the forum) We will also update the Tapa Talk API for our TapaTalk users.

Issue resolved

I wanted to take a moment to chime in and post a link to the VT blog: http://www.vaportalk.com/fda-regulation-explained/ SAFTA released a very easy to understand breakdown of the upcoming regulations. (Though a few things have changed) I've been pretty stretched over the last few weeks working with partners to ensure we don't go to the way of the wind when all of this comes down, with that said though, I'll try to update the first post shortly later with the SAFTA PDF and an easier to understand bullet point of what's coming. (It's confusing even for me)

Had a call on this earlier this evening. It appears to be correct as a number of sources are citing the same. Interesting turn of events and welcomed

I can assure you vaping will not cause a false positive. If it's for life insurance or similar and it's a nicotine test, sure you'll fail. But if it's your standard drug test or even hair test, you'll be just fine.

Hey Folks, I'm trying to gather some feedback from the forum. I've noticed that every so often (personally and in the logs) that after trying to create a new topic a 500 "not found" forum page shows. If you experience this while posting on the forum, please kindly post here so we can try to resolve the issue

And your opinion is well founded. While we're still in the early phases if and when we apply from our initial applications for US made VT liquids the funding source will likely come from outside investors as the cost is ridiculously high. Especially if there are multiple application attempts, that has to be recuperated some how. Without a doubt, those selling liquid past the 3 year window will raise the prices. If there are few companies left, there's also the "why not" as there isn't any other option for the consumer. I'm not saying this is something Vapor Talk would do but heck, look at the table industry as a perfect example. The start up costs to get an Internet company of the ground is huge. But as some have pointed there is still things passing through congress and a lot can happen in a couple of years. But it will go by quicker than people realize. Let's just hope the outcome is one we try to control rather than sitting back hoping those in the know take care of everything. (Psst come to my house, I got the good stuff) EDIT: Just for future readers, my random quirks aren't a lack of taking this subject serious. Just that it's so ridiculous I often keep myself going with offbeat, crappy humor.

While I think your more advanced vapers will probably be fine in terms of getting most of the supplies they need, it's also about how we're going to pass this forward. There there are still so many people who smoke cigarettes and most aren't going to jump through hoops like we would to get the gear the need. It would be nice to ensure the industry as a whole is protected. Although the start of vaping has been unrestricted (and sure we've had a few bumps in the road) the most fascinating thing for me to watch since 2007, is how quickly innovation took over. With no rules in place and a little self regulation, the devices we have now our light years away from the early days. It really goes to show when people are left with enough room to breath, just how quickly and creatively things move forward.

That's correct. There is nothing wrong with owning devices that you have or may purchase in the future. This pretty much applies to vendors and retailers. Though the states can now in theory create a law affecting customers too if they so desired. I suspect though that a "sin tax" would probably be applied in favor of a law. But then again after this last release of regulations, nothing really surprises me anymore. As to the comment above about bringing it in through the border, no different than when we ship through customs, you could still potentially have your merchandise confiscated. Thing is, if that was possible, suppliers would just pay someone to bring the gear into the country. Like Angela mentioned, it's just vague enough in some places to make it really confusing. The free samples are a good example, I think what they're trying to prevent is retailers from handing out nicotine contained products. When I was in Vegas for example, I recall a night club/bar handing out free disposables. This was quite a while ago but you're basically giving out products that are potentially addictive. So at least from this standpoint I get it. But when an adult smoker or existing vaper who's already made the decision to vape using nicotine enters an adult store requesting to try a new flavor, I really don't see what the problem is. If ID has been checked it should be fair game. But it doesn't state what "free sample" means. For example tasting stations found in vape stores don't really "give" you anything, instead you try a flavor on a pre filled tank with a protected mouthpiece usually. That's then handed back to the store owner/tasting station. So really, these regulations are pretty confusing. Finally and what I really don't understand is this: The FDA Is supposed to provide guidelines to ensure manufactures are producing a safer product. Who wouldn't want that? But these latest regulations, for example checking ID and not handing out free samples sound to me more like laws. The FDA should and does not have the power to create law. So many questions and not a lot of answers yet.

The FDA mentioned it will have a "task force" set in place to enforce these regulations. But more important is that states now have the right (again we're still going through all of this documentation) to not only enforce currently regulations but to enforce their own regulations. You mentioned how will this affect Vapor Talk and it's community and I can say that we will not, within the law, stifle or suppress conversation. The greatest right we have in this country is the right to free speech. Though most are unaware on the forum, we've had many cease and desist orders. One of them was actually from a well known candy company. (They asked us to remove three topics or face a lawsuit) my reply letter which is certified is actually up in my office with the rest. My response in legal jargon basically said "kiss my ***." (We were in the right) additionally we'd not only counter sue financially but would add a rider requesting partial payment in candy. (It's actually a pretty hilarious go between) This was before I sold Vapor Talk to The Whitney Group. Now to answer you questions about Vapor Talk. There are many big changes coming for VT as a company. (Many of you might have noted I've been absent for a couple of years outside of website maintenance) After a generous offer, I recently took back a large controlling stock in the company and am now sitting on the board. Additionally we're signing a multimillion dollar venture to push Vapor Talk globally (Two sister companies are opening in Asia and Europe) Furthermore we're releasing US created and mixed e-liquids 6 weeks from now +-. (That's about all I can mention before the PR release. The lawyers get antsy when I post. I was lovingly told not to be like the T Mobile CEO. I took that as a compliment) While many companies have gone up the popular chain and back down, we've been quietly working behind the scenes. It's taken a year of painstaking work after watching Vapor Talk struggle after leaving, but I can assure you - It feels like old times again with the regulation, we've been expecting this for quite time. I might not be this most filtered board member a company has ever brought back but let's be honest, the United States wasn't founded on following the rules. As someone who was British born, I like to think I'm keeping the tradition going. I hope and feel most vapers are on board. Vaping has always been the wild west industry and while we support proper, reasonable regulation, this recent release is total corporate backed horse****. Vapor Talk is your platform for communication on this and we're not going to sit back while the FDA pushes vapers back to traditional tobacco.

For those menting 0mg nicotine, that included as well. Essentially, if the FDA can prove you are selling the substance for use in ENDS (electronic nicotine delivery systems) you will become liable. I'm not saying it won't impossible, it's just that for the masses, this is unlikely. It's also a great risk to the vendor selling the supplies whether or not they want to risk the fine/felony for skirting around the law. Additionally the regulation does just include different flavors and strengths but also formulations. So, if you have one flavors available in 0mg, 6mg, 12mg and it comes in say three PG/VG ratios then your looking at 9 applications.

Potentially yes. I've heard mixed things on this but from what I understand, that would be the case. Another thing to think about is that companies in the US that can afford these large applications are going to want a way to recover the costs. If Big Tobacco were involved, naturally they're going to prefer the sealed no coil change method because obviously they can pull in far greater sales. This is just speculation. In the other hand though, like the Chinese companies or not, they're fighting alongside of us. Kanger Tech (who are HUGE now in China) has already formed a legal team to assist them with the new FDA regulations. They've always been pretty creative and I assume that'll be no different when it comes to these regulations. (See this unit for example which is in preparation for Europe's TPD regulations: Thing is, most of the new vapers on the board are dealing with this for the first time. Back when Vapor Talk was first founded we had similar restrictions in place. But they weren't direct, rather the FDA simply blanket banned everything coming into the country. It didn't stop vapers then.... As Americans we have a long history of not following the rules are tip toeing around them. There are more vapers now than ever and lots of intelligent users. It's very early now but I'm sure we'll prevail. At least the dedicated users.

At one point they were part of the Blu/Lorillard buy out but I'd heard they'd spun off from that since. I can't confirm but happened to be speaking with someone who works closely in the industry about a year ago. I had assumed the FDA would follow suit with the TPD regulations in Europe (Which are stricts but very reasonable) instead they've gone full dumbass mode.

Well said, complacency among vapers will ensure these regulations are set in stone. I was in orange county yesterday and happened to walk by a cigar store, they had a huge gather of cigar enthusiasts looking for ways to fight the newly enacted regulations. (and this was just a random store, on a Monday no less) EDIT: Looks like Nicopure has filed the first suit against the FDA. https://www.nicopure.com/news/nicopure-labs-challenges-fdas-deeming-rule/

Hey Vapor Talkers, So as most of you have probably heard by now the FDA has release their deeming regulations for electronic cigarettes. It's extremly broad and a potential devastating blow to the industry. Especially for small to medium sized vape shops that produce their own hardware or e-liquids. I'll leave my own opinion out of the top post and reserve this for the most current information. There seems to be a lack of simplified summaries so I'll do my best, with what we know so far, to explain the situation. Please see updated thread here:

You're welcome. I just took over a hefty share of Vapor Talk after many years, so you'll see my face around here again quite often. We need to dust this place off a bit.

I was thinking the same thing in regards the the lollipops. Hipopchary at it's finest. Made from Tobacco warning labels on zero nic liq, makes absolutely no sense. It's going to be an interesting two years. If the regulation isn't changed via lawsuit or new or additional laws passed through congress, most of the brands selling today will likely pull out. I suspect we'll see a few large factories with heavy investment come into the market selling pass through liquid that's already been submitted for regulation. Thing is, any change in formulation, meaning proprietary white labeled liquids, would need to apply as well. So you're potentially looking at say 20-50 flavors depending on the financial backings, simply sold under different labels. Heck, the factories may even opt to pull out and simply sell their own creations. Hard to say really, as there so much information to plow through. We have a big round table meeting coming up this week and a couple of lawyers reviewing the info over the weekend, I'll likely draft an ELI5 (Explain like I'm 5) version for those looking to get the highlights. (Though ECF will probably have something up pretty quickly)

Interesting, I agree this is probably in prep for some of the regulations coming into play in Europe. (Like TPD)

Due to issues with spam over the years suppliers are limited to their sub forums. Thus, the option to post topics openly is redistricted. (This isn't my decision personally)

Hey Rixter, This is marked as a bug I'm awaiting a patch on. (Happens with users in FireFox). The dev was gone over the holidays but now that he's returned, hopefully we'll have a new patch shortly.

You're welcome