2026-03-17

Which PCI self-assessment applies once you take phone payments

Taking a card number over the phone changes which PCI questionnaire you owe. Here is how the SAQ types map to a restaurant that answers its own line.

Adding phone ordering to a restaurant that already takes cards online usually changes which PCI questionnaire you owe, and almost nobody notices.

The reason is structural. Most restaurants got their PCI answer once, from a processor onboarding form, in the form of a letter and a number that meant nothing to them. Nothing about the phone triggers a re-ask. So an operator who spent two years on SAQ A quietly starts keying card numbers read aloud by callers and stays on a questionnaire that explicitly does not cover it.

The questionnaires exist to shrink the assessment, not to grade you

PCI DSS has a few hundred requirements. The self-assessment questionnaires are subsets, each written for a payment environment specific enough that most requirements can be assumed inapplicable. Pick the one matching how card data moves through your business, answer its questions, and you have validated.

The whole apparatus works only if you pick correctly. A restaurant on the wrong SAQ is not lightly non-compliant. It has attested, in a signed document, that it meets a standard scoped for a business it is not running. After a breach that document becomes the first exhibit, and an incorrect attestation is worse than a missing one.

What actually changes when a card number is spoken aloud

Card-not-present is not one category. E-commerce and telephone orders are treated differently, and the difference is where the card number lands.

In outsourced e-commerce, the customer types the number into a page hosted by your processor. It never enters your systems. That is what SAQ A is scoped for, and in the current version of the standard SAQ A is e-commerce only.

On a phone order, the number leaves the customer's mouth and enters your restaurant. A person hears it. A device receives it. Something with a screen displays it. Whether that something is a browser on the back-office computer, your POS, or a piece of paper next to the register, you are now handling cardholder data, and the questionnaires that describe handling are the ones you are eligible for.

That is the whole shift, and it is why "we're SAQ A because our website is outsourced" stops being true the day you start taking orders by phone.

The four that a restaurant realistically lands on

The one to notice is C-VT's isolation condition. A virtual terminal open in a browser tab on the same computer that runs your scheduling software, your email, and somebody's Spotify does not meet it. That single detail disqualifies a lot of restaurants that believe they are on C-VT, and it is the kind of thing a QSA finds in about four minutes.

Call recordings are the trap that catches restaurants specifically

Sensitive authentication data may not be retained after authorization. That includes the verification code printed on the card, the thing your caller reads out as "the three numbers on the back."

An audio file of a customer saying those numbers is retention. It does not matter that it is a recording rather than a database field, and it does not matter that nobody intends to listen to it. If your phone system records calls and your calls include card entry, you are storing prohibited data, probably in a cloud archive, probably indefinitely, probably with a retention setting nobody has looked at since installation.

There are three defensible responses. Suppress the recording during card entry, so the segment never exists. Route card entry away from the conversation entirely, which is what DTMF masking does. Or do not take card payments by phone at all and collect on pickup, which is a legitimate choice more restaurants should consider than do.

What is not defensible is recording everything and hoping. Retention settings and who can hear what deserve their own decisions, laid out in call recording retention policy, and the broader payment mechanics are in PCI compliance for restaurant phone payments.

What to ask before a voice agent touches a card number

A voice agent changes the picture in a useful direction, provided the vendor built it correctly. The card number can be routed to a payment gateway through masked keypad entry, never spoken, never present in a transcript, never stored in your environment. Done that way, phone payment scope shrinks rather than grows.

Done carelessly, you have added a system that hears card numbers, transcribes them into text, and files the text somewhere with your call logs. That is a materially worse position than a person with a pen, because it is automatic and complete.

Five questions to put to any vendor in writing:

A vendor who answers the first three with marketing language rather than documents is telling you something. The contractual side of those answers, including the exit terms, is worth reading against voice AI contract terms to avoid, and the underlying mechanism is explained in phone payment tokenization.

Write one paragraph describing exactly how a card number travels through your restaurant on a phone order, from the caller's mouth to the authorization. Name every device and every person it passes. Send that paragraph to your acquirer and ask them to confirm your SAQ in writing. If the paragraph is hard to write because you are not sure what happens after the number is spoken, you have found the actual problem, and no questionnaire is going to tell you about it. See also collecting payment over the phone safely for the operational version of that walkthrough.

More on compliance & legal

All compliance & legal articles

Frequently asked questions

Hear it answer a real call.

Call the demo line and order like a customer would, or book time and we'll walk your team through it.