[ic] Authorize.net & fallback to GPG?
emailgrant at gmail.com
Mon Mar 31 20:14:03 EST 2008
> >Has anyone come up with a satisfactory system for giving the user info
> >on the result of their pre-auth, but preventing fraudsters from
> >testing stolen cards?
> The Authorize.net configuration will email the GPG'd credit card
Should I just write some ITL to email [value mv_credit_card_info] if I
don't get a valid response from Authorize.net? That would be simple
> info, you can decide if you are going to just authorize, or capture
> each sale . The system I work with, just authorizes transactions,
> then posts for settlement upon shipment in the admin UI - this
> feature is built in since (5.4?).
> The only drawback on authorizations: if the customer attempts to
> complete a sale and it takes 2-3 attempts, using incorrect billing
> address or zip, and they finally get it right on the 4th try - each
> attempt to validate the card locks up the funds for about 24 hours.
> So if they try to finish a sale for $100.00 ,4 times, they have
> reduced their available credit by $400.00 until the first three
> attempts clear - this doesn't happen often, but some people get a
> little irate about it.
> I wrote some custom code which limits the number of times that they
> can attempt to test a credit card for valid billing address and zip
> code, then locks out further attempts, also added CVV test - this
> really put a damper on fraudulent activity, but doesn't stop it all.
> We capture international cards without authorization, for later
> review - we have a really strict policy on international cards on
> unknown customers.
I like the idea of sending the payment info to Authorize.net without
any type of authorization. Which charge type accomplishes that?
> Once you dig into the processing of credit card/payment processes,
> can do just about anything you need.
If sending the payment info to Authorize.net succeeds and I don't
email [value mv_credit_card_info], can that payment info be said to
never be stored on my machine? I think it would only be in memory
More information about the interchange-users