Have your own great idea for a new API feature?

or maybe a suggested improvement to an existing one? Share it and become a god of the developer world.

New Idea

Notice of Change reports via API

Status: Under Review
by ddri-rlevesque on ‎10-06-2016 08:27 AM

From what I understand getTransactionDetails will not provide the same information as the Notice Of Change report that is accessed via the website, i.e. corrected account and/or routing number.

 

The result of getTransactionDetails for a transaction in the NOC report is a “returned item” after the original transaction is settled successfully.  It is not until several days later that the returned item is generated. 

 

If the information provided by the NOC report could be accessed programmatically, one could correct the transaction and resubmit. 

 

Status: Under Review

The CIM iframe works great but lacks some display options.  For example, I use it at a newspaper where the billing and shipping info are both useful to have.  Unfortunately we cannot change the name of "Shipping" to delivery.  In the case of a newspaper, this might imply we will mail the subscription which is not the case.  It would also be nice to be able show or hide the shipping field if it wasn't needed.

 

The iframe should also support a responsively designed site.  It will position further down on the page by default when viewed on a mobile device.

Status: Delivered

Created from previous thread: https://community.developer.authorize.net/t5/Integration-and-Testing/refundTransaction-requires-expi...

 

Currently, to refund a transaction, you must provide both the masked credit card number and expiration date.   Yet this information adds nothing to the request -- in fact, if you no longer have this information, you must issue a separate getTransactionDetail transaction to fetch this information.   Rather than requiring two separate transactions to perform a single task, only require the original transaction id.

 

Status: Accepted

Hosted solution similar to stripe, coming?

Status: Delivered
by rreynier on ‎08-05-2014 10:41 AM

Currently, to avoid most PCI compliance, the hosted CIM is the suggested solution.  The problem with this solution is that it is very clunky and does not integrate well with any custom interface.  It uses an Iframe solution in which you have no control over the appearance of the form fields.

 

Stripe offers a javascript solution which basically does the same thing as the hosted CIM but allows for the developer to seamlessly integrate the form folds into an existing system.  I was curious of Authorize.net is planning on any sort of similar solution down the road.

 

Thanks!

Status: Delivered

We now offer Authorize.Net Accept.js, a javascript library for accepting payments while reducing PCI scope:  http://developer.authorize.net/api/reference/features/acceptjs.html

Give full customization of email receipts

Status: Under Review
by merpro on ‎12-02-2015 10:17 AM

Please allow us to fully customize the email receipts. You finally allowed us to change the description of the normal recipt. Now expand that to allow customization for recipts from transactions flagged by the fraud filter.

 

In 2015 I can't even comprehend this restriction of not letting the customer dictate what the recipt should say. 

Status: Under Review

As noted in the FAQ, Authorize.net waits 10 seconds to receive a response from DPM POST requests:

http://developer.authorize.net/faqs/#rrcauses

 

It also notes that "On occasion, timeouts will occur that are outside of the control of your script or our servers. Typical reasons for these timeouts are Internet traffic, merchant server overload or malfunctions, or Internet routing issues. Depending upon your server location and what route is used to send data, it is possible that you may occasionally receive a time out message."

 

It appears that Authorize.net does not retry a failed POST, even if the 10 second timeout has not been reached. This was confirmed by an admin in the forums ("We currently do not retry failed posts").

 

I propose that this behavior be changed. If an Authorize.net POST request fails, prior to the 10 second cut-off, the POST should be retried, possibly with a short backoff (e.g., wait a second or two to reinitiate, to prevent a flood of requests).

 

As background, we have been using DPM successfully for a couple of years now, but we do occassionally see "timeout" errors. Crucially, it does not appear that these are actually caused by timeouts. The first thing we do in handling the response is log receipt of the request. But we see no evidence of having received the requests in our logs. Which suggests that the problem is happening outside of our network.

 

As it currently stands, Authorize.net's POST request could fail immediately due to some extremely transitory issue (perhaps even within their network). They would immediately receive a "connection reset by peer" error or whatever. And even though virtually none of the 10 second timeout period has been consumed, the customer receives a timeout error.

 

The DPM process should make more of an effort to communicate the transaction status and prevent this failure scenario.

 

Possibly related to this request would be additional logging facilities, so that both Authorize.net and its customers could have more insight into what exactly is occuring. IOW, it would be very helpful to have some visibility into *why* Authorize.net's POST request failed, and how long it took. It could provide much needed stats to discover how often the "timeout" problem is happening and whether these suggested changes are actually making a difference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Status: Delivered

DPM is now replaced by Authorize.Net Accept.js, a javascript library for accepting payments: http://developer.authorize.net/api/reference/features/acceptjs.html

CIM Customization

Status: Delivered
by whitsell1 on ‎11-18-2014 01:33 AM

Would like to be able to customize the pop up for managing payment profiles. It would be great if the Payment Form Fields configuration checkboxes applied to this, so that for example we could turn off the shipping address. A seperate place to configure this would also be fine.

Status: Delivered
There seems to be many companies that have more than a 1,000 unsettled transactions they need to review on a daily basis. Being able to pull this down programmatically is an important feature for us to evaluate/validate unsettled transactions each day. Removing the limit on the Get Unsettled Transactions API function would be a great help! Thanks,
Status: Delivered

We have delivered this capability with an update to the reporting API methods:

 

 

Element

Description

sorting

Contains sorting information

         orderBy

Order of transactions in response:

         id

         submitTimeUTC

         orderDescending

true, false, 1 or 0

Paging

 

         limit

1-1000.

The number of transactions per page.

         offset

1-100000.

The number of the page.

 

Unsettled Transactions

The example request below will retrieve the last 100 unsettled transactions by time submitted.  With this release, sorting can be on either transaction ID or transaction submit time.

 

 

<getUnsettledTransactionListRequest>
    <merchantAuthentication>
        <name>API_LOGIN_ID</name>
        <transactionKey>TRANSACTION_KEY</transactionKey>
    </merchantAuthentication>
    <sorting>
      <orderBy>submitTimeUTC</orderBy>
      <orderDescending>true</orderDescending>
    </sorting>
    <paging>
      <limit>100</limit>
      <offset>1</offset>
    </paging>
</getUnsettledTransactionListRequest>

 

 

The resulting GetTransactionList response is unchanged apart from one new field, totalNumInResultSet.

 

Settled Transactions

Pagination works exactly the same way for settled transactions. Use the paging elements to page through a settled batch of transactions 100 at a time. 

 

<getTransactionListRequest> 
  <merchantAuthentication> 
<name>API_LOGIN_ID</name>
<transactionKey>TRANSACTION_KEY</transactionKey>
</merchantAuthentication>
<batchId>6416551</batchId>
<paging>
<limit>300</limit>
<offset>1</offset>
</paging>
</getTransactionListRequest>

 

The resulting GetTransactionList response is unchanged apart from one new field, totalNumInResultSet.

Just posting here in case someone finds my post before wasting further time on this issue.

 

I have an app that uses authnet's API to take payments.  I also use their fraud detection suite, specifically for many of the IP address-related filters (velocity, shipping mismatch, regional blocking, etc).  I'd been conducting business like normal for some time, no issues.  I recently had my web host enable IPv6 for my site to get the benefits it providers for mobile shoppers who often see faster performance over v6 due to not having to go through carrier NAT for IPv4 in high density areas.  Everything seemed like it was working fine initially, but then I heard from a customer who could not pay.

 

After some debugging, we found that my payment code was populating the authorize.net API field customerIP / x_customer_ip with the customer's IP, which is obviously what it is intended for.  I was populating it with both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses.  The field is only usable for IPv4 ;if you pass IPv6, it will decline the transaction.

 

What's worse, is that since I have fraud suite features enabled, I have to pass an IP.  So what to do for an IPv6 shopper?  I can't pass a placeholder IPv4 address, such as always passing my site's own IP when the shopper is IPv6, because I'd end up triggering the velocity filter.  So ended up having to go back to not having my site IPv6 enabled.

 

I found someone asking about IPv6 and that field as far back as 2011, and authnet still hasn't caught on.  Comcast is IPv6-enabled nationwide, as is nearly every 4g cell network, so this isn't just a fringe customerbase I'm wanting to support.

 

Status: Under Review

ARB subscription details

Status: Accepted
by mandah0520 on ‎01-26-2015 02:02 PM

There needs to be a feature that allows you to get subscription information like when was the last valid payment, all attempt of card processing and whether it failed or went through, etc etc etc. ARB really is tiny with no usefull functions other than create and cancel subscriptions. Even the update is useless with the amount of things u can update about a transaction. So please add some features that gives users some idea of what is going on with their subscription. Is there a better payment processor than authorize.net that does this?

Status: Accepted

We are a software developer with an interface to Authorize.net's API for storing card data using Customer Information Manager and issuing transactions based on the saved payment profiles.
A number of our clients separate credit card transactions by card type. To do this we need to know the card type for a payment profile saved in CIM. This information does not appear to be in your CIM documentation. Are there any plans for returning this data?

Status: Delivered

We'd like to proactively email customers who have credit cards about to expire. It would be very helpful to have one call that would return all those customer ids with payment profile id(s) and expiration date.

Status: Delivered

Currently it doesn't appear that you offer a service like many of your competitors to automatically update card expiry dates that are stored in the system. It would be VERY beneficial for anyone doing recurring payments (either manually or via your automatic system) to be able to get the latest expiry information.

Create transaction and recurring billing subscription with single request

Status: Delivered
by Omkaar1 on ‎02-06-2015 06:25 AM - last edited on ‎02-06-2015 10:21 AM by Administrator Administrator

how i create ARB subscription using single payment in php

I want to integrate ARB with AIM in core php website.please give me proper intructions with example.

Status: Delivered

We're marking this idea as delivered but it does require two steps:

 

See https://community.developer.authorize.net/t5/The-Authorize-Net-Developer-Blog/Recurring-billing-and-... for more details on creating or updating a subscription using a profile

 

Richard

Hi,

It's great that now we finally can retrieve card expiration dates via API call. Nevertheless, on https://test.authorize.net/profile/editPayment form expiration date is still displayed as masked. Our clients find this inconvenient. The idea is to show unmasked date on hosted form.

Status: Accepted

The ID of a duplicate customer profile is returned, but not when it is a payment profile: "A duplicate customer payment profile already exists." These requests date back to 2009, it forces us to loop through the payments and try to guess at which one is the duplicate and doesn't always work since customers can still generate duplicates anyway by updating existing profiles. It would be nice if there was a way to get the ID of the duplicate payment profile, or if there was a way to disable the duplicate verification check completely, since what some merchants really need is just a "I give you a PAN, you give me a token" level of tokenization instead of futzing with profiles. Thanks.

Status: Delivered

Payment Page

Status: Declined
by Fcm on ‎12-10-2014 10:56 AM
Hi, An option of a payment page would be a great idea! For a retail business which uses a gateway due to the convenience of reporting etc., it is very annoying to need to login each time a customer wants to pay. If a merchant processes payments every 10-15 minutes, although they still have authorize.net open the page logs out due to inactivinty and they need to login again. This means they constantly need to login in. ANNOYING! As well, authorize.net does currently not properly support level II & level III processing. (Although you claim you do) Numerous merchants entered the data in the fields you advised and did not qualify for level II -level III rates. When they processed with a different gateway, they did. (IT"S A BIG PROBLEM!) The authorize.net community would appreicate action to the above mentiones matters. Thanks!
Status: Declined

We have a separate requst for Level 3 data at https://community.developer.authorize.net/t5/Ideas/Level-3-Support-Feature-request/idi-p/53711

 

For your other request to have a page that does not need authentication, we're going to decline.

Declined Transactions Emailed to Us

Status: Declined
by Liquid on ‎11-13-2014 07:19 PM

We need the DECLINED / Non-Payments to be EMAILED TO us. I have ALSO asked for this easy and basic functionality for years. We have recieved nothing but a "we are working on it" response for YEARS. It's beyond frustrating.

 

It's a very simple task. It is ABSURD that you do NOT have this option yet.

 

We NEED to have the DECLINED Payments (and not just successful payments) EMAILED directly to various admins here at our small business AND the reason for the decline (i.e. incomplete payment or expired credit card).

 

Please advise on when this will actually be impleted. Thank you.

Status: Declined

I don't think it's fair to put the status to delivered, (as @cggamer alluded to) as the request was specifically for getCustomerProfileRequest. It's nice that it was delivered for getCustomerPaymentProfileRequest but this means that you have to do multiple requests to show a customer's full profile, which I'm guessing most systems (including mine) would rather not.

Status: Delivered

It is unclear whether or not Authorize.net supports readers where the manufacturer is able to perform key injection of an encryption key provided by Authorize.net.   This seems like a straight-forward concept that should be documented on the mobile reader support page.  Forum posts (other than mine) indicate confusion about this issue.  Unfortunately, the support reps don't really understand the question and can only answer based on what they read from the site, so calling support does not help.

 

Status: Delivered

The list of supported devices is maintained at https://support.authorize.net/authkb/index?page=content&id=A1574

 

Richard