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

Hello Authorize.net Community. We have recently implemented the new Accept hosted mobile optimized forms and we wanted to know if anyone has any success in hiding some of the following fields:

- City
- State
- Country
- Phone

 

Unfortuantely that function the option to show or not show the billing address options and that is by setting the property for hostedPaymentBillingAddressOptions https://developer.authorize.net/api/reference/features/accept_hosted.html#Requesting_a_Token allows us to disable all of the billing fields and our challenge is that we only want to enable the address fields that are required (i.e. Street Address, Zip & Phone). Based on our research and your responses from your forum, it looks like this is not possible. Hopefully your teams can consider these non-required fields as definable options separately in the future.

 

Thank you in advance for your consideration.

 

Best regards,

TS

Approve Held Transactions via API

Status: Delivered
by andrewskaggs on ‎03-17-2016 05:48 AM

Currently, transactions flagged as suspicious and held for review by the Fraud Detection Suite can only be approved via the Merchant Interface.

 

It would be much more convenient if we were able to approve these held transactions via the API without requiring our admins to log into the Merchant Interface.

Level 3 Support Feature request

Status: Accepted
by thill on ‎02-05-2016 09:50 AM

I have just recently wrapped up an integration with Auth.net to our website and erp system using CIM and the Payment Transaction API.  Our system is passing the Level 3 data to Auth.net, but Auth.net doesn't pass this information to the processor.  I was curious about the decision for Auth to hold onto the data and not deliver it to the processors and if this feature is on the roadmap?  I would love to have the L3 data passed around, we could realize an incredible amount of savings from this (fees can be cut by up to half with this information, That's huge!). 

 

If this isn't on the roadmap, please consider adding support for this.

 

Status: Accepted

integration with Zapier

Status: Under Review
by 4aGoodCause on ‎03-03-2017 08:40 AM

Does Authorize net have plans to integrate with Zapier? It is has been listed on their website as "upcoming" for over a year. When will it come? 

Status: Under Review

Created from previous thread: https://community.developer.authorize.net/t5/Integration-and-Testing/How-to-set-billing-info-in-CIM-...

 

Add ability to pre-load billing information into CIM hosted form.   Our customer's billing information is already stored in our system, and we do not want to force them to enter it a second time when adding a payment profile.  We would prefer instead to show the current billing information as the default values and allow them to modify the displayed information if the billing infomration is different for the credit card than what is already on file.

 

================================

 

 

In our system the user complete billing information, and when we show the form of the CIM hosted API, we need such data are loaded in the form, as we do that?

 

First we call to createCustomerProfileRequest,  with merchantCustomerId and email.

 

Then I call createCustomerShippingAddressRequest with customer billing address

 

and then, I call getHostedProfilePageRequest.

Status: Accepted

Generating Client Public Key

Status: Delivered
by menudrive-myles on ‎09-10-2018 11:27 AM

Hello all,

 

We operate as a service provider, rather than a single merchant. A lot of our merchants are not too tech savvy so asking them to generate a public key (we're switching almost all merchants to Accept.JS from AIM) is like pulling teeth most of the time. Maybe when a merchant signs up a public client key is automatically generated for them or there could be an API request that generates a key for them so we can obtain the key from a 'getMerchantDetailsRequest'.

 

Also once again: love your service, your API is much better documented than a lot of your competitors, it's much more robust and the Accept.js library is easy to handle.

 

Myles

Status: Delivered

 Hi @menudrive-myles

 

 Just to update on it if you are calling the getMerchantDetailsRequest API .

 

and  if the public key is not generated , it will be generated automatically and returned in the response . 

 

You can call the getMerchantDetails API on behalf  of the merchant by using the  OAuth token 

 

https://developer.authorize.net/api/reference/features/oauth.html

 

 

Thanks

Anurag

 

 

Despite using best security practices to protect passwords, we consider the single form authentication to the Authorize.net portal to be a critical security concern.

 

The concern is especially high with regard to CIM. When CIM is enabled, anybody breaking into the Authorize.net account can do a lot of damage (like creating transactions).

 

We are in 2015 and two form factor authentication is widespread and easy to implement. It does not have to be a full blown 2-factor with MFA devices. A simple solution - for example using a mobile phone access code - would already be a huge improvement over the current system.

 

 

Status: Accepted

Since when you call the getCustomerProfileRequest and it will list all the payment profiles can you please add a field as to which one is the default one?

 

This would be extremely useful when showing a user a list of all their profiles and which one they have set as default. Otherwise it takes a lot more unecessary coding to show all the payment profiles and then have to determine which one is the default by making additional API calls.

Status: Delivered

Hi

 

Following our recent Gap Analysis for PCIDSS Compliance, it was suggested that at the point of entering the Credit/Debit card details for payments, the PAN should be masked. This would then take away the opportunity for screen scraping where the user could screen shot the full details, or copy and paste them somewhere else.

 

After getting in touch with the dev team at Authorize, they have advised that this would be a good idea to get rolling and the best way to do this is to add it here. So here we are!

 

Many thanks

Amber

Status: Under Review

The identifying information that's included in Silent Posts (x_cust_id, x_subscription_id, etc) should always be in webhook transactions, if not just everything in Silent Posts. I know about refId but that's of no use to companies using ARB for recurring billing, which is 99% of our transactions.

This is making my migration to Webhooks difficult. Your support staff has obviously been instructed to push everyone to webhooks if they're using Silent Post right now but the glaring omissions of functionality in webhooks is just absurd.

The only solution is to query the Authnet API for information on the transaction ("getTransactionDetailsRequest"). The response that comes back from that query is very detailed. That detailed response should just be webhook. Why the heck not? Come on now.

Idea: A read-only key that can be generated specifically for the Transaction Details API.

 

Background:

We are developing an app that only uses the Transaction Details API.

Which means we are only reading information.

 

From a liability standpoint, we want to avoid saving a write-capable transaction key.

 

Ideally a separate "read-only" transaction key could be created when a user turns on the Transaction Details API.

Status: Accepted

NPM package for Accept.js

Status: New
by naringyro4 on ‎07-17-2018 08:55 AM

It would be convenient if Authorize.net would create and support an npm package that contained the production and sandbox versions of Accept.js.

I am implementing a solution in Angular and currently have copied and pasted the file contents and put them in my application.

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

I have a scenario where I'm performing an authorization with a payment nonce, then creating a profile from that successful authorization, and later capturing the authorized amount. This is a nice workflow because I only create a payment profile if the authorization succeeds.

 

But unfortunately, this workflow is not possible because the authorization is not associated with the payment profile, and doesn't show up under its history. In a scenario where we're using a profile for recurring transactions, it's a big deal to us to have the initial payment in the history.

 

See this thread for more details as to alternatives that are less ideal.

 

 

It'd be very helpful if, when I create a profile from a transaction, if that transaction became the initial transaction in the payment profile's history, and I was able to capture it as though it had been issued from that profile.

 

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

As we build out our integration we noticed it would nice to have some additonal search types added to the getCustomerPaymentProfileListRequest endpoint. The most useful for us would be to search by customerProfileID.  Also an expiration date range would be nice along with a paymentType (credit card or bank account)

 

A future request i could see is having the ability to have multiple searchTypes like customerProfileID and and an expiration month/year or range, or customerProfileID and paymentType.

 

Thanks,

-Nick

Status: Accepted

Support 19 Digit Card Numbers

Status: Accepted
by jmagaro88 on ‎01-24-2017 06:30 AM - last edited on ‎02-13-2017 04:13 PM by Administrator Administrator

A customer on my site just attempted to place an order with a valid Discover card number that is 19 digits long. Apparently, Discover and Visa have begun rolling out valid cards with 19 digits. The card passed my Luhn algorithm validation and was passed to Authorize.NET for authorization. The XML request was sent succefully; however, I received the following error response from Authorize.NET:

 

The 'AnetApi/xml/v1/schema/AnetApiSchema.xsd:cardNumber' element is invalid - The value XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX is invalid according to its datatype 'String' - The actual length is greater than the MaxLength value.

I checked on the Authorize.NET documentation, and it appears that only card numbers between 13 and 16 characters long are supported. When will this be changed to accommodate 19 digit card numbers?

Status: Accepted

Converted community thread to an idea and changed to accepted.

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

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