BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }
5. Established, tested cpan modules for dealing with them
I only know of Business::PayPal::API in CPAN which seems to work
ok. The downside is that its PayPal :)
My initial inclinations were the big guns like Datacash and
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:02:07PM +0100, James Laver wrote:
I'm looking for a card processing service to take payments with.
Essential features:
1. No javascript required to make a payment (that means you, NetBanx).
The new Unified Payment Pages now work just fine without JavaScript.
If we
2009/10/1 James Laver james.la...@gmail.com:
I'm looking for a card processing service to take payments with.
Essential features:
1. No javascript required to make a payment (that means you, NetBanx).
2. No insistence on 3dsecure (because really, it's horrifically insecure).
3. I don't have
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 10:26:06AM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
However, one can't take payments from Maestro unless one has 3D insecure.
(And it seems that even easyJet are no longer large enough to wiggle out
of that one)
Nor are Google:
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Tom Hukins t...@eborcom.com wrote:
Nor are Google:
http://econsultancy.com/blog/4356-why-has-google-checkout-dropped-maestro
Paypal probably meets most of your criteria too :-)
They meet all of them.
What do you all think of Google Checkout?
--- On Fri, 2/10/09, Nicholas Clark n...@ccl4.org wrote:
From: Nicholas Clark n...@ccl4.org
2. No insistence on 3dsecure (because really, it's
horrifically
insecure).
And badly implemented by quite a few providers.
(There's XML, and a DTD. If the XML validates against the
DTD, that
Ovid wrote:
OK, I give. That's two references to how insecure 3D secure is.
Given that I know nothing about it other than the annoying fact that
I've forgotten my password for it, could someone explain why its
broken?
Well firstly you, I and *everyone* forgets their password. And then it
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 10:49:04AM +0100, Tom Hukins wrote:
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 10:26:06AM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
However, one can't take payments from Maestro unless one has 3D insecure.
(And it seems that even easyJet are no longer large enough to wiggle out
of that one)
Nor
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 03:13:35AM -0700, Ovid wrote:
--- On Fri, 2/10/09, Nicholas Clark n...@ccl4.org wrote:
From: Nicholas Clark n...@ccl4.org
2. No insistence on 3dsecure (because really, it's
horrifically
insecure).
And badly implemented by quite a few providers.
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 11:34:15AM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
(Rather than having DNS delegated, so that 3dinsecure.rbs.gov.uk is a CNAME
pointing to an IP owned and hosted by the outsourcer)
Oh yes. If anyone knows anyone who might know someone at the registrar who
might cause rbs.gov.uk to
2009/10/2 Nicholas Clark n...@ccl4.org:
(And annoyance, as a UK taxpayer, at all the various
stupidities involved, that I'm paying for, because of incompetence from
people who are not just still employ*able*, but employ*ed*)
Direct also your ire to the employees of the DWP, because most of
On Friday 02 October 2009 11:13:35 Ovid wrote:
OK, I give. That's two references to how insecure 3D secure is. Given that
I know nothing about it other than the annoying fact that I've forgotten my
password for it, could someone explain why its broken?
Well, there's the fact that, for years,
On 2 Oct 2009, at 12:07, David Precious wrote:
It's a poor attempt towards three-factor authentication, but relying
upon
entering a password - which will be picked up by the same keylogging/
sniffing
techniques they'd use to grab the rest of your details if you're
entering them
on a
On 2 Oct 2009, at 10:26, Nicholas Clark wrote:
The new Unified Payment Pages now work just fine without JavaScript.
If we have documentation saying otherwise, could you point it out so
that
I can ask for it to be corrected?
Ah no, my experience was as a customer of the companies house
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 01:11:36PM +0100, James Laver wrote:
On 2 Oct 2009, at 10:26, Nicholas Clark wrote:
The new Unified Payment Pages now work just fine without JavaScript.
If we have documentation saying otherwise, could you point it out so
that
I can ask for it to be corrected?
On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 01:40:55PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
We had a chat at lunch, and (IIRC) Tom said that he thinks that
Amazon are now not taking Maestro.
You remember correctly, but I'm wrong. I managed to end up looking at
the list of card types accepted on amazon.com and somehow
On 2 Oct 2009, at 13:40, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Yes, that's the old stuff. That's, um, not exactly something to be
proud of/
not exactly a good advertisement of what we now can do.
Ah, well at least that's changed :)
We had a chat at lunch, and (IIRC) Tom said that he thinks that
Amazon
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, James Laver wrote:
6%? I know of sites with much larger dropouts than that. And one day some of
them will finally realise it's stupid and stop taking 3dsecure at all.
In my experience sites are forced to by their bank.
--
bob walker
buses should be purple and bendy
On 2 Oct 2009, at 14:18, Bob Walker wrote:
In my experience sites are forced to by their bank.
That's unusual.
Banks usually don't care, but they will give liability to the retailer
in case of fraud on non-3ds transactions.
--James
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, James Laver wrote:
Banks usually don't care, but they will give liability to the retailer in
case of fraud on non-3ds transactions.
Like I said forcing them.
--
bob walker
buses should be purple and bendy
On 2 Oct 2009, at 16:28, Bob Walker wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, James Laver wrote:
Banks usually don't care, but they will give liability to the
retailer in case of fraud on non-3ds transactions.
Like I said forcing them.
It's not *quite* so clear-cut.
The costs due to fraud might be less
- Original Message
From: Peter Corlett ab...@cabal.org.uk
It's not *quite* so clear-cut.
The costs due to fraud might be less than the costs of losing sales due to
VBV/3DSecure, in which case the retailer might be happy to risk the fraud,
especially if they have other
On 2 Oct 2009, at 22:16, Ovid wrote:
- Original Message
From: Peter Corlett ab...@cabal.org.uk
It's not *quite* so clear-cut.
The costs due to fraud might be less than the costs of losing sales
due to
VBV/3DSecure, in which case the retailer might be happy to risk the
fraud,
2009/10/1 James Laver james.la...@gmail.com
I'm looking for a card processing service to take payments with.
Essential features:
1. No javascript required to make a payment (that means you, NetBanx).
2. No insistence on 3dsecure (because really, it's horrifically insecure).
3. I don't have
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, James Laver wrote:
So, recommendations? Horror Stories? Legal guidance?
3d secure is normally optional until your bank tells you otherwise.
SecureTrading seem fine. Dont know about perl interfaces but all you have
to do is pass xml to a java app. So really shouldnt be
25 matches
Mail list logo
