Secure Trading Checkout Problem

[taliesyn]

We have been using Secure Trading successfully for years now, but since we upgraded to version 9.05 (and probably since we upgraded from v7, but I never thought to check the payment pages as they have always worked!), the address details of the customer are not fully passed through to the ST payment form (specifically Address line 1, Town/City, and County or State). Name, Postcode/Zip, Country, and Telephone Number are fine, as are the order reference and the amount.

Obviously this means that even though payments go through successfully, we are getting an AVS check error, because ST can't verify the address numbers.

I have contacted ST support, and as usual they have been very helpful, and have sent me their latest Actinic merchant files, which I have uploaded to their servers, but still the problem persists.

I noticed Chris Adams' thread on the forum (having of course searched beforehand ) which mentions a similar problem with v8.5 and doesn't seem to apply to v9, and I wonder if anyone else has noticed the problem or come across a solution? There appears to be no mention of on the KB either.

[taliesyn]

Is there no one else using Secure Trading?

Still working on this, and if I manage to find a solution, I'll post it up here

[Rich Brady]

Phil, bumping th thread won't make people more likely to reply I'm afraid.

This thread has had 29 views and no one as replied, suggesting that either they don't know the answer and/or they don't use secure trading.

Have you contacted Actinic support?

[taliesyn]

Phil, bumping th thread won't make people more likely to reply I'm afraid.

This thread has had 29 views and no one as replied, suggesting that either they don't know the answer and/or they don't use secure trading.

Have you contacted Actinic support?

Bumping the thread Rich? Wouldn't dream of it

It's not as if it was in any danger of getting dropped off the first page in this particular part of the forum, so a bump would have been even more pointless than my last reply

I haven't spoken to Actinic Support yet, mainly as I wanted to exhaust all other possibilities first. Well that and the fact that I'm in the middle of another crisis at the moment, so I've got my hands full.

Rest assured, they're my next port of call

[Mark H]

It would be very helpful if you could post the answer (assuming you find out...) we're just about to go to V9 and we use Secure Trading

[taliesyn]

It would be very helpful if you could post the answer (assuming you find out...) we're just about to go to V9 and we use Secure Trading

I'll definitely do that, however I've just realised that I didn't renew our Actinic Cover the last time (mainly as in the many years we have had cover - since v6 I think , most times we have always managed to sort our own problems faster than support have been able to get back to us, or they have been so minor that they're not worth getting in touch with them about), so they will likely not talk to me.

Certainly the option is not there when you phone up and you are simply referred back to this forum and the Knowledge Base

Anyway, I shall have to have a poke about myself and see if I can come up with something.

[taliesyn]

Having investigated further, and having spoken to ST, it appears to be a general problem with Actinic either not passing the address details at all or only partially passing them to ST (which is the problem we're having).

I know it used to work correctly back in the mists of time, so have Actinic changed what they pass through to the PSP?

The attachment below illustrates the problem

[Mark H]

I have been reminded that we needed to modify (at ST's suggestion) either some html or other code to get Actinic to pass certain fields through to ST, and I'm trying to find what was modded. Will let you know what I find.

[Mark H]

Getting close, I have found notes from 2003 saying that initial testing showed that town, county, address1 not being passed through to ST........

[Chunkford]

I have no knowledge with V7 but does V7 use the .pl scripts in the CommonOCC folder like in V8 and V9?
If so you could compare the two and see if the Post Name values are the same that are used to transfer the data across.

[taliesyn]

I have been reminded that we needed to modify (at ST's suggestion) either some html or other code to get Actinic to pass certain fields through to ST, and I'm trying to find what was modded. Will let you know what I find.

Many thanks Mark. Much appreciated

ST themselves don't seem to be aware of any changes that could affect the data being passed through to the payment form, but who knows. Maybe any changes required have been lost in the mists of time!

I have no knowledge with V7 but does V7 use the .pl scripts in the CommonOCC folder like in V8 and V9?
If so you could compare the two and see if the Post Name values are the same that is used to transfer the data across.

No idea Paul, but I can see that the NETQUOTEVAR:OCC_VALUES variable contains the data that is passed through to the PSP on the bounce page, so that's certainly worth further investigation. Thanks

[Chunkford]

I've just compared v8 and v9 OCCSecureTradingScriptTemplate.pl and there are differences in the post values used.

Maybe something got mixed up or corrected along the way

V9

AddPostValues ('&', 'SALUTATION', $::InvoiceContact{SALUTATION}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'name', $::InvoiceContact{NAME}, $ALWAYS, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'JOBTITLE', $::InvoiceContact{JOBTITLE}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'COMPANY', $::InvoiceContact{COMPANY}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'address', $::InvoiceContact{ADDRESS1}, $ALWAYS, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'ADDRESS2', $::InvoiceContact{ADDRESS2}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'town', $::InvoiceContact{ADDRESS3}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'county', $::InvoiceContact{ADDRESS4}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'country', $::InvoiceContact{COUNTRY}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'telephone', $::InvoiceContact{PHONE}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'FAX', $::InvoiceContact{FAX}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'email', $::InvoiceContact{EMAIL}, $ALWAYS, $NOENCODE);

V8

AddPostValues ('&', 'SALUTATION', $::InvoiceContact{SALUTATION}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'NAME', $::InvoiceContact{NAME}, $ALWAYS, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'JOBTITLE', $::InvoiceContact{JOBTITLE}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'COMPANY', $::InvoiceContact{COMPANY}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'ADDRESS1', $::InvoiceContact{ADDRESS1}, $ALWAYS, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'ADDRESS2', $::InvoiceContact{ADDRESS2}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'ADDRESS3', $::InvoiceContact{ADDRESS3}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'ADDRESS4', $::InvoiceContact{ADDRESS4}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'COUNTRY', $::InvoiceContact{COUNTRY}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'PHONE', $::InvoiceContact{PHONE}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'FAX', $::InvoiceContact{FAX}, $OPTION, $REDIRECT);
AddPostValues ('&', 'EMAIL', $::InvoiceContact{EMAIL}, $ALWAYS, $NOENCODE);

[Mark H]

OK, bear with me as I am not the techie here......

For V7 this html is in our ST pages "form", "failure" and "success":

<!-- "Convert" some to ST Fields -->
<input type="hidden" name="address" value="$address1">
<input type="hidden" name="town" value="$address3">
<input type="hidden" name="county" value="$address4">
<input type="hidden" name="telephone" value="$phone">

I think this means that the actinic field "$address1" is converted to the ST field "address" in order for the info to be passed over?

[Mark H]

Hi Paul - just seen your reply, it looks like the V9 code has corrected this old problem, and the "conversion" code in the ST html pages should be taken out, as it is probably still there from earlier versions of Actinic, and is now itself causing the problem?

[taliesyn]

I'll have a look at my ST card processing form and see if the changes have been implemented there