Protx VSP Direct 2.4.0

Connor,

You might also see this thread

http://www.zen-cart.com/forum/showthread.php?t=102272

I have installed the prtox module and orders are being passed through and the client is being billed. However, they are being billed £20-30 more then they are supposed to be being charged. I know why the values are different I just need to force it to pass the correct one through to protx

Could you tell me the variable names passed to protx so I can search for them in the code to see why the value is being changed/give it the correct value? I am not 100% sure how the prtx module in zen cart works so if I knew what it passes then I can start looking for it!

hope this makes sense

thanks

Rachael

Hi Rachael,

rlparker:

hope this makes sensel

It doesn't actually! Why are the values different? You shouldn't be modifying the Protx module to sends different amounts from the cart's total.. you should be modifying the cart's total to send the correct amount.

Changing the Protx module to work in this way is not something I'll support, that's bad customer service/programming practice.

All the best...

Conor

sorry that's not what i am trying to do.

my customer has a complicated tax/discount system which has meant I have had to calculate the cart total manually. so all the correct values are shown to the customer in the cart.

however I cannot get this correct value through to protx. I do not want to sneakily charge them extra! Protx is charging them more then it should be. I am trying to pass my correct value through to it so the customer is charged the amount they expect to be charged.

not trying to do anything underhand honestly!

Hi Rachael,

I didn't think you were trying to do anything underhand - I doubt you'd just ask here if you were - but I wasn't sure if you were making the customer aware properly.

However, I also mentioned "bad programming practice" and this point still stands. What you are asking to do should be done in a different way.

rlparker:

my customer has a complicated tax/discount system which has meant I have had to calculate the cart total manually. so all the correct values are shown to the customer in the cart.

Then don't just show these details to the customer in the cart, modify the cart calculation itself.

Move the calculations you are using to show the customer the correct amount from the display functionality to the cart total functionality.

That's the good programming practice way to achieve your desired solution.

Sometimes it just takes looking at things with a slightly different methodology behind you! :)

Hope that info's useful to you!

If you want further help on this, please start a new thread, I don't think this is appropriate for this thread any longer.

All the best...

Conor

hi!

first i think this is a great module, but i have a question with regards to confirming Crypt Blowfish is installed, when you first install Protx Module it warns it is not installed, (it is installed) however when i run the store in debug mode it states Blowfish encryption was used?

which is right?

Thanks!

Steve

Hi Steve,

athenadesign:

first i think this is a great module,

Thanks for saying so, I'm glad you like it! :)

athenadesign:

which is right?

Bizarrely, both are right. Many hosts seem to set up Zen Cart with different PHP configurations for the admin from the catalog. I don't know why this is, but a new version of the module will be uploaded shortly with code to provide more informative messages on both the catalog and admin side.

More than likely, your admin uses a different PEAR installation from your catalog but as the catalog is the one with the necessary access to Crypt_Blowfish, everything is fine for you! :)

You don't need the new version as yours is working just fine (and is indeed uising Encryption, which is recommended), it just makes things clearer for those installing the module for the first time.

Hope that sets your mind at ease!

All the best...

Conor

Hi,

Version 2.6.2 has been released. ALL USERS USING 2.4.0 OR VERSIONS PREVIOUS TO 2.4.0 MUST UPGRADE!

The differences between 2.6.1 and 2.6.2 are minor but welcome:

[ADDED] Module now automatically checks include paths against any open_basedir restrictions and displays the information necessary to fix a misconfigured server's access to its PEAR installation/Crypt_Blowfish files.
[ADDED] Checks regarding length of CVV code added.
[UPDATED] Error handling improved by including checks for specific error codes in returned status detail.
[UPDATED] FAQs updated in documentation with some more information about how to fix problems with a server's access to the PEAR:Crypt_Blowfish package.

The file has been submitted to the download area and should be available there shortly. As always it's also available for download from our website and upgrading instructions are included in the documentation:

http://www.zen-cart.com/index.php?main_page=product_contrib_info&products_id=629

Enjoy!

All the best...

Conor

Good Evening,

Sorry to ask but. where's the publicly available code for version 3.0, this is from version 3.0 off a client's website:

<?php /** * protx_direct 3D-Secure iFrame Redirection and Callback Handler * * @author Conor Kerr <[email protected]> * @copyright Copyright 2006-2008 Ceon * @copyright Portions Copyright 2003-2006 Zen Cart Development Team * @copyright Portions Copyright 2003 osCommerce * @link <http://dev.ceon.net/web/zen-cart/protx_direct> * @license <http://ceon.net/licenses/commercial> Ceon Commercial License * @version $Id: protx_direct_3d_secure_iframe.php 550 2008-02-19 15:56:23Z conor $ */ require('includes/application_top.php');

ASFAIK Version 3 is based on version 2 which in turn is based on zerncart oscommerce work all under GPL 2.0. From the ceon FAQ's at http://dev.ceon.net/web/zen-cart/protx_direct/faqs, it's stated that:

Supporting this technology required a substantial rewrite of the module, which took a lot of time, so it was decided to charge for this new version in order to cover its development costs and future development of the module (e.g. the implementation of “Authenticate/Authorise” to be introduced later in the year).

But the GPL states that all derivative works must also be released under the GPL.

*The GPL is the most popular and well-known example of the type of strong copyleft license that requires derived works to be available under the same copyleft. *

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License so unfortunately just because the work took a lot of time, it's not possible to release it under a commercial license without releasing the code for any modifications.

Technically the module is "linked in" to zencart (application_top.php is called), and so also should be GPL. There's nothing wrong with charging to support the module, nor for charging for the download from your servers, but it must be publicly available and it must be released under the GPL 2.0 at the very least. It could "possibly" be dual licensed with a commercial license like mysql used to be that guarantees a support level.

Sorry about this (I respect you immensely as a programmer), but the GPL is the GPL, and it would be like me releasing a module for "special delivery" on a commercial licence out of all the royal mail modules I made.

Philip.

Hi Philip

Your post appears to be mixing up several issues. On some you're right. On others wrong. Let's try to pick them apart and look at them individually.

I agree that there is a licensing issue here. Not specifically because the module calls application_top.php. Original and segregated works are allowed to interface with GPL-licensed software as long as they don't become integral to it. Whether that's the case here could be argued into the night, but is moot, since there's a much clearer argument - namely, however much it has changed, the work is clearly derivative of earlier code that is copyrighted by others and licensed under GPL, and therefore must in turn be released under the GPL.

Though it's worth noting as a separate point that the only people who can enforce this are the copyright holders, should they choose to incur the expense of doing so. The rest of us have no standing on the issue.

I disagree about your suggestion that the derived code must be made publicly available. In fact quite the opposite, the freedom granted by the GPL to use software received under the terms of license includes the freedom to keep it to yourself or pass it on to whomever you choose under whatever commercial terms you set. What it prevents is then placing more stringent restrictions on any recipients. So Connor can decide for himself to whom he makes it available, and whether he asks for payment for doing so.

What the license does insist upon, and it is this that I think is proving confusing, is that if it is distributed, then it must be done in such a way as to not preclude the recipient from seeing it and changing it, as they wish.

So, for example, if distributed in binary or compiled form, then a readable version must also be made available to the recipient. And it is not allowed to distribute it in obfuscated or encrypted formats. However, as the Protx mod is not compiled, obfiscated or encrypted, this is not relevant here. Furthermore although these requirements place restrictions on how it may be distributed, they create no obligations in terms of to whom it must be made available.

Personally, I'm happy to encourage my clients to pay for Connor's Protx mod. It's so key to their sites, works beautifully, he provides great support and keeps it up-to-date. All of which I value greatly. However, you have raised a legitimate question about the licensing.

(And BTW, your Royal Mail mods are also much appreciated :smile:)

I've had a chat with Conor and I'm happy that the differences with 2.6 and 3.whatever are compliant with the GPL.

Comes down to documentation really, and service and the provision of code at reasonable cost. Like MySQL, he provides and owns the copyright on the documentation, so as long as the original source code is available, it remains compliant to the different bundle that he sells. It's really a wording issue with some of the source files that I have mis-interpreted, or interpreted in a sort of GPL kind of strict enforcement way. There is a working version of the module available, and I have nothing against Conor or his selling of his work, support service, documentation and his download package,

Philip.

philip_clarke:

/**

• protx_direct 3D-Secure iFrame Redirection and Callback Handler
• @author Conor Kerr [email protected]
• @copyright Copyright 2006-2008 Ceon
• @copyright Portions Copyright 2003-2006 Zen Cart Development Team
• @copyright Portions Copyright 2003 osCommerce
• @link http://dev.ceon.net/web/zen-cart/protx_direct
• @license http://ceon.net/licenses/commercial Ceon Commercial License

With respect, based on the content (quoted below) at the link from the content you quoted (above), I would think that the wording of Conor's commercial license is not at all compatible with GPL.

Ceon license @ ceon.net/licenses/commercial, As of Nov 22, 2008:

2. SCOPE OF GRANT
   You may not modify, rent, or resell for profit this SOFTWARE, or create derivative works based upon
   this SOFTWARE.

In no event shall the AUTHOR's liability exceed the purchase price of the SOFTWARE.

3. COPYRIGHT
   This SOFTWARE is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties, as well as other
   intellectual property laws and treaties.

4. DISTRIBUTION
   You may not distribute the SOFTWARE under any circumstances.Specifically paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 do not mesh with GPL in any way.

I think the scope of the service he provides and charges for needs to be differentiated from the software, he gives more "value" with the version he sells as Kuroi states, than with the source available here. It's just that it's fuzzy what he's doing and worded in the wrong places.

Excuse me? Fuzzy? I don't think so. His license clearly states it is contrary to the GPL.

Hi,

Kim:

Excuse me? Fuzzy? I don't think so. His license clearly states it is contrary to the GPL.

To be honest all of this licensing issue is quite complicated to learn about!

I understand what's being said now though and will make the necessary adjustments to the licensing as soon as I've finished work on the new [GPL :)] SEO module for Zen Cart I'm working on at the minute. More on that later of course! ;)

Incidentally, any news on 1.4? The end of 2008 is fast approaching!

All the best...

Conor

I have this module isntalled, everything seems to be working find, for about a month, Now vet is being skipped for some reason, It shows up at the checkout, but on the order screen its showing as 0, so i have to communicate back to the customer advising of the error, Is tehre anything i can check from protx to see if it was transmited to to protx back to the store correctly? Or anyone experience something similar?

Hi,

aerosmith:

I have this module isntalled, everything seems to be working find, for about a month, Now vet is being skipped for some reason, It shows up at the checkout, but on the order screen its showing as 0, so i have to communicate back to the customer advising of the error, Is tehre anything i can check from protx to see if it was transmited to to protx back to the store correctly? Or anyone experience something similar?

When you say "Order screen" are you talking about the order page/contents of the order e-mail? If so, that's bizarre but it couldn't be an issue with the module as it simply asks for the Order Total, it doesn't ask for tax values when charging the customer.

The module does look up/calculate the tax amounts for each item in the "basket contents" section of the Protx transaction (and I can't see how that would fail unless something was wrong with your Zen Cart order class) but has nothing to do with Zen Cart's display of tax (whether in the admin or the order e-mail).

All the best...

Conor
Ceon

Hi,

I'm assisting someone with the zen-cart module for Protx. The documentation and advice on this forum is excellent but I can't seem to get past a current issue.

When testing the Protx payment method, we are receiving the following error:

Your card could not be authorised! Please correct any details below and try again or contact us for further assistance.

The brackets following this message are unhelpfully empty.

I noted earlier in this thread someone had the same message and Conor pointed out:

You have 3D-Secure enabled on your account but are trying to use the version of the module which doesn't support 3D-Secure. Please disable 3D-Secure in your VSP admin and you won't see this error any longer!

I have checked this setting in both admin and test admin but 3D-Secure is turned off. What else could cause this error?

Many thanks,

Stella

Hi Stella,

I don't know what the problem is but just want to check that you know that you can only use the **test **card numbers when using the "Test" Transaction Mode and can only use real cards when using the "Live" Transaction Mode?

That's probably not the issue but thought I'd post just in case it was!

All the best..

Conor

conor:

Hi Stella,

I don't know what the problem is but just want to check that you know that you can only use the **test **card numbers when using the "Test" Transaction Mode and can only use real cards when using the "Live" Transaction Mode?

That's probably not the issue but thought I'd post just in case it was!

All the best..

Conor

Hi and thanks Conor,

I didn't actually realise this, so this is helpful; but unfortunately not the cause. I'm currently using the test card numbers whilst in test transaction mode.

Additionally, I haven't yet fixed the Crypt: Blowfish recommendation, but imagine this isn't causing it. SSL is currently shared via WebFusion Shared Hosting, so could this be the problem? Do I need to organise a personal SSL?

Cheers,

Stella