Leaderboard

For non-merchant redirection gateways such as Paypal standard, where the users sees www.paypal.com in the address bar, instead of your site URL, there is no need for PCI compliance. That's why non-merchant gateways are a much better option for most businesses. For every gateway that allows payment information to be collected while your own site URL is in the address bar -including Stripe- you need PCI compliance when PCI 3.0 becomes required (2015?) Do note that Mastercard and VISA do not require compliance VALIDATION by the acquiring bank for smaller merchants. This means that while you do need to comply, the gateway/bank is not required to check that you actually ticked all the boxes on the SAQ paperwork, and actually did the quarterly external security scans. It may therefore still be tempting to "forget" to comply. However if there is an incident, they likely do want to see it, and if it turns out you were not in compliance, there will be trouble. That they didn't check up on you earlier, does not mean the contract clause requiring compliance will not stand.

FIDO U2F is a new standard for 2 factor authentication USB tokens. https://fidoalliance.org/specifications/download http://googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.nl/2014/10/strengthening-2-step-verification-with.html https://github.com/Yubico/php-u2flib-server Main advantages over OATH/Yubikey: Can use a single token with multiple websites without central authentication servers, because it uses public key cryptography instead of shared secrets. Cheap enough to hand out to customers. Tokens start at $ 5.99 (versus $ 20 for a classical Yubikey): https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=FIDO%20U2F%20Security%20Key

Fixed in CORE-1487

We don't have an ego on the matter, I'd like to support all the different domain registrars. We have limited resources though, so we are attempting to put them to the best possible use by developing the most highly requested features first. An argument can be made that not many people have requested NameSilo because of the fact that we don't offer it, and doing so would open up the market. I talk a lot about widening the funnel for Blesta. Offering more integrations widens the funnel, and increases our market reach. So yes, NameSilo would be great. Right now we have been focusing largely on core features. Shoring up the core, so that we can focus more of our efforts on extensions in future releases. Pro forma invoices, pro rata, price overrides (all part of 3.3) are considered by many to be critical features. Only we can work on the core, but other developers can build extensions to integrate with an endless number of 3rd party services and APIs. We are also working on a domain registrar plugin, that will allow for simpler set up of domain TLDs and pricing, and consolidate many of the features of domain registrars to make module development for registrars simpler going forward. It's difficult to take time away from highly requested features, to build a registrar module a few people want, that we'll have to rewrite later anyway to make it work well with the domain registrar plugin. So, we hear ya. We know we need more integrations like NameSilo, and we aren't saying no. We just have to prioritize, and it's a difficult thing when we have so many great feature and extension requests. The community has had a large impact in the direction of development since our initial alpha releases, and we consider that dialogue of vital importance.

The customer token, account token, last 4 of card number, card expiration date.

Blesta doesn't pass the email address to Authorize.net. Authorize.net only uses the email address to send purchase receipt emails which is super awkward for clients. Blesta handles purchase receipts, so no need to use that "feature" of Authorize.net.

Well, I'm a business analyst and not a developer. But a simple plugin would increase your customer base and provide more resources in the form of sales. If 70% is devoted to software development and 30% is devoted to business development, Blesta would experience greater gains. If you think I'm wrong, based on this forum alone and your passion for the product alone then so be it. I think Blesta has great upside so I hope you guys know I've no been arguing against it. I've been arguing for Blesta and it's success. Passion can sometime be blinding. Well, once a Namesilo plugin is available you'll in a single instant get 3 more paying customers (I think I saw two from another post) once the availability is known and there isn't already a significant investment in another platform. (FYI, Namesilo is one of the fastest growing registrars so it will benefit Blesta: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/01/prweb11497507.htm) Good luck!

PayPal now requires HTTP 1.1, if your server is sending HTTP 1.0 headers then they will reject it. Blesta doesn't set this header, so it is likely set by CURL. Are you running an old version?

We use our own template so not a big issue haha

Hey welcome! Yes, you can ask for information during checkout as it relates to the service you're selling. If there is not a provisioning module for what you're selling, you'd be using the Universal Module. You can set up a product for the Universal Module under Settings > Company > Modules > Universal Module that asks for the fields you want (service fields section). If any of the questions/options you want to ask for cost extra, then they should be set up as configurable options (Under Packages > Options).

I now have IPv6 addresses. Let me know if you want to try it out

You can do so with the CSS toolkit so you don't need to keep editing it

the ETA this week will be released with some HOT feature , block admin area by ip , block acces to uninstalled plugins via , add/edit/delete custom links in client/admin side . now i'm making a full rewrite to this plugin . if you want to add custom link , you should add it to the Table: plugin_actions . nav_primary_client = client side . nav_primary_staff = admin side .

We are working on a module for Websitepanel, shall be released soon.

This may be true that they are lazy in developing a blesta module. However, the plugin benefits Blesta more than Namesilo. I don't foresee any Namesilo members choosing Blesta over Namesilo. In the end, Namesilo members will be forced to other hosting applications. Remember, people don't buy hosting applications and then see which domain registrars are available. It works the other way around. Those who are members of domain registrars look to see which hosting platform is available for them. Therefore, Blesta's growth depends on which providers are supported, but domain registrars aren't dependent on which hosting platform supports them. People get domains first. Not too long ago a Clientexec plugin popped up on Namesilo. So that will leave Blesta out of the mix. I have a Hostbill and WHMCS license. However, development is more open on Blesta (for which I have use for custom plugins I want developed). However, if I cannot , why would I consider Blesta over the others? I do hope a Namesilo plugin is developed though. I'd like to invest in Blesta because of it's openess in which I can have customization. Because of this, I would invest in Blesta for a long term. My suggestion would be: If it's sooo simple to develop a Namesilo plugin, Blesta should just lose the ego and take the small amount of time to get it done, an done well to start capturing more sales, which would help in further development and growth. A simple business logic, from a Business Analyst. Just food for thought.