atom feed19 messages in What would you like to see in our...
FromSent OnAttachments
GoogleCheckoutDevProSep 11, 2006 10:38 am 
sipherSep 11, 2006 11:56 am 
royal123Sep 11, 2006 12:35 pm 
msolutionSep 14, 2006 7:55 am 
sipherSep 15, 2006 3:25 pm 
lassar2000Sep 21, 2006 5:30 am 
adminSep 22, 2006 9:14 pm 
William C. McCainOct 20, 2006 2:11 pm 
Joshua BeallOct 22, 2006 7:50 pm 
William C. McCainOct 23, 2006 4:13 pm 
GoogleCheckoutDevProNov 28, 2006 5:11 pm 
davekitsonNov 29, 2006 6:22 am 
HarrierNov 29, 2006 3:32 pm 
GoogleCheckoutDevProNov 29, 2006 8:12 pm 
emaniaJan 8, 2007 11:05 am 
CheckoutEngineeringJan 8, 2007 9:22 pm 
JVJan 17, 2007 6:32 am 
NoneJan 18, 2007 4:04 am 
cpmikeJan 24, 2007 5:55 pm 
Subject:Re: What would you like to see in our Developer's Center?
From:William C. McCain (
Date:Oct 20, 2006 2:11:45 pm

msolution wrote:

And definately a way out to integrate level2 without "https://"

I'd like to SECOND that request. Small merchants simply cannot afford the cost of an SSL certificate. If we could afford SSL, we could accept credit cards directly anyway, we wouldn't need Google or PayPal!

So, in some ways, the SSL requirement for Level 2 integration is contrary to the WHOLE CONCEPT of an "order/payment processor" -- which, essentially, is to have somebody else (a "big guy") aggregate at lower cost the stuff that is too expensive for us (the "little guy"). SSL certificates are one of those things! (Not the only thing, to be sure. I realize that "big guys" can do more of the back-office processing and thus get better rates from the credit card companies and banks.)

None of the other order/payment processors (at least not PayPal, nor VeriSign, which I used before their order processing business was bought by PayPal) have the extensive security requirements that Google Checkout has (base64 encoded, cryptographically signed order submission and SSL-protected callbacks). Then again, maybe the added security is why Google's fees are so much lower (because it potentially reduces their exposure to fraud).