|
Can I have half your profits?
|
|
|
|
|
You've done all the work, it will only be fair that you get all of them.
|
|
|
|
|
Nah, I assume Shrinvas will be supplying the card numbers...He should get some of the profit for that bit. Oh, and all the risk-of-arrest.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
|
|
|
|
|
1) Don't post your email to any public forum, unless you really like spam.
2) Don't ask for codez, unless you really want to annoy people.
3) Try googling: many web hosting companies are out there, most of which will be more than happy to help you validate credit cards as part of a ecommerce site. Otherwise, they may assume you are trying to rip people off.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: trying to rip people off
I don't think he is going to be very successful at this somehow.
|
|
|
|
|
It's so refreshing to see disorganised crime in the "planning" stages, isn't it? 
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
|
|
|
|
|
I want to know what skilties are. Google Translate tells me that it's Lithuanian for column, but I really doubt that's what he means.
|
|
|
|
|
From the Oxtail Dictionary of English:
"Skilty : [Skil'ty] (n) A person skilled in technical matters who is also so naive and gullible that he will give out information needed for a small (but ultimately unsuccessful) crime spree if you meet either one of two conditions:
1) You can convince him that this is for a project, rather than for nefarious purposes.
2) You are, or can present yourself as, female."
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't read any of the other answers to this question yet, so let me look into my crystal ball:
Amongst other things, I bet thet say (with varying degrees if politeness):
1. No one is going to write your project/ homework for you.
2. You haven't tried anything yet. If you have tried something, tell us what isn't working
3. Read the site FAQs.
3. If you need to ask this, you shouldn't be playing with security on something as serious as a credit card.
[Edit]
Wrong on points two and three and should have foreseen the easily "google-able" message, better than most psychics at least....
|
|
|
|
|
You like point 3 so much, you make it twice. 
|
|
|
|
|
In an embarring faux pas, I also get it wrong the second time 
I shall use <ol> next time, unless I'm being lazy. Oh BTW, I'm not coming home over the festive, that's why I haven't been in touch. We are planning a visit mid-Jan instead.
|
|
|
|
|
Fair enough. Let me know when, and we'll arrange a get together. It's a shame you haven't been here this week, the lady santas have looked very fine down on the quayside. Ho ho ho.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depends on what you mean by validate.
One of the other posts provide a link to do a simple check sum on the digits itself. This is a simple test that can be done in a GUI.
A number that passes that test still might not be a valid number in that numbers have certain rules related to the card type (such as Visa.) There are simple methods that one can use to validate those however the only correct way requires that one get the bin numbers from a valid processor and check them.
Of course a number is only valid if a processor accepts it. Doing that requires a lot of code and will be specific to each processor. Both of those make it pointless for anyone to post such solutions here.
And none of that has anything at all to do with securing ecommerce payment applications.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually SECURE E-COMMERCE is my acadamic project. In that i need to validate Credit card atleast Visa card.
My thinking is when the user give card no. how can we validate ? and what are the reqmnts to validate?
|
|
|
|
|
Many numbers in use use the Luhn algorithm to generate/check the final digit of the number.
Credit cards, debit cards, cell phone IMEI numbers, SIM cards are just a few examples of these.
It will tell you that the number is theoretically valid only.
At work I have a class I wrote a while ago with all this stuff in. I would paste it here but I'm not back at work til 4th Jan - it's pretty easy to implement though so you should be able to do it yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
bool IsCardValid(string CCNumber)
{
return (CustomerResponse("Is this your card?") == "Yes")
&& (ExpirationDate > DateTime.Now());
}
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for Ur reply..
But i need to validate CCNumber is it possible?
|
|
|
|
|
WTF is a "Skilties"?
See if you can crack this: fb29a481781fe9b3fb8de57cda45fbef
The unofficial awesome history of Code Project's Bob!
"People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
|
|
|
|
|
Dear friends on CodeProject,
do not discourage the OP!
Have you ever been to India?
I just spent 4 weeks of holidays there, and I can tell you from my experience: credit/debit card validation is a real issue!
In 1 hotel only were my credit cards accepted, all other hotels failed - and of course none had the old type of machines doing a simple paper offprint as a fall-back solution...
I had to get cash from (Indian) ATMs... At the first machine, I failed using it, on the first screen I saw the logo of the bank and its name on top, a "WELCOME:" in bold black letters on the middle left, and a "CONTINUE" on the middle right, I selected "CONTINUE" and was back to this page. A security man could tell me that I was expected to enter my PIN here (and in fact, in small dark gray characters on a light gray background it read "Please enter your PIN", where I previously thought was part of the logo). But in the end, the transaction failed for unknown reasons.
After many more failures at different ATMs, I tried to change cash at a Western Union office, which they were not licensed to do, but they told me that only a few banks can handle non-Indian MasterCards, and could give me two suggestions to try. At ICICI bank, the transaction failed, but their staff told me that they can do, I should try later again, and it failed again... Only from the ATM of HDFC bank I could get cash (and that ATM looked like Western make, quite different from the other ones).
Some time ago, some (Indian?) guy asked here on CodeProject how to program a cash machine. We should have provided him with much more guidance!
In the end, we could become victims of our failure to guide such newbies.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, I think I know the answer to this but I am looking for some validation/verification here…
I am TRYING to use the latest Enterprise Library build, specifically the Logging functionality, to write out debug logs… I am running into cases where I am ending up with log files being written that have a GUID prepended onto the filename:
trace.log
0ce735a7-8bb1-465c-8340-cee60f6cc0d2trace.log
89e76526-07ea-4154-bc1c-c4caba63de48trace.log
From what I can tell this seems to be because the logging subsystem opens the log file and keeps it open. This means that any other logging statements that try to use that same file get a new file built with this goofy name, and their debug goes there. This seams really odd, but it seems to be what’s happening. In fact if you watch the debug output when you run in the IDE you actually see two exception being thrown as the initial write happens because apparently (I have not yet 100% validated this by reviewing the code myself) they logging writer system tries to grab a handle to a log stream and does not know that it needs to open the file until it catches that exception. Then, once it is open it hangs on to it and does not allow any other source use THAT stream, it opens new ones and logs to there.
What I am trying to achieve seems simple… I want to use different message formats for different areas of the code, but write all the entries to the same file. It seems that unless I use the same formatter layout for all calls to the file, I end up creating a new file handle and writing my entries to a new file instead of writing all to the one I have specified.
Anyone else seen this? Know a way around it?
Yeah, I have heard it recommended that I just write out using MSMQ and then have one single reader grab that data and log it to a file, but that seems really overkill for what SHOULD be a simple multiple-writer, single-reader, type of process here. I can’t believe that the entire logging library is actually suffering from this junk code. It just seems dumb that they can’t internally just handle this multiple writer issue by implementing their own darn queue of messages between the input text stream readers and the output file writer.
|
|
|
|
|
Alhtough I have never seen this in EntLib 4.1, how about disposing the Logger after call to Write method?
|
|
|
|
|
I am actually disposing of the writer and it is still happening. I am not making any direct calls tothe Logger in this case.
I create an instance of the writer:
LogWriter writer;
writer = EnterpriseLibraryContainer.Current.GetInstance<LogWriter>();
...and then I just make a call to the writer using one of the overloads...
writer.Write(message);
writer.Dispose();
. . .
writer.Write(message, categories);
writer.Dispose();
The thing I want to do is use different formatted writers bassed upon the type of message I am writing, but have them all go to the same file.
|
|
|
|
|
In that case, you might have missed something in configuration. Can you check if all listeners have a file name associated with them. I haven't seen this happenning so just guessing around what might have happenned.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
