#dinlashades - Apple Pay
1 messages ยท Page 1 of 1 (latest)
Hey! ๐
Pasting all your messages in this thread:
I can see failed request to https://api.stripe.com/v1/tokens
with 402 status
Response is {
"error": {
"code": "card_declined",
"decline_code": "generic_decline",
"doc_url": "https://stripe.com/docs/error-codes/card-declined",
"message": "Your card was declined.",
"param": "",
"type": "card_error"
}
}
Can you share the request ID (req_xxx)? Here's how you can find it: https://support.stripe.com/questions/finding-the-id-for-an-api-request
Stand by
req_IAEOUGUJps0xlE
here ๐
oops, sorry
that one was from 4000...0002 card
req_MWBLF6aphbHnPz
^ this one from Apple Pay
when I try test card 4000...0002 the .confirmSetup resolves just fine
but not with Apple Pay
Discord is a little busy, sorry for the delay. Will have a look in a moment.
no worries, I can jump in
Thanks guys, really appreciate this
Spent a few hours trying to figure out this mystery
@tight pumice unfortunately I know what the issue is but I'm not allowed to tell you for policy reasons. Please read between the lines.
hm, not sure I follow. What kind of policy forbids to tell why JS promise would not be resolved? ๐
I've tried awaits and regular promises
well, I still need to handle such errors ๐
and I can't because nothing happens ๐
I'm not talking about the card (I know exactly why my card is rejected, that specific card)
it's wrong that the library doesn't resolve the promise in that case, hmm
it should handle the failed request to /v1/tokens and pass up an error
yep that's a bug, we likely don't handle this case well(the tokenzation failing), I'll report it internally. I don't think there's really any workaround
Alright, thanks! How can I track the bug status if there is any way?
best way would be to write to https://support.stripe.com/?contact=true. I think you can replicate this problem if you add a specific test card number to your block lists at https://dashboard.stripe.com/test/settings/radar/lists as I believe a card blocked that way fails the tokenization in the same way, so that might be a good way to replicate and test this
I'll try that myself later when I'm filing the issue