Answers.Body: <p>I don't think anyone has submitted a patch to enable SIM support for auth.net. Might be beneficial for you to investigate and see how much work might be involved in adding this to the current auth.net codebase.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2015-04-16T22:47:07.857Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2015-04-17T00:46:14.923Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2015-04-17T00:46:14.923Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Donald Lobo
Body: <p>Has anyone implemented a CiviCRM payment processor that uses the Authorize.net SIM method? (<a href="http://developer.authorize.net/api/" rel="nofollow">http://developer.authorize.net/api/</a>)</p>
  
  <p>The <a href="http://wiki.civicrm.org/confluence/display/CRMDOC/Authorize.net+Configuration" rel="nofollow">docs say</a> that CiviCRM does not have support for this. </p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>At this time, CiviCRM only supports the Advanced Integration Method.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>My reason for asking: the SIM method reduces our campus-policy compliance burden compared to the AIM method. </p>
  
Tags: <payment-processor><authorize.net>
Title: Payment Processor for Authorize.net Server Integration Method (SIM)?
ThreadText: # Payment Processor for Authorize.net Server Integration Method (SIM)?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2015-04-14)
  
  Has anyone implemented a CiviCRM payment processor that uses the Authorize.net SIM method? (<http://developer.authorize.net/api/>)
  
  The [docs say](http://wiki.civicrm.org/confluence/display/CRMDOC/Authorize.net+Configuration) that CiviCRM does not have support for this.
  
  > At this time, CiviCRM only supports the Advanced Integration Method.
  
  My reason for asking: the SIM method reduces our campus-policy compliance burden compared to the AIM method.
  
  **Tags:** payment-processor, authorize.net
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2015-04-16. Score: 1
  
  I don't think anyone has submitted a patch to enable SIM support for auth.net. Might be beneficial for you to investigate and see how much work might be involved in adding this to the current auth.net codebase.
  
  
  ---
  
  