Add OxaPay to payment gateways list

[kevin-san0]

OxaPay supports Monero payments and functions as a full crypto payment gateway. Added to the gateways section for merchant resources.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for barolo-time-757cf9 ready!

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	84199f0
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/barolo-time-757cf9/deploys/691864f1f4d88b0008a0a117
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2563--barolo-time-757cf9.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[kevin-san0]

Thank you for reviewing this PR. OxaPay supports Monero payments and is actively used by merchants, so adding it to the gateways list helps users discover more options. Let me know if anything needs to be adjusted.

[nahuhh]

Any examples of merchants who use itin the wild?

[kevin-san0]

Any examples of merchants who use itin the wild?

From what I can see publicly, OxaPay is an active gateway with real usage.
Their official WordPress plugins show consistent adoption: the WooCommerce plugin has 200+ active installs, the EDD plugin has 100+ active installs, Gravity Forms has 50+, and the Paid Memberships Pro integration also shows 100+ active installs on WordPress.org. These numbers mean there are several hundred live merchant sites actively processing crypto payments through OxaPay.

Aside from WordPress, a few platforms also use OxaPay directly via API. For example, UploadGig integrates OxaPay for crypto payments, and similar digital-content or VPS services appear to use it through white-label or custom checkout flows. These usually do not publicly display the gateway name, but the payment flow resolves to OxaPay endpoints.

[kevin-san0]

@nahuhh @plowsof
I have added the merchant usage details as requested. 🙌

Whenever you get a chance, I would really appreciate your review.
Thank you!

[plowsof]

Thanks for the numbers, looks good so far,

[kevin-san0]

Hi @plowsof, thanks again for the review and approval.
Whenever it aligns with the workflow, please feel free to keep the merge for this in mind.
Thanks a lot.

[plowsof]

the only oddity remaining is the fact that monerica.com lists oxapay as a scam https://monerica.com/merchant-services/integrations/oxapay, however they list a service that uses oxapay on the backend https://monerica.com/non-profits/miscellaneous/p-stream

[kevin-san0]

the only oddity remaining is the fact that monerica.com lists oxapay as a scam https://monerica.com/merchant-services/integrations/oxapay, however they list a service that uses oxapay on the backend https://monerica.com/non-profits/miscellaneous/p-stream

I reached out to Monerica today and asked them to update the OxaPay listing, which is currently marked as a scam. I also shared the final Bitcointalk post where the user confirmed that the issue was fully resolved and was simply an AML review delay, not anything fraudulent. The service continues to be used normally without any issues.
I’ll update you once Monerica adjusts their page.
If anything else is needed on my side, just let me know.

[kevin-san0]

the only oddity remaining is the fact that monerica.com lists oxapay as a scam https://monerica.com/merchant-services/integrations/oxapay, however they list a service that uses oxapay on the backend https://monerica.com/non-profits/miscellaneous/p-stream

Hey @plowsof,

Quick update on the Monerica listing:

They said the “scam” mark is based on a claim from Stealths.net and that it will remain until OxaPay makes a payment to them.

When I asked for any supporting evidence (invoice, contract, email logs, etc.), none was provided. They only replied: “You used to be their processor.”

OxaPay has never had any partnership, service agreement, or financial relationship with Stealths.net.

Full email thread attached for transparency.

Let me know if anything else is needed. Thanks!

Uploading Oxapay Mail - Request to Correct OxaPay Listing on Monerica.pdf…

[stealthsnet]

Hello,
This is admin from stealths(.)net, thank you @plowsof for letting me know about this discussion. While they claim that problem has been resolved, unfortunately we haven't received our funds back even after 10 months. They have seized our funds (roughly $11.5K) claiming AML (they don't have AML screening), and never replied back.

Here you can find our Bitcointalk thread about the situation:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5529576

I strongly advise not to list them as they are dishonest entity (probably not a real company at all).

Here is the proof we have been actively using OxaPay as payment method:

[stealthsnet]

Hello, This is admin from stealths(.)net, thank you @plowsof for letting me know about this discussion. While they claim that problem has been resolved, unfortunately we haven't received our funds back even after 10 months. They have seized our funds (roughly $11.5K) claiming AML (they don't have AML screening), and never replied back.
Here you can find our Bitcointalk thread about the situation: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5529576
I strongly advise not to list them as they are dishonest entity (probably not a real company at all).
Here is the proof we have been actively using OxaPay as payment method:

Hey @plowsof,

Just to clarify a few important points regarding this new claim:

The Bitcointalk thread they are now referencing was created immediately after the previously resolved case 👉 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5524547.20

In that earlier case, the user explicitly confirmed here that everything was fully resolved: 👉 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5524547.msg64927683#msg64927683

The new thread they opened follows the exact same pattern: • no payout request • no ticket number • no transaction ID • no wallet address • no proof of frozen funds • and no evidence of any communication

In both cases, not a single verifiable document has been provided – not then, and not now. The screenshot they posted today only shows a dashboard page, which proves usage but provides zero evidence of any withheld payout, and it even contains internal inconsistencies.

Given the absence of any supporting data, and the timing right after the previous case was resolved, this looks much more like an attempt to create public pressure rather than a legitimate unresolved issue.

If they can provide an actual payout request, support ticket, wallet address, TXID, or any verifiable trace, I will review it immediately. So far, none has been provided.

Stop the nonsense. This is separate case, not related with the one referencing. You can always ask so-called "Daniel" about it, I'm pretty sure he is well informed. He asked us to do KYC, he stopped replying us after we ask for your company's legal registration details.

Here is the proof that you cancelled our most recent withdrawals:

Account email: stealth [at] tuta.com

I think we don't need to share any more proof, as you have already ignored our threads and messages for months, but if repo maintainers need more evidience, I'm happy to share all messages with your so-called support and screen videos privately.

[kevin-san0]

OxaPay did not “steal” any funds.
The case described is a standard AML fraud-recovery event that every payment processor is legally required to follow.

When funds are reported as stolen, the processor must place them on hold, verify the rightful owner through KYC, and release the funds once ownership is proven. This is a legal obligation, not a discretionary choice.

In this situation, the individual who filed the stolen-fund report completed KYC and demonstrated ownership, so OxaPay was legally required to return the funds. The merchant never had legal entitlement to money confirmed as stolen.

If a merchant delivered goods to a scammer, that dispute exists strictly between the merchant and the buyer. The correct legal path would have been to pursue action against that buyer, not the processor.

The chat messages already show this clearly.

Also In Stealths.net’s own screenshot, OxaPay has processed around 1.4M USD of revenue for them.
The dispute is about ~11k USDT, in a case where they explicitly admit the buyer was a “scammer” and the funds were reported as stolen.
That pattern is consistent with a single AML / fraud-recovery case, not with a payment processor “scamming” its merchants.

[stealthsnet]

OxaPay did not “steal” any funds. The case described is a standard AML fraud-recovery event that every payment processor is legally required to follow.

When funds are reported as stolen, the processor must place them on hold, verify the rightful owner through KYC, and release the funds once ownership is proven. This is a legal obligation, not a discretionary choice.

In this situation, the individual who filed the stolen-fund report completed KYC and demonstrated ownership, so OxaPay was legally required to return the funds. The merchant never had legal entitlement to money confirmed as stolen.

If a merchant delivered goods to a scammer, that dispute exists strictly between the merchant and the buyer. The correct legal path would have been to pursue action against that buyer, not the processor.

The chat messages already show this clearly.

Also In Stealths.net’s own screenshot, OxaPay has processed around 1.4M USD of revenue for them. The dispute is about ~11k USDT, in a case where they explicitly admit the buyer was a “scammer” and the funds were reported as stolen. That pattern is consistent with a single AML / fraud-recovery case, not with a payment processor “scamming” its merchants.

What legal? Which jurisdiction? What are legal representive details of OxaPay?

Who are you Kevin? Are you from OxaPay team, if so why are talking as third-party? A so-called crypto payment gateway with all fake names, your "Daniel" is from Iran, lol. You might want to stay anonymous, this is OK, but this is not the way. You cannot hide under "legal" mask to steal merchant funds. Right, dispute is for ~11.5K, just because we have processed over 1.4M, that doesn't mean you can exit-scam us for such amount.

This is my last message on this discussion unless something else asked by maintainers.

[kevin-san0]

Trying to discredit a payment gateway (which processed 1.4M USD for this very merchant) and to discredit individuals, all because of an issue caused by the merchant’s own customer, does not strengthen their claim. It only highlights the weakness of the allegation, not the strength of their argument.