Fraud risk advisor

• US 20060064374A1
• Filed: 09/17/2004
• Published: 03/23/2006
• Est. Priority Date: 09/17/2004
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Digital Envoy, Inc. (Landmark Media Enterprises LLC)
• Original Assignee: Digital Envoy, Inc. (Landmark Media Enterprises LLC)
• Inventors: Helsper, David, Maicon, Dennis
• Application Number:
  US10/943,454
• Publication Number:
  US 20060064374A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/39
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/10 specially adapted for electronic funds transfer [EFT] systems; specially adapted for home banking systems
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/02 Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising

Abstract

A fraudulent business transaction application (FBTA) for monitoring application based fraud. When a consumer supplies account access information in order to carry out an Internet business transaction, the FBTA uses an online fraud mitigation engine to detect phishing intrusions and identity theft. The FBTA uses the account access information, a rules based engine and a risk score database to determine the likelihood that the Internet business transaction is fraudulent and deserves further review by personnel.

Claims

1. A method of determining a fraudulent business transaction comprising:

receiving an IP address associated with an Internet user;

computing a plurality of factors based on the IP address associated with a business transaction conducted by the Internet user; and

determining based on the IP address and the computation whether the business transaction is suspicious.

2. The method of claim 1 further comprising forwarding the determination to a client for further processing by the client.

3. The method of claim 1 further comprising generating a report based on the determination.

4. The method of claim 1 further comprising generating a risk score associated with the business transaction.

5. The method of claim 4 further comprising storing the risk score in a database.

6. The method of claim 4, wherein a client assigns a threshold level for comparison with the risk score.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein the transaction is determined to be fraudulent when the risk score exceeds the threshold level.

8. The method of claim 4, wherein the risk score is generated in real time.

9. The method of claim 1 further comprising accessing the determination by a client.

10. The method of claim 9, wherein the client may override the determination that the business transaction is suspicious.

11. The method of claim 9, wherein the client may designate a business transaction not determined to be suspicious as a suspicious business transaction.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of factors are static or dynamic.

13. The method of claim 12, wherein the static factors comprise a country, region or city associated with the IP address.

14. The method of claim 12, wherein a dynamic factor is a proximity of the Internet user in comparison to a purported location of the Internet user associated with the IP address.

15. The method of claim 12, wherein a static factor is an address supplied by a client for comparison with the address associated with the IP address.

16. The method of claim 12, wherein a static factor is an area code and telephone number supplied by a client for comparison with an area code and telephone number stored in a database that is associated with the Internet user.

17. The method of claim 12, wherein a static factor is an email address supplied by a client for validation.

18. The method of claim 12, wherein a dynamic factor is an access behavior associated with the Internet user based on business transactions habits stored in a database that are compared with the business transaction.

19. The method of claim 12, wherein a dynamic factor is a frequency in which the business transaction is attempted within a predetermined period of time.

20. The method of claim 12, wherein a client may assign a threshold level for the static and dynamic factors.

21. The method of claim 12, wherein a client may create user defined dynamic factors.

22. The method of claim 12, wherein a dynamic factor is determined by a static factor.

23. The method of claim 1, wherein a client may define constraint rules for the factors.

24. A computer based medium, comprising:

an application being executable by a computer, wherein the computer executes the steps of;

receiving an IP address associated with an Internet user;

computing a plurality of factors based on the IP address associated with a business transaction conducted by the Internet user; and

determining based on the IP address and the computation whether the business transaction is suspicious.

25. The computer based medium of claim 24, wherein the computer further executes forwarding the determination to a client for further processing by a client.

26. The computer based medium of claim 24, wherein the computer further executes generating a report based on the determination.

27. The computer based medium of claim 24, wherein the computer further executes generating a risk score associated with the business transaction.

28. The computer based medium of claim 27, wherein the computer stores the risk score in a database.

29. The computer based medium of claim 27, wherein a client assigns a threshold level for comparison with the risk score.

30. The computer based medium of claim 29, wherein the transaction is determined to be fraudulent when the risk score exceeds the threshold level.

31. The computer based medium of claim 27, wherein the risk score is generated in real time.

32. The computer based medium of claim 24, wherein a factor is an access behavior associated with the Internet user based on business transaction access habits stored in a database that are compared with the business transaction.

33. The computer based medium of claim 24 further comprising accessing the application by a client.

34. The computer based medium of claim 33, wherein the client may override the determination that the business transaction is suspicious.

35. The computer based medium of claim 33, wherein the client may designate a business transaction not determined to be suspicious as a suspicious business transaction.

36. The computer based medium of claim 24, wherein said application includes a web based application having a plurality of web pages and a plurality of databases.

37. An apparatus for detecting a fraudulent business transaction comprising:

a computer system including a processor for executing computer code; and

an application for execution on the computer system, wherein the computer system, when executing the application receives an IP address associated with an Internet user, computes a plurality of factors based on the IP address associated with a business transaction conducted by the Internet user and determines based on the IP address and the computation whether the business transaction is suspicious.

38. The apparatus of claim 37, wherein the application is a web based application.

39. The apparatus of claim 37, wherein the application has a client user interface.

40. The apparatus of claim 39, wherein the client may override the determination that the business transaction is suspicious.

41. The apparatus of claim 39, wherein the client may designate a business transaction not determined to be suspicious as a suspicious business transaction.

42. The apparatus of claim 37, wherein the application forwards the determination to a client for further processing by a client.

43. The apparatus of claim 37, wherein a factor is an access behavior associated with the Internet user based on business transaction access habits stored in a database that are compared with the business transaction.

44. The apparatus of claim 37, wherein the application generates a report based on the determination.

45. The apparatus of claim 37, wherein the application generates a risk score associated with the business transaction.

46. The apparatus of claim 45, wherein the application stores the risk score in a database.

47. The apparatus of claim 46, wherein the risk score is generated in real time.

48. The apparatus of claim 45, wherein a client assigns a threshold level for comparison with the risk score.

49. The apparatus of claim 48, wherein the transaction is determined to be fraudulent when the risk score exceeds the threshold level

50. The apparatus of claim 37, wherein said application includes a web based application having a plurality of web pages and a plurality of databases.

51. An apparatus for detecting a fraudulent business transaction comprising:

means for receiving an IP address associated with an Internet user;

means for computing a plurality of factors based on the IP address associated with a business transaction conducted by the Internet user; and

means for determining based on the IP address and the computation whether the business transaction is suspicious.