TRANSACTION ASSESSMENT AND/OR AUTHENTICATION

• US 20100293094A1
• Filed: 05/10/2010
• Published: 11/18/2010
• Est. Priority Date: 05/15/2009
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Acuant Inc. (GB Group Plc)
• Original Assignee: IDM Global, Inc.
• Inventors: Sherlock, Kieran Gerard, Kolkowitz, Dan, Elgamal, Taher
• Granted Patent: US 9,471,920 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/44
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/3821 Electronic credentials
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/3825 Use of electronic signatures
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/40 Authorisation, e.g. identification of payer or payee, verification of customer or shop credentials; Review and approval of payers, e.g. check credit lines or negative lists
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/401 Transaction verification
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/4014 Identity check for transactions
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/4016 involving fraud or risk level assessment in transaction processing
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/405 Establishing or using transaction specific rules
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 50/01 Social networking

Abstract

Systems and methods for assessing and authenticating transactions are disclosed. Some exemplary embodiments may authenticate transactions based at least in part on a comparison of a newly obtained electronic signature associated with a user with a previously obtained electronic signature associated with the user, where a payment instrument presented for use in the transaction is also associated with the user. Exemplary electronic signatures may comprise any information which may identify the user, such as browser fingerprints, computer fingerprints, IP addresses, geographic IP location information, information associated with a payment, and/or a typing patterns.

Claims

1. A computer-readable medium including computer-executable instructions stored thereon, which, when executed by a computer, enable the computer to perform a method comprising:

storing a first electronic signature associated with a user, the first electronic signature including a plurality of attributes collected in connection with a prior transaction;

associating the first electronic signature with a payment instrument utilized in the prior transaction;

receiving a second electronic signature in connection with a proposed transaction utilizing the payment instrument;

determining whether the second electronic signature correlates with the first electronic signature by comparing the second electronic signature with the first electronic signature;

if the second electronic signature correlates with the first electronic signature, confirming that the payment instrument and the second electronic signature are associated with one another; and

if the second electronic signature does not correlate with the first electronic signature, determining that the payment instrument and the second electronic signature are not associated with one another.

2. The computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the plurality of attributes includes at least one of a browser fingerprint, a computer fingerprint, an IP address, geographic IP location information, information associated with a payment, a typing pattern, user name, user billing address, user shipping address, user phone number, email address, and account name.

3. The computer-readable medium of claim 2, wherein comparing the second electronic signature with the first electronic signature includes comparing individual attributes collected in connection with the proposed transaction to corresponding ones of the plurality of attributes collected in connection with the prior transaction.

4. The computer-readable medium of claim 3, wherein determining whether the second electronic signature correlates with the first electronic signature is based at least in part upon a trust score calculated using a weighted consideration of at least some of the plurality of attributes collected in connection with the prior transaction.

5. The computer-readable medium of claim 4, wherein the weighted consideration includes calculating the trust score based at least in part upon matching attributes, non-matching attributes, attributes not compared, and a maximum possible trust score.

6. The computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein determining whether the second electronic signature correlates with the first electronic signature includes calculating a trust score based at least in part upon at least one of a reputation score associated with the payment instrument, a reputation score associated with a computer utilized in the proposed transaction, and a reputation score associated with the user.

7. The computer-readable medium of claim 2, wherein the browser fingerprint includes at least one of a user agent, a screen resolution, a software plug-in, a time zone, a system language, whether Java is enabled, whether cookies are enabled, a site visited, and an IP address.

8. The computer-readable medium of claim 2, wherein the computer fingerprint includes at least one of a processor characteristic, a memory size of the machine, a value that is loaded at a key location, a value of a registry of a loaded operating system, an Ethernet MAC address, raw networking information, network information, a loaded program, and a log file.

9. The computer-readable medium of claim 2, wherein the network information includes a network provider, whether an IP address is consistent with a known IP address, a geographical proximity of an address registered with a payment instrument and the IP address as determined by an IP to geo-location service, whether or not a proxy is in use, whether a known bad IP address is in use, and whether the IP address is associated with a service provider who was associated with the user in the prior transaction.

10. A computer-readable medium including computer-executable instructions stored thereon, which, when executed by a computer, enable the computer to perform a method comprising:

receiving a received electronic signature including a plurality of received attributes and information pertaining to a payment instrument;

determining whether the received electronic signature correlates with any of a plurality of stored electronic signatures by comparing the plurality of received attributes of the received electronic signature to a plurality of stored attributes associated with the plurality of stored electronic signatures;

if the received electronic signature correlates with one of the plurality of stored electronic signatures,

determining whether the payment instrument is associated with the one of the plurality of stored electronic signatures based at least in part upon at least one prior transaction involving the one of the plurality of stored electronic signatures and the payment instrument and

if the payment instrument is associated with the one of the plurality of stored electronic signatures, confirming an association between the payment instrument and the received electronic signature; and

if the received electronic signature does not correlate with one of the plurality of stored electronic signatures, determining that the payment instrument is not associated with the received electronic signature.

11. The computer-readable medium of claim 10, wherein the information pertaining to the payment instrument includes a credit card number.

12. The computer-readable medium of claim 10, wherein the plurality of received attributes includes at least one of a browser fingerprint, a computer fingerprint, an IP address, geographic IP location information, information associated with a payment, a typing pattern, user name, user billing address, user shipping address, user phone number, email address, and account name.

13. The computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the browser fingerprint includes at least one of a user agent, a screen resolution, a software plug-in, a time zone, a system language, whether Java is enabled, whether cookies are enabled, a site visited, and an IP address.

14. The computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the computer fingerprint includes at least one of a processor characteristic, a memory size of the machine, a value that is loaded at a key location, a value of a registry of a loaded operating system, an Ethernet MAC address, raw networking information, network information, a loaded program, and a log file.

15. The computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the network information includes a network provider, whether an IP address is consistent with a known IP address, a geographical proximity of an address registered with a payment instrument and the IP address as determined by an IP to geo-location service, whether or not a proxy is in use, whether a known bad IP address is in use, and whether the IP address is associated with a service provider who was associated with the user in the prior transaction.

16. The computer-readable medium of claim 10, wherein determining whether the received electronic signature correlates with any of the plurality of stored electronic signatures includes determining which ones of the plurality of received attributes match stored attributes associated with individual stored electronic signatures.

17. The computer-readable medium of claim 16, wherein determining whether the received electronic signature correlates with any of the plurality of stored electronic signatures includes calculating a trust score based at least in part upon which ones of the plurality of received attributes match stored attributes associated with individual stored electronic signatures.

18. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein calculating the trust score includes applying different weights to different ones of the plurality of received attributes.

19. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein calculating the trust score is based at least in part upon a reputation score.

20. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein the method further comprises

if the trust score is below a first predetermined threshold, determining that the payment instrument is not associated with the received electronic signature;

if the trust score is between the first predetermined threshold and a second predetermined threshold, determining that the payment instrument is associated with the received electronic signature at a low confidence level; and

if the trust score is above the second predetermined threshold, determining that the payment instrument is associated with the received electronic signature at a high confidence level.

21. A computer-readable medium including computer-executable instructions stored thereon, which, when executed by a computer, enable the computer to perform a method comprising:

receiving, from a user computer system, a request to utilize a payment instrument in a transaction;

transmitting, to an authentication system, information pertaining to the payment instrument and a collected electronic signature including attributes associated with the user computer system; and

receiving, from the authentication system, an indication of whether the collected electronic signature associated with the user computer system correlates with a stored electronic signature associated with the payment instrument obtained in connection with a previous transaction involving the user computer system and the payment instrument.

22. The computer-readable medium of claim 21, wherein the attributes associated with the user computer system include at least one of a browser fingerprint, a computer fingerprint, an IP address, geographic IP location information, information associated with a payment, a typing pattern, user name, user billing address, user shipping address, user phone number, email address, and account name.

23. The computer-readable medium of claim 21, wherein the indication includes at least one of an indication corresponding to a high confidence correlation, a low confidence correlation, and no correlation.

24. The computer-readable medium of claim 23, wherein the method further comprises

if the indication corresponds to the high confidence correlation, accepting the transaction;

and

if the indication corresponds to the low confidence correlation or no correlation, initiating additional fraud detection assessment.

25. The computer-readable medium of claim 23, wherein the high confidence correlation is associated with a high user match score, a known payment instrument, a known computer that have previously been used together.