Processor-Specific Transaction Verification With Alias Account Numbers
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Financial institutions face challenges in verifying transactions due to varying trustworthiness and susceptibility to fraud among payment processors, as they often apply a uniform verification setting, which can expose customers to fraud when their bank account information is stolen.
Innovation Solution
Implementing a system that uses alias account numbers associated with specific payment processors, allowing for customized verification policies tailored to each processor, ensuring higher security for less trusted processors while maintaining convenience for trusted ones.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If a uniform verification setting is applied to all payment processors, then the verification process is simple to manage, but security is compromised when fraudsters steal customer bank account information
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the verification process by creating processor-specific verification settings. Instead of applying a single uniform verification policy to all payment processors, the system divides verification requirements into separate configurations for each processor based on their trustworthiness and fraud susceptibility. This allows tailored security measures for high-risk processors while maintaining simplicity for trusted ones.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements local quality by applying different verification intensities to different payment processors based on their specific risk profiles. Trusted processors receive minimal verification (local quality of low security), while suspicious processors undergo enhanced verification (local quality of high security). This resolves the contradiction by making verification quality localized to each processor's risk level rather than uniform across all processors.
2Reliability
If enhanced verification measures are implemented for all transactions, then fraud protection is improved, but customer convenience deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by implementing enhanced verification measures only for transactions involving suspicious or high-risk payment processors, while maintaining simple verification for trusted processors. This ensures fraud protection is concentrated where needed rather than applied uniformly, thus improving fraud protection without broadly deteriorating customer convenience.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent uses partial action by applying enhanced verification measures selectively rather than to all transactions. Only transactions involving processors with questionable trustworthiness or known fraud susceptibility receive the full burden of enhanced verification, while other transactions proceed with standard or minimal verification, balancing fraud protection with customer convenience.
3Reliability
If processor-specific verification policies are implemented, then security is optimized for each processor, but system complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments verification policies into processor-specific configurations, allowing each payment processor to have its own tailored verification requirements. This segmentation enables optimized security for each processor based on their risk profile while organizing the complexity into manageable, discrete policy units that can be independently configured and maintained.
Data Source
AI summary
A method includes conserving, responsive to receiving an indication that at least one selectable object is selected, computing resources; receiving a request to set the verification settings for a computing system, the verification settings comprising a threshold transaction amount; determining an alias account number for the transaction account; receiving a transaction request, the transaction request indicating the alias account number and a transaction involving the transaction account; implementing a verification policy based on the verification settings, comprising: determining a predetermined threshold of a monetary amount; determining a first policy monetary amount; comparing the first policy monetary amount to the predetermined threshold; determining that the first policy monetary amount does not meet the predetermined threshold; implementing a sub-policy; and generating and transmitting an electronic message comprising a selectable hyperlink generated for the transaction request; and responsive to determining that the selectable hyperlink was navigated, approving the transaction request.