Dynamic Identity Decisioning for Online Transaction Security

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing identity verification and authentication methods for online transactions are time-consuming, costly, and cumbersome, requiring significant manual effort for implementation and maintenance, and are susceptible to identity theft due to reliance on user-provided information.

Innovation Solution

A dynamic identity decisioning system that assesses risk levels for transactions by retrieving identity verification data from user devices, presenting authentication exams if necessary, and determining identity decisioning results based on user responses, allowing for real-time selection of decisioning techniques and minimal involvement from transacting entities.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional identity verification techniques are used, then security against identity theft is improved, but time consumption and operational cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:

ImprovesecurityVSAvoidtime consumption

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts the identity verification process based on real-time risk assessment. It evaluates multiple factors including device characteristics, transaction patterns, and user behavior to determine the appropriate level of verification required, rather than applying a static verification process to all users

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes verification parameters dynamically based on risk levels. For low-risk transactions, minimal verification is performed, while high-risk transactions trigger more stringent verification procedures including authentication exams and additional identity checks

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

2Reliability

If traditional identity verification techniques are used, then security against identity theft is improved, but operational cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:

ImprovesecurityVSAvoidoperational cost

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts the identity verification process based on real-time risk assessment. It evaluates multiple factors including device characteristics, transaction patterns, and user behavior to determine the appropriate level of verification required, rather than applying a static verification process to all users

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes verification parameters dynamically based on risk levels. For low-risk transactions, minimal verification is performed, while high-risk transactions trigger more stringent verification procedures including authentication exams and additional identity checks

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

3Adaptability or versatility

If manual integration of verification code is performed, then customization capability is improved, but device complexity and maintenance effort increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecustomization capabilityVSAvoidimplementation complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses an intermediary verification module that sits between the user device and the transaction system. This module handles all complex verification logic and authentication exams, while presenting a simple interface to both users and service providers, eliminating the need for manual code integration

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The verification system performs self-configuration and automatic updates without requiring manual intervention from programmers or system administrators. The system automatically adapts to different transaction types and adjusts verification parameters based on predefined policies and real-time risk assessment

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentUS11551226B2Systems and methods for dynamic identity decisioning

Publication Date: 2023.01.10 TRANS UNION LLC

AI summary

Example systems and methods for dynamic identity decisioning include: receiving a request, from a third-party server, to confirm an identity of a user attempting a transaction through a third-party website displayed in a first application window on a user device of the user; causing the user device to display a second application window for presenting an identity decisioning application and at least partially overlapping the first window; assessing a risk level associated with the transaction based on identity verification data retrieved from the user device; and if the risk level exceeds a predetermined threshold, selecting at least one identity authentication exam for presentation to the user via the second window, determining an outcome of the at least one identity authentication exam based on a user response thereto, and determining an identity decisioning result based on the outcome; and presenting the result to the user via the second application window.