Interaction Cryptogram Validation for Secure Peer-to-Peer Transfers

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Peer-to-peer transactions are vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks, where fraudsters intercept and alter transaction messages to divert payments to themselves, compromising security and authenticity.

Innovation Solution

A system that generates and verifies cryptograms using information from both parties involved in a transaction, ensuring the authenticity of the interaction and integrity of the transaction details by validating the cryptograms with cryptographic keys, thereby preventing fraudulent alterations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If peer-to-peer transactions are enabled without cryptographic validation, then the transaction process is simple and fast, but the system becomes vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks and fraud

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransaction securityVSAvoidcryptographic validation process
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary cryptographic validation by generating and verifying cryptograms before the actual transaction occurs. The first party generates a cryptogram based on transaction details and receiver information, and the system verifies this cryptogram against the actual transaction execution, ensuring security measures are in place before potential fraud can occur

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces cryptographic cryptograms as an intermediary element between the transaction initiation and execution phases. This cryptogram acts as a mediator that carries authentication information, allowing the system to verify transaction integrity without directly exposing sensitive account credentials or enabling complex multi-party authentication

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If the system validates both party cryptograms and digital signatures, then transaction authenticity and integrity are ensured, but the validation process time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransaction authenticityVSAvoidvalidation processing time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The validation process is segmented into distinct phases: first party cryptogram validation, second party cryptogram validation, and digital signature verification. Each phase handles specific authentication requirements independently, allowing the system to validate multiple security layers without requiring all validations to complete simultaneously, thus reducing overall validation time while maintaining comprehensive security

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Productivity

If a single cryptogram validates both party accounts, then the process becomes more efficient, but the cryptogram must incorporate more complex multi-party information

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransaction processing efficiencyVSAvoidcryptogram generation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system merges the authentication requirements of both parties into a single integrated cryptogram validation mechanism. The first party cryptogram incorporates receiver information and transaction details that enable validation of both the sender's and receiver's authentication, effectively combining multiple validation functions into one efficient process that reduces the number of separate validation operations needed

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentEP3779753B1Validation cryptogram for interaction
Publication Date: 2025.12.10 VISA INTERNATIONAL SERVICE ASSOCIATION
  • EP3779753B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3779753B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3779753B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method for validating an interaction is disclosed. A first interaction cryptogram can be generated by a first device using information about a first party to the interaction and a second party to the interaction. A second interaction cryptogram can be generated by a second device also using information about the first party to the interaction and the second party to the interaction. Verifying each cryptogram can validate that the interaction details have not been changed, and that both the first party and second party legitimately authorized the interaction.