Payment Authentication Using Reward Redemption Flags

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current fraud detection systems in credit/debit card transactions are inadequate, leading to increased liability for merchants and other parties due to fraudulent activities, particularly in online transactions where additional authentication steps inconvenience legitimate consumers and result in abandoned transactions.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method and system that uses a merchant loyalty scheme to enhance payment transaction authentication by determining if an authentication challenge is needed based on a reward redemption flag, allowing legitimate transactions to bypass additional verification steps when the flag is set, thereby reducing the need for step-up challenges.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If authentication challenges are implemented for all transactions, then fraud detection capability is improved, but consumer convenience deteriorates and transaction abandonment increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefraud detection capabilityVSAvoidconsumer convenience
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by differentiating authentication requirements based on transaction characteristics. Instead of uniformly applying authentication challenges to all transactions, the system selectively applies challenges only to transactions that exhibit fraudulent patterns, while allowing legitimate transactions to proceed without additional verification steps. This resolves the contradiction by making the system highly reliable for fraud detection while maintaining ease of operation for legitimate users.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements dynamics by making the authentication challenge requirement adaptive rather than static. The system dynamically adjusts whether to issue an authentication challenge based on real-time analysis of transaction data, device information, and behavioral patterns. This dynamic approach allows the system to maintain high fraud detection capability while minimizing inconvenience to legitimate consumers, as challenges are only imposed when dynamically determined to be necessary.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If authentication challenges are implemented for all transactions, then fraud detection capability is improved, but transaction processing time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefraud detection capabilityVSAvoidtransaction processing time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by concentrating authentication challenges only on transactions that exhibit fraudulent characteristics. By analyzing transaction data, device information, and behavioral patterns, the system identifies suspicious transactions and applies additional verification only to those cases. This selective approach maintains high fraud detection capability while avoiding time delays for the majority of legitimate transactions that do not require additional verification.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements dynamics by making the authentication challenge requirement adaptive rather than static. The system dynamically determines whether to issue challenges based on real-time risk assessment, allowing most low-risk transactions to be processed quickly without additional verification while applying challenges only when the dynamic analysis indicates potential fraud. This resolves the time loss issue while maintaining detection capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Reliability

If step-up authentication challenges are required, then security against fraudulent transactions is improved, but consumer satisfaction deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity against fraudulent transactionsVSAvoidconsumer satisfaction
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by implementing step-up authentication challenges only for transactions that exhibit fraudulent patterns rather than for all transactions. The system analyzes transaction characteristics, device information, and behavioral patterns to identify suspicious cases, applying enhanced verification only locally to those specific transactions. This maintains high security against fraud while preserving consumer satisfaction for legitimate users who do not encounter additional verification steps.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements dynamics by making the step-up challenge requirement adaptive based on real-time risk assessment. The system dynamically determines whether to escalate authentication requirements based on transaction data analysis, device fingerprints, and behavioral anomalies. This dynamic approach ensures high security when needed while maintaining ease of operation and consumer satisfaction for the majority of legitimate transactions that do not trigger the dynamic fraud detection thresholds.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentUS20230004975A1Systems and Methods for Authenticating Users with Reduced Messaging
Publication Date: 2023.01.05 MASTERCARD INT INC
  • US20230004975A1 patent drawing
  • US20230004975A1 patent drawing
  • US20230004975A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A computer-implemented method for enhancing payment transaction authentication using a merchant loyalty scheme is provided. The method is implemented using a verification computer device in communication with a memory. The method includes receiving an authentication request message for a payment transaction originating from an originating merchant for a cardholder. The authentication request message includes a reward redemption flag. The method also includes determining that an authentication challenge is needed based on the authentication request message, transmitting an authentication challenge to the user if the reward redemption flag is not set, determining that the authentication challenge may be bypassed based on the reward redemption flag if the reward redemption flag is set, generating an authentication response message based, at least in part, on at least one of reward redemption flag and the authentication challenge, and transmitting the authentication response message to the originating merchant.