Transaction Authentication Using User State Confidence Checks

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current payment transaction systems lack sufficient security measures to prevent fraudulent transactions, especially in scenarios where the user's location or condition is incompatible with initiating the transaction.

Innovation Solution

A method and system that utilize user state information from devices associated with the user, such as smart devices and network connections, to determine a user's location and condition, and require additional authentication if the confidence criterion is not met, enhancing security by cross-checking the legitimacy of the transaction.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If standard device and environment checks are performed to verify account holder identity, then transaction security is improved, but the system remains vulnerable to sophisticated fraud mechanisms

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransaction securityVSAvoidfraud risk
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary checks on user state information (location, device condition, network environment) before processing the transaction request. This advance verification ensures that the user is in a legitimate state to initiate the transaction, preventing fraud before it occurs by rejecting requests that don't meet predefined confidence criteria

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors and collects user state information from multiple sources (GPS location, device sensors, network data) and uses this feedback to dynamically assess transaction legitimacy. The confidence criterion evaluation provides feedback on whether to proceed with or reject the transaction, creating a closed-loop security system that adapts to detected anomalies

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If additional authentication information is requested from users, then transaction legitimacy verification is improved, but user convenience and transaction speed deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransaction verification accuracyVSAvoiduser convenience
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system automatically collects and evaluates user state information (location data, device status, network environment) without requiring active user participation. The confidence criterion assessment and authentication decisions are performed automatically by the system, eliminating the need for users to manually provide additional verification information in most cases

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts the confidence criterion threshold and authentication requirements based on the assessed risk level and user state. When user state information indicates low risk (high confidence), no additional authentication is required. When anomalies are detected (low confidence), the system selectively requests specific authentication information, optimizing the balance between security and convenience

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Measurement precision

If user state information is collected from multiple devices to determine user location and condition, then fraud detection capability is improved, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser state assessment accuracyVSAvoidsystem architecture complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses a unified confidence criterion evaluation mechanism that processes multiple types of user state information (location, device condition, network data) through a single assessment framework. This multi-functional approach allows the same system components to handle diverse data sources without requiring separate processing pipelines for each type of information

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces an intermediary confidence criterion evaluation layer that mediates between the diverse user state information sources and the final transaction decision. This intermediary component standardizes and integrates data from multiple devices and sources, transforming heterogeneous information into a unified confidence score that drives authentication decisions without requiring complex direct integration between all data sources

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentEP4700683A1Transaction authentication
Publication Date: 2026.02.25 MASTERCARD INT INC
  • EP4700683A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4700683A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4700683A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method for processing a transaction interaction between a first device and a payment processing device. The method is implemented by a remote server and comprises receiving a transaction request associated with a payment account of a user and generated during the transaction interaction, and receiving user state information from at least one second device associated with the user. The method further comprises determining a state of the user based on the user state information, and determining whether the state of the user satisfies a confidence criterion. In dependence on the state of the user failing to satisfy the confidence criterion, the method then requests authentication information from the user in order to determine whether to approve the transaction request.