# US 9,519,902 B2 · Fraud monitoring system with distributed cache > Agents: this data is available as JSON from the patentgrep API and MCP server — see https://patentgrep.com/llms.txt - Number: US 9,519,902 B2 - Document ID: US9519902B2 - Status: Granted - Kind: B2 - Application number: 14/162,316 - Filed: 2014-01-23 - Published: 2014-12-25 - Granted: 2016-12-13 - Earliest claimed: 2013-06-25 - Assignees: Quisk, Inc. - Applicants: Quisk, Inc. - Inventors: Praveen Amancherla; Kumar Kartikeya - Web page: https://patentgrep.com/patent/US9519902B2 ## CPC - G06Q 20/4016: {involving fraud or risk level assessment in transaction processing} - G06F 16/27: Replication, distribution or synchronisation of data between databases or within a distributed database system; Distributed database system architectures therefor - G06Q 20/40: Authorisation, e.g. identification of payer or payee, verification of customer or shop credentials; Review and approval of payers, e.g. check credit lines or negative lists - G06F 11/3409: {for performance assessment} - G06F 13/4243: {with synchronous protocol} - G06F 16/24552: {Database cache management} - G06F 16/273: {Asynchronous replication or reconciliation} - G06F 2201/80: Database-specific techniques - G06F 2201/82: Solving problems relating to consistency - G06F 2212/254: Distributed memory - G06Q 40/00: Finance; Insurance; Tax strategies; Processing of corporate or income taxes - G06Q: INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR - G06F: ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING (computer systems based on specific computational models G06N) ## Abstract Systems and methods for fraud monitoring in a payment service are disclosed. An exemplary system includes a first server being located at a first locale and routing a first series of transaction requests. The system includes a second server being located at a second locale and routing a second series of transaction requests. The transactions requests may or may not be associated with a single payment service user account. The system includes a distributed cache storing a set of transaction details of the two series of transaction requests. The system includes a risk service having access to the set of transaction details from the distributed cache. The risk service generates a fraud warning based on a result of a comparison of at least one transaction detail in the set of transaction details and at least one transaction detail of a new transaction request received by the first server. ## Claims ### Claim 1 A system comprising: a first server located at a first locale and routing a first series of purchase transaction requests for a payment service; a second server located at a second locale and routing a second series of purchase transaction requests for said payment service; a central database that is remote from said first and second locales and stores transaction data of said first and second series of purchase transaction requests; a distributed cache that is connected to said central database and stores and synchronizes a set of transaction details across said first and second locales, rather than at said central database; and a risk service operating at said first locale and having access to said set of transaction details from said distributed cache at said first locale without accessing said central database; wherein said risk service generates a fraud warning based on a result of a comparison of at least one transaction detail in said set of transaction details and at least one transaction detail of a new purchase transaction request received at said first server. ### Claim 2 (depends on 1) The system of claim 1, wherein: said first and said second series of purchase transaction requests are associated with a set of purchases made by a single account; said set of transaction details include a cumulative amount of money spent in said set of purchases; and said comparison compares a sum of said cumulative amount of money and a purchase amount of said new purchase transaction against a predetermined amount. ### Claim 3 (depends on 1) The system of claim 1, further comprising: a load balancer dividing a third series of purchase transaction requests into said first and second series of purchase transaction requests; wherein said first server and said second server are both located in a single data center. ### Claim 4 (depends on 1) The system of claim 1, wherein: said first and said second series of purchase transaction requests are associated with a single account; said set of transaction details include a geographical distance between a purchase transaction request in said second series of purchase transaction requests and said new purchase transaction request, said purchase transaction request in said second series of purchase transaction requests and said new purchase transaction request not being at a same geographical location; and said risk service generates said fraud warning when said geographical distance is greater than a predetermined distance. ### Claim 5 (depends on 1) The system of claim 1, wherein said risk service is located in said distributed cache. ### Claim 6 (depends on 1) The system of claim 1, wherein said risk service comprises a set of configurable fraud monitoring rules. ### Claim 7 (depends on 6) The system of claim 6, wherein: said first and said second series of purchase transaction requests are for a set of purchases; and said set of configurable fraud monitoring rules vary based on an identity of a financial institution serving as a funding source for said set of purchases. ### Claim 8 (depends on 1) The system of claim 1, further comprising: a reaper having access to said distributed cache; wherein: said set of transaction details include a time stamp of when a particular purchase transaction request in said first series of purchase transaction requests was processed; a subset of transaction details in said set of transaction details describe said particular purchase transaction request; and when initiated, said reaper conducts a reaper process in which said subset of transaction details are cleared from said distributed cache if said time stamp indicates said particular purchase transaction request was processed more than a predetermined length of time in the past. ### Claim 9 (depends on 8) The system of claim 8, wherein: said reaper is initiated according to a configurable reaper period defining how often said reaper process is initiated; said predetermined length of time is a configurable reaper window; and said configurable reaper period and said configurable reaper window vary based on an identity of a financial institution associated with said particular purchase transaction request. ### Claim 10 (depends on 8) The system of claim 8, wherein said reaper is located in said distributed cache. ### Claim 11 A computer-implemented process comprising: processing a first series of purchase transaction requests at a first server; processing a second series of purchase transaction requests at a second server; storing transaction data concerning transactions associated with said first and said second series of purchase transaction requests in a central database; storing historical transaction information in a distributed cache, rather than in the central database, the distributed cache being connected to said central database; receiving a purchase transaction request; conducting a comparison of information regarding said purchase transaction request with said historical transaction information by accessing said distributed cache without accessing said central database; and issuing a fraud warning based on results of said comparison; wherein said first and said second series of purchase transaction requests are associated with a single user account; wherein said first and second servers are in different locales; wherein said distributed cache is at said different locales and synchronizes the historical transaction information across the different locales, rather than in the central database; and wherein said central database is remote from said different locales. ### Claim 12 (depends on 11) The process of claim 11, further comprising: processing said first and second series of purchase transaction requests; wherein said historical transaction information includes a cumulative amount of money expended via the processing of said first and second series of purchase transaction requests. ### Claim 13 (depends on 11) The process of claim 11, wherein: said historical transaction information includes a first geographical location of a purchase transaction request from said first series of purchase transaction requests; and said purchase transaction request is received via said second server. ### Claim 14 (depends on 11) The process of claim 11, further comprising: dividing a third series of purchase transaction requests into said first and second series of purchase transaction requests using a load balancer; wherein said first server and said second server are both located in a single data center. ### Claim 15 (depends on 11) The process of claim 11, wherein said comparison is conducted using a risk service that is programmable to set fraud monitoring rules by a user. ### Claim 16 (depends on 15) The process of claim 15, wherein said fraud monitoring rules: (i) are based on an identity of the user requesting a transaction, or (ii) are based on a financial institution administering a funding source involved in said purchase transaction request. ### Claim 17 (depends on 11) The process of claim 11, further comprising: setting a predetermined reaper period; and initiating a reaper process when said reaper period has elapsed, said reaper process removing a portion of said historical transaction information from said distributed cache; wherein said portion comprises historical transaction information that has been stored in said distributed cache for longer than a predetermined reaper window. ### Claim 18 (depends on 17) The process of claim 17, further comprising: receiving a configuration message from a financial institution; wherein said configuration message determines said predetermined reaper window; and said portion consists of historical transaction information that has been stored in said distributed cache for longer than said predetermined reaper window and contains information regarding transactions that create an obligation for said financial institution to transfer or receive funds. ### Claim 19 (depends on 18) The process of claim 18, wherein said fraud warning comprises restricting said purchase transaction request. ### Claim 20 A system comprising: a first server located at a first locale and routing a first series of purchase transaction requests for a payment service; a second server located at a second locale and routing a second series of purchase transaction requests for said payment service; a central database that is remote from said first and second locales and stores transaction data of said first and second series of purchase transaction requests; a distributed cache that is connected to said central database and stores and synchronizes a set of transaction details across said first and second locales, rather than at said central database; and a risk service having access to said set of transaction details from said distributed cache without accessing said central database; wherein said risk service generates a fraud warning based on a result of a comparison of at least one transaction detail in said set of transaction details and at least one transaction detail of a new purchase transaction request received by said first server; and wherein said first and second series of purchase transaction requests are associated with a single payment service user account.