IP Library Granted Patent US 12,229,756
Granted Patent B2
US 12,229,756 · App. 18/155,207 · Granted Feb 18, 2025

Systems and methods for encryption and decryption service for electronic transaction monitoring and reporting

Inventor: Brant Peterson (Denver, CO)
Assignee: Worldpay, LLC
G06Q20/382G06Q20/401H04L9/3226G06Q20/206G06Q2220/00H04L2209/56
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,229,756
App. No.
18/155,207
Granted
Feb 18, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method for electronic transaction monitoring and reporting includes: determining whether the received transaction request is encrypted, upon determining that the received transaction request is not encrypted, sending a failure alert to the merchant, determining a receiving acquirer processor for the transaction request, and transmitting the transaction request to the determined acquirer processor.

Claims (58)

1. A computer-implemented method for validating encryption of electronic transactions using a decryption service system, the method comprising:

receiving, by the decryption service system, a plurality of transaction requests from one or more point-of-sale (POS) devices associated with a user;

determining, by the decryption service system, that a first transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is one of clear data or corrupted;

in response to determining that the first transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is one of clear data or corrupted, transmitting, by the decryption service system, a failure alert to the one or more POS devices, the failure alert associated with the first transaction request and including a failure report including a number of point-to-point encryption failures, each point-to-point encryption failure of the number of point-to-point encryption failures categorized by one of malformed message received, clear data received, or invalid card;

determining, by the decryption service system, that a second transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is encrypted;

in response to determining that the second transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is encrypted, decrypting, by the decryption service system, the second transaction request;

determining, by the decryption service system, a recipient acquirer processor using decrypted data of the second transaction request;

re-encrypting, by the decryption service system, the second transaction request using an encryption key associated with the decryption service system; and

transmitting, by the decryption service system and over an electronic network, the re-encrypted second transaction request to the recipient acquirer processor for payment authorization.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising:

receiving, by the decryption service system, a result for the second transaction request from the recipient acquirer processor; and

transmitting, by the decryption service system, the result for the second transaction request to the one or more POS devices, wherein the result for the second transaction request is encrypted.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the failure alert is transmitted by way of a reporting portal accessible to the user via the electronic network.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising:

assigning, by the decryption service system, a level of severity to the first transaction request based on one or more aspects of the failure alert, wherein the level of severity is higher for transaction requests associated with one of category clear data or category corrupted; and

determining, by the decryption service system, a reporting frequency for the failure alert based on the assigned level of severity.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein a failure alert report is reported to the one or more POS devices based on a scheduled basis or upon an accumulation of a pre-determined number of failure alerts of a pre-determined severity level.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein a corrupted transaction request indicates a mismatch between the encryption key and a registered decryption key associated with the user.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein a corrupted transaction request indicates a failure in decrypting a transaction request due to one of an error in the transaction request or an internal processing error within the decryption service system.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising:

returning, by the decryption service system, the first transaction request to the one or more POS devices associated with the user, wherein payment processing services for the first transaction request is terminated.

9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein one or more failure alerts are stored in a database, and wherein the failure alert is searched in the database based on a query submitted by the user or other entities having access to reporting data for the user.

10. The computer-implemented method of claim 9 , further comprising:

generating, by the decryption service system, a presentation of a dashboard in a user interface of a device associated with the user for viewing the failure report, wherein the dashboard includes search criterion, search values, date ranges, and failure codes for searching the database for detailed information on point-to-point encryption (P2PE) failures.

11. The computer-implemented method of claim 10 , wherein the failure report is exported to an external format for incorporation to an external document.

12. A decryption service system for validating encryption of electronic transactions comprising:

one or more processors; and

at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:

receiving, by the decryption service system, a plurality of transaction requests from one or more point-of-sale (POS) devices associated with a user;

determining, by the decryption service system, that a first transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is one of clear data or corrupted;

in response to determining that the first transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is one of clear data or corrupted, transmitting, by the decryption service system, a failure alert to the one or more POS devices, the failure alert associated with the first transaction request and including a failure report including a number of point-to-point encryption failures, each point-to-point encryption failure of the number of point-to-point encryption failures categorized by one of malformed message received, clear data received, or invalid card;

determining, by the decryption service system, that a second transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is encrypted;

in response to determining that the second transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is encrypted, decrypting, by the decryption service system, the second transaction request;

determining, by the decryption service system, a recipient acquirer processor using decrypted data of the second transaction request;

re-encrypting, by the decryption service system, the second transaction request using an encryption key associated with the decryption service system; and

transmitting, by the decryption service system and over an electronic network, the re-encrypted second transaction request to the recipient acquirer processor for payment authorization.

13. The decryption service system of claim 12 , the operations further comprising:

receiving, by the decryption service system, a result for the second transaction request from the recipient acquirer processor; and

transmitting, by the decryption service system, the result for the second transaction request to the one or more POS devices, wherein the result for the second transaction request is encrypted.

14. The decryption service system of claim 12 , wherein the failure alert is transmitted by way of a reporting portal accessible to the user via the electronic network.

15. The decryption service system of claim 12 , the operations further comprising:

assigning, by the decryption service system, a level of severity to the first transaction request based on one or more aspects of the failure alert, wherein the level of severity is higher for transaction requests associated with one of category clear data or category corrupted; and

determining, by the decryption service system, a reporting frequency for the failure alert based on the assigned level of severity.

16. The decryption service system of claim 12 , wherein a failure alert report is reported to the one or more POS devices based on a scheduled basis or upon an accumulation of a pre-determined number of failure alerts of a pre-determined severity level.

17. The decryption service system of claim 12 , wherein a corrupted transaction request indicates a mismatch between the encryption key and a registered decryption key associated with the user, and wherein the corrupted transaction request indicates a failure in decrypting the corrupted transaction request due to an error in the corrupted transaction request or an internal processing error within the decryption service system.

18. A non-transitory computer readable medium for validating encryption of electronic transactions using a decryption service system, the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:

receiving, by the decryption service system, a plurality of transaction requests from one or more point-of-sale (POS) devices associated with a user;

determining, by the decryption service system, that a first transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is one of clear data or corrupted;

in response to determining that the first transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is one of clear data or corrupted, transmitting, by the decryption service system, a failure alert to the one or more POS devices, the failure alert associated with the first transaction request and including a failure report including a number of point-to-point encryption failures, each point-to-point encryption failure of the number of point-to-point encryption failures categorized by one of malformed message received, clear data received, or invalid card;

determining, by the decryption service system, that a second transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is encrypted;

in response to determining that the second transaction request of the plurality of transaction requests is encrypted, decrypting, by the decryption service system, the second transaction request;

determining, by the decryption service system, a recipient acquirer processor using decrypted data of the second transaction request;

re-encrypting, by the decryption service system, the second transaction request using an encryption key associated with the decryption service system; and

transmitting, by the decryption service system and over an electronic network, the re-encrypted second transaction request to the recipient acquirer processor for payment authorization.

19. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 18 , further comprising:

receiving, by the decryption service system, a result for the second transaction request from the recipient acquirer processor; and

transmitting, by the decryption service system, the result for the second transaction request to the one or more POS devices, wherein the result for the second transaction request is encrypted.

20. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 18 , wherein the failure alert is transmitted by way of a reporting portal accessible to the user via the electronic network.

Assignments (6)
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTERESTS RECORDED AT REEL/FRAMES 066626/0655, 066625/0426, 066625/0347, AND 066625/0276 Recorded Jan 12, 2026
From: WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS NOTES COLLATERAL AGENT
To: WORLDPAY, LLC; WORLDPAY ISO AND ECOMMERCE, LLC; PAYMETRIC, LLC; WORLDPAY US, LLC
Reel/Frame 074314/0622 →
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RECORDED AT R/F 066624/0719 Recorded Jan 12, 2026
From: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., AS COLLATERAL AGENT
To: WORLDPAY, LLC
Reel/Frame 074315/0412 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Feb 19, 2024
From: WORLDPAY, LLC
To: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., AS COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 066624/0719 →
SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Feb 19, 2024
From: WORLDPAY, LLC
To: WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS NOTES COLLATERAL AGENT
Reel/Frame 066626/0655 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jan 17, 2023
From: PETERSON, BRANT
To: VANTIV, LLC
Reel/Frame 062393/0771 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Jan 17, 2023
From: VANTIV, LLC
To: WORLDPAY, LLC
Reel/Frame 062394/0174 →
Continuity (2)
Continuation 15843548 · Dec 15, 2017
Related Publication 20230222497A1 · Jul 13, 2023
References Cited (63)
US 5351296A · Sullivan · 1994 [cited by examiner]
US 5870473A · Boesch · 1999 [cited by examiner]
US 6832314B1 · Irvin · 2004 [cited by examiner]
US 7292587B2 · Knauerhase · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 8590057B1 · Mayblum · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 9373111B2 · Wagner · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 9818108B2 · Von Mueller · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 10673617B1 · Antoniou · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20020055837A1 · Ahonen · 2002 [cited by examiner]
US 20020091718A1 · Bohannon · 2002 [cited by examiner]
US 20040225748A1 · Chong · 2004 [cited by examiner]
US 20050071434A1 · Hettish · 2005 [cited by examiner]
US 20050102525A1 · Akimoto · 2005 [cited by examiner]
US 20050273843A1 · Shigeeda · 2005 [cited by examiner]
US 20070116266A1 · Greco · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 20080103800A1 · Domenikos · 2008 [cited by examiner]
US 20080129037A1 · Roth · 2008 [cited by examiner]
US 20090300368A1 · Zilberstein · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20100011254A1 · Votta · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 20100318468A1 · Carr · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 20100322417A1 · Altmann · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 20110047230A1 · McGee · 2011 [cited by examiner]
US 20110077977A1 · Collins · 2011 [cited by examiner]
US 20110211689A1 · Von Mueller · 2011 [cited by examiner]
US 20120158585A1 · Ganti · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 20120271955A1 · Deverick · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 20120275598A1 · Vimpari · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 20130041823A1 · Wagner · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20130067032A1 · Kasim · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20130212026A1 · Powell · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20130291089A1 · Wang · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20130297392A1 · Cincera · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20130341977A1 · Kiefer · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20140052642A1 · Spies · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140146648A1 · Alber · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140146650A1 · Alber · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140149477A1 · Abramovitz · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140281487A1 · Klausen · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20140324278A1 · Teng · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20150019443A1 · Sheets · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150170148A1 · Priebatsch · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150271150A1 · Barnett · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150302397A1 · Kalgi · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150313534A1 · Angelides · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20160155122A1 · Patterson · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160318622A1 · Haukom · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160373412A1 · MacCarthaigh · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20170004496A1 · Pujari · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170101054A1 · Dusane · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170132929A1 · Mays · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170291544A1 · Ishihara · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170337399A1 · Alonzo · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20180253705A1 · Spector · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180314965A1 · Dodson · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20190139039A1 · Chawan · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200066383A1 · Rutledge · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200334923A1 · Yamamoto · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200336506A1 · Levin · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210090730A1 · Patel · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20220182278A1 · Vangapalli · 2022 [cited by examiner]
EP 2642725A1 · 2013 [cited by examiner]
WO WO03058879A1 · 2003 [cited by examiner]
T. Menzies and A. Marcus, “Automated severity assessment of software defect reports,” 2008 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, 2008, pp. 346-355, doi: 10.1109/ICSM.2008.4658083. (Year: 2008). [cited by applicant]