IP Library Granted Patent US 12,567,076
Granted Patent B2
US 12,567,076 · App. 18/762,500 · Granted Mar 3, 2026

Electronic payment network security

Inventors: Stefan Thomas (San Francisco, CA); Peter Krey (San Francisco, CA)
Assignee: Interledger Foundation Inc.
G06Q30/0185G06N3/08G06N7/01G06N3/044G06N3/045G06N3/084G06Q2220/00
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 12,567,076
App. No.
18/762,500
Granted
Mar 3, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

Systems and techniques are provided for electronic payment network security. Payment data including an origin and a destination for a payment in an electronic payment network may be received. A route of the payment in the electronic payment network may be estimated based on the origin and the destination. The estimated route of the payment in the electronic payment network may be input to a neural network. Fraud probabilities may be determined using the neural network. A fraud probability may include a value indicating a probability of fraud in the payment in the electronic payment network.

Claims (42)

1 . A computer-implemented method comprising:

receiving, at a computing device, payment data comprising an origin and a destination for a payment in an electronic payment network;

estimating, by the computing device, a route of the payment in the electronic payment network based on the origin and the destination;

generating, by the computing device, separate vector representations of each of two or more segments of the estimated route;

inputting, by the computing device, each of the generated separate vector representations sequentially to an input layer of an encoder neural network of a neural network on the computing device;

determining, by the computing device, using the neural network, one or more fraud probabilities based on inputting a hidden layer of the encoder neural network to a decoder neural network of a neural network after the separate vector representations of each of the two or more segments of the estimated route have been input to the input layer of the encoder neural network; and

sending an electronic communication to at least one ledger system in the estimated route to cause the at least one ledger system to close or suspend an account of a connector system or suspend services usable through an account of a connector system based on the one or more fraud probabilities for the connector system, reject the payment, or initiate a review of the payment.

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

receiving a label for the payment data comprising one or more fraud probabilities comprising values indicating a probability of fraud in the payment in the electronic payment network;

determining a level of error of the neural network based on a comparison of the fraud probabilities from the neural network and the fraud probabilities from the received label; and

updating weights of the neural network based on the level of error of the neural network.

3 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein each of the two or more segments comprises an indication of two ledger systems and one connector system.

4 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein estimating a route of the payment in the electronic payment network based on the origin and the destination is further based on a known topology of the electronic payment network.

5 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising updating a risk score for at least one user, connector system, or ledger system in the estimated route based on the one or more fraud probabilities for that user, connector system, or ledger system.

6 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the origin comprises an identification of a first user and wherein the destination comprises and identification of a second user.

7 . The computer-implemented method of claim 6 , wherein the identification of the first user is a fingerprint comprising data associated with a computing device used by the first user to initiate the payment in the electronic payment network.

8 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the neural network further comprises a decoder neural network that receives output from the encoder neural network.

9 . A computer-implemented system comprising:

one or more storage devices;

a communications device that receives payment data comprising an origin and a destination for a payment in an electronic payment network; and

a processor that estimates a route of the payment in the electronic payment network based on the origin and the destination, generates separate vector representations of each of two or more segments of the estimated route, inputs each of the generated separate vector representations sequentially to an input layer of an encoder neural network of a neural network, and determines, using the neural network, one or more fraud probabilities based on inputting a hidden layer of the encoder neural network to a decoder neural network of the neural network after separate vector representations of each of the two or more segments of the estimated route have been input to the input layer of the encoder neural network, and wherein the communications device further sends an electronic communication to at least one ledger system in the estimated route to cause the at least one ledger system to close or suspend an account of a connector system or suspend services usable through an account of a connector system based on the one or more fraud probabilities for the connector system, reject the payment, or initiate a review of the payment.

10 . The computer-implemented system of claim 9 , wherein the processor further receives a label for the payment data comprising one or more fraud probabilities comprising values indicating a probability of fraud in the payment in the electronic payment network, determines a level of error of the neural network based on a comparison of the fraud probabilities from the neural network and the fraud probabilities from the received label, and updates weights of the neural network based on the level of error of the neural network.

11 . The computer-implemented system of claim 9 , wherein each of the two or more segments comprises an indication of two ledger systems and one connector system.

12 . The computer-implemented system of claim 9 , wherein the processor estimates the route of the payment in the electronic payment network further based on a known topology of the electronic payment network.

13 . The computer-implemented system of claim 9 , wherein the processor further updates a risk score for at least one user, connector system, or ledger system in the estimated route based on the one or more fraud probabilities for that user, connector system, or ledger system, wherein the risk score is stored in the one or more storage devices.

14 . The computer-implemented system of claim 9 , wherein the origin comprises an identification of a first user and wherein the destination comprises and identification of a second user.

15 . The computer-implemented system of claim 14 , wherein the identification of the first user is a fingerprint comprising data associated with a computing device used by the first user to initiate the payment in the electronic payment network.

16 . A system comprising: one or more computers and one or more storage devices storing instructions which are operable, when executed by the one or more computers, to cause the one or more computers to perform operations comprising:

receiving payment data comprising an origin and a destination for a payment in an electronic payment network;

estimating a route of the payment in the electronic payment network based on the origin and the destination;

generating separate vector representations of each of two or more segments of the estimated route;

inputting each of the generated separate vector representations sequentially to an input layer of an encoder neural network of a neural network;

determining, using the neural network, one or more fraud probabilities based on inputting a hidden layer of the encoder neural network to a decoder neural network of the neural network after the separate vector representations of each of the two or more segments of the estimated route have been input to the input layer of the encoder neural network; and

sending an electronic communication to at least one ledger system in the estimated route to cause the at least one ledger system to close or suspend an account of a connector system or suspend services usable through an account of a connector system based on the one or more fraud probabilities for the connector system, reject the payment, or initiate a review of the payment.

17 . The system of claim 16 , wherein the instructions further cause the one or more computers to perform operations further comprising:

receiving a label for the payment data comprising one or more fraud probabilities comprising values indicating a probability of fraud in the payment in the electronic payment network;

determining a level of error of the neural network based on a comparison of the fraud probabilities from the neural network and the fraud probabilities from the received label; and

updating weights of the neural network based on the level of error of the neural network.

18 . The system of claim 16 , wherein each of the two or more segments comprises an indication of two ledger systems and one connector system.

19 . The system of claim 16 , wherein estimating a route of the payment in the electronic payment network based on the origin and the destination is further based on a known topology of the electronic payment network.

20 . The system of claim 16 , wherein the instructions further cause the one or more computers to perform operations further comprising:

further comprising updating a risk score for at least one user, connector system, or ledger system in the estimated route based on the one or more fraud probabilities for that user, connector system, or ledger system.

Assignments (2)
CORRECTIVE ASSIGNMENT TO CORRECT THE ASSIGNEE NAME PREVIOUSLY RECORDED AT REEL: 68684 FRAME: 982. ASSIGNOR(S) HEREBY CONFIRMS THE ASSIGNMENT. Recorded Mar 19, 2025
From: RIPPLE LUXEMBOURG S.A.
To: INTERLEDGER FOUNDATION INC.
Reel/Frame 070660/0786 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Sep 24, 2024
From: RIPPLE LUXEMBOURG S.A.
To: INTERLEDGER FOUNDATION
Reel/Frame 068684/0982 →
Continuity (3)
Continuation 18103840 · Jan 31, 2023
Continuation 15662096 · Jul 27, 2017
Related Publication 20240354781A1 · Oct 24, 2024
References Cited (43)
US 6253186B1 · Pendleton, Jr. · 2001 [cited by applicant]
US 8886563B2 · Sakata · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 10002348B1 · Doctor · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 11127004B2 · Lorberg · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11151468B1 · Chen · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11164163B1 · Viidu · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11587099B2 · Thomas · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20040089711A1 · Sandru · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20080140576A1 · Lewis · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20090144213A1 · Patil · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20100145836A1 · Baker · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20120005749A1 · Zoldi · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120271765A1 · Cervenka · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130018795A1 · Kolhatkar · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130024361A1 · Choudhuri · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130185802A1 · Tibeica · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20160104163A1 · Aquino · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160224949A1 · Thomas · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160364794A1 · Chari · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170017935A1 · Beaudoin · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170140382A1 · Chari · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170243177A1 · Johnsrud · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180068395A1 · Gupta · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180316722A1 · Jenson · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190171929A1 · Abadi · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200026992A1 · Zhang · 2020 [cited by applicant]
WO 2014179690A2 · 2014 [cited by applicant]
Quah et al. ““Real-time credit card fraud detection using computational intelligence,”” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 35, Issue 4, 2008, pp. 1721-1732, ISSN 0957-4174, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.08.093… [cited by examiner]
Prihodko, Pavel et al. “Flare : An Approach to Routing in Lightning Network White Paper.” (2016). (Year: 2016). [cited by applicant]
Ghosh and Reilly, “Credit card fraud detection with a neural-network,” 1994 Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1994, pp. 621-630, doi: 10.1109/HICSS.1994.323314. (Year:… [cited by applicant]
E. L. Barse, H. Kvarnstrom and E. Jonsson, “Synthesizing test data for fraud detection systems,” 19th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, 2003. Proceedings., 2003, pp. 384-394, doi: 10.1109/CSAC.2003.12543… [cited by applicant]
C. Phua, Vincent C. S. Lee, Kate Smith-Miles and Ross W. Gayler. “A Comprehensive Survey of Data Mining-based Fraud Detection Research., 2010, CoRR, arXiv:1009.6119 [cs.AI](or arXiv:1009.6119v1 [cs.AI] for this version)… [cited by applicant]
K. Modi and R. Dayma, “Review on fraud detection methods in credit card transactions,” 2017 International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control (12C2), 2017, pp. 1-5, doi: 10.1109/12C2.2017.8321781. (Year: 201… [cited by applicant]
J. Shaji and D. Panchal, “Improved fraud detection in e-commerce transactions,” 2017 2nd International Conference on Communication Systems, Computing and IT Applications (CSCITA), 2017, pp. 121-126, doi: 10.1109/CSCITA.… [cited by applicant]
PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US18/43740, dated Oct. 15, 2018, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/US2018/043740, dated Jan. 28, 2020, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
E. Caldeira, G. Brandão, H. Campos and A. Pereira, “Characterizing and Evaluating Fraud in Electronic Transactions,” 2012 Eighth Latin American Web Congress, 2012, pp. 115-122, doi: 10.1109/LA-WEB.2012.16 (Year: 2012). [cited by applicant]
Sequence to Sequence Learning with Neural Networks Ilya Sutskever, Oriol Vinyals, Quoc V. Le arXiv:1409.3215 [cs.CL] (Year: 2014). [cited by applicant]
Crisp, Kevin & Sutter, Ellen & Westerberg, Jacob. (2015). Pencil-and-Paper Neural Networks: An Undergraduate Laboratory Exercise in Computational Neuroscience Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a p… [cited by applicant]
E. A. Lopez-Rojas and S. Axelsson, “A review of computer simulation for fraud detection research in financial datasets,” 2016 Future Technologies Conference (FTC), 2016, pp. 932-935, doi: 10.1109/FTC.2016.7821715. (Year… [cited by applicant]
Jordan Neural networks: training with backpropagation. Jul. 2017; Retrieved from https://www.jeremyjordan.me/neural-networks-training/ (Year: 2017). [cited by applicant]
Convolutional Sequence to Sequence Learning Jonas Gehring, Michael Auli, David Grangier, Denis Yarats, Yann N. Dauphin arXiv:1705.03122v3 [cs.CL] (Year: 2017). [cited by applicant]
Vaswani et al., “Attention is All you Need,” Published in NIPS Jun. 12, 2017, Computer Science, 2017, arXiv: 1706.03762v1 retrieved from https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762 (Year: 2017). [cited by applicant]