System and method for identifying and preventing on-line fraud

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9779556
  • Patent Number
    9,779,556
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, December 27, 2006
    18 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, October 3, 2017
    7 years ago
Abstract
The present invention is directed to systems and methods which identify fraudulent situations during the transaction phase. In one embodiment, such detection is accomplished by monitoring for situations either outside the range of normal for the general population or outside the range of normal for this particular user. The normal range could be rule driven and, for example, could include size of a given purchase, frequency of purchases, identity of use equipment being utilized for the current transaction, etc. The rule could be relaxed or tightened, at least in part, based on the length of time that the user has been a customer and the user's past payment history. In one embodiment, device ids are used to detect fraudulent users. These device (or software) ids could, for example, be a “fingerprint” of the user's equipment, or a “cookie” previously downloaded to the user that identifies the user to the fulfillment system. In situations where fraud is detected downloading the value to the user is interrupted.
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application is related to co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/616,513 filed Dec. 27, 2006, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ON-LINE PRINTING FRAUD PROTECTION,” the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated herein by reference. The present application is also related to co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/197,044, entitled “GENERIC VALUE BEARING ITEM LABELS,” filed Jul. 16, 2002, published as 2003/0037008 on Feb. 20, 2003; U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/975,532, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING COMPUTER-BASED POSTAGE STAMPS,” filed Oct. 10, 2001, published as 2002/0073039 on Jun. 13, 2002 and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,191,158 on Mar. 13, 2007, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/239,424, entitled “A SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING COMPUTER BASED POSTAGE STAMPS,” filed Oct. 10, 2000; U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/690,066, entitled “CRYPTOGRAPHIC MODULE FOR SECURE PROCESSING OF VALUE-BEARING ITEMS,” filed Oct. 16, 2000, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,216,110 on May 8, 2007; which applications being owned by a common entity with the present application are hereby incorporated by reference herein.


TECHNICAL FIELD

This disclosure relates to on-line fraud protection in general and more specifically to systems and methods for fraudulent detection and prevention in on-line value transfer situations. Even more specifically, this disclosure addresses fraud protection when users receive value indicia via Internet facilitated transfer of items of value.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Electronic commerce has become commonplace and as the value of such commerce has increased so has the sophistication of criminal activities. Electronic on-line printing of tickets, stamps and other indicia of value allows these items to be printed in the comfort of one's home or office. This relative privacy presents a tempting target for those with a larcenous bent.


In one scenario, a fraudulent user (fraudster) simply uses a stolen or otherwise invalid credit card to order the downloaded material that is printed on paper located at the fraudster's premises. In some situations, one needs to be a member or otherwise have a log-in identity in order to print the desired material. To overcome this requirement, fraudulent user's create a log-on, download what they want, and then stop using the log-on. The next time they desire to print the tickets, postage indicia, etc., they create a new log-on identity using a different credit facility, which often proves to be stolen or otherwise improper.


In other scenarios, the fraudulent user logs onto the system and obtains something of value, for example, a downloaded postage indicia for printing, either immediately or at a subsequent time, onto stock material at the customer's location. In some situations, the transaction turns out to be fraudulent in that the user's credit is not acceptable, the credit facility that was used turns out to be not acceptable, or for any of a number of other reasons the transaction is determined to be improper. One problem with these types of fraudulent situations is that each transaction is independent of previous transactions in that nothing is being shipped to a permanent address and thus each transaction is transient. Attempts to identify the computer (or other electronic address information) are often futile since fraudsters have a facility for masking their electronic identity. In addition, certain intermediary systems, such as ISP providers, often modify (or allow a user to modify) their real addresses and even their machine identities (MAC identifications).


Another method for preventing recurring fraud from the same user is to block the account (log-on) from that user. However, the fraudster then opens a new account using a new phony id. Often, when promotions are being offered it is customary to limit such promotions to “one per customer”. In these situations users are tempted to “fake” their identity in order to obtain more than one promotion.


BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is directed to systems and methods which identify fraudulent situations during the transaction phase. In one embodiment, such detection is accomplished by monitoring for situations either outside the range of normal for the general population or outside the range of normal for this particular user. The normal range could be rule driven and, for example, could include size of a given purchase, frequency of purchases, identity of use equipment being utilized for the current transaction, etc. The rule could be relaxed or tightened, at least in part, based on the length of time that the user has been a customer and the user's past payment history. In one embodiment, device ids are used to detect fraudulent users. These device (or software) ids could, for example, be a “fingerprint” of the user's equipment, of a “cookie” previously downloaded to the user that identifies the user to the fulfillment system. In situations where fraud is detected downloading the value to the user is interrupted.


The foregoing has outlined rather broadly the features and technical advantages of the present invention in order that the detailed description of the invention that follows may be better understood. Additional features and advantages of the invention will be described hereinafter which form the subject of the claims of the invention. It should be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the conception and specific embodiment disclosed may be readily utilized as a basis for modifying or designing other structures for carrying out the same purposes of the present invention. It should also be realized by those skilled in the art that such equivalent constructions do not depart from the spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the appended claims. The novel features which are believed to be characteristic of the invention, both as to its organization and method of operation, together with further objects and advantages will be better understood from the following description when considered in connection with the accompanying figures. It is to be expressly understood, however, that each of the figures is provided for the purpose of illustration and description only and is not intended as a definition of the limits of the present invention.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

For a more complete understanding of the present invention, reference is now made to the following descriptions taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawing, in which:



FIG. 1 shows one embodiment of a system for controlling on-line printing of value indicia;



FIGS. 1A and 1B show one embodiment of stock materials;



FIG. 2 shows one embodiment of a method for controlling the distribution of stock material;



FIGS. 3A and 3B show one embodiment of a method for controlling the printing of value indicia on stock material; and



FIG. 4 shows one embodiment of a rules chart for a few possible fraud situations for use in a rules engine.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Turning now to FIG. 1, there is shown one embodiment of systems, such as system 10, which allows the user at PC 11 to access a remote location such as location 120 to receive indicia value data to be printed locally on printer 18. In the embodiment shown, the postage indicia, as controlled by indicia value data from server 13 is printed on a sheet of stock, such as stock 100 shown in FIG. 1A. Communication between user PC 11 and the system at location 120 is via a network, such as network 12. It should also be noted that while a PC is shown, any type of computing device can be utilized and the location where the printing occurs can be a single location as shown or can be networked together in an intranet wirelessly or otherwise. Also note that communications between elements can be wire line or wireless, or combinations thereof. As used herein, the work “indicia” can be singular or plural.


When a user desires to print postage indicia, the user must, in one embodiment, obtain the stock material either from a supplier local to the user (a store, or perhaps an on-line supplier other than the on-line supplier of the postage indicia). In some situations, such as the situation of the embodiment, the user obtains the stock material from the same online supplier that supplies the postage. Thus, as will be detailed hereinafter, when a user logs onto the system at location 120, the user identifies him/herself and orders the necessary supplies which are then checked through inventory 15 with payments being processed through processing facility 14. Fulfillment 16 then sends the supplies physically to the user at PC 11. Note that this transaction, i.e., the obtaining of stock material, always precedes the actual downloading of postage in situations where the material is obtained from the vendor since the postage indicia is to be printed (retained) on the obtained stock material by the customer at the customer's location. Also note that the cost of the material is significant less (more than ten times less) than the cost of postage. Thus, there is not very much reason for the fraudster to use invalidly obtained credit facilities for purchasing stock material. In other situations, the indicia can be printed on plain paper such as would occur when the indicia is printed as part of an address label or directly on to an envelope. In these situations the stock material is not purchased. Also, in some situations the indicia is printed at the vendor's location and shipped to the customer.


In situations where the print stock is bought from a vendor other than the vendor supplying the postage indicia data, then the id of the stock material, together with the id of the purchaser is sent to the postage vendor for storage thereat. The user id, both from sales from the postage vendor, or other on-line vendor can be, if desired, augmented by the fingerprint of the buyer. In this situation, the fingerprint can be one or more of the identity of the software being used by the material purchaser, or by the identity of the hardware (such as CPU, hard drive, etc.) of the computer being used by the purchaser or even by the printer associated with the purchaser's computer.


As will be seen from FIG. 1A, each sheet of stock 100 contains an identity, such as serial number 101, that identifies the stock and allows that sheet of stock material to become associated with a particular user or group of users. Thus, when fulfillment 16, in conjunction with inventory control 15 prepares the stock for delivery, the identity and quantity of stock material is recorded for subsequent use in validating the downloading of postage to a user. For example, the quantity and identity of each piece of stock material obtained by a user, or user group, can be stored in memory 13-2 under of control of processor 13-1. In some situations the serial numbers of stock need not be unique (i.e., more than one customer can have stock with the same serial number) but rather the test can be whether the records show that a present user has print stock with a particular number associated with that user.


Subsequently, after the user obtains physical possession of the stock material at the location of printer 18, the user, using a PC, such as PC 11, or any other appropriate communication device, and network 12, accesses server 13 for the purpose of obtaining postage media data on-line from the vendor at location 120. As has become customary, the user then identifies him/herself to server 13. The user also identifies the stock material, either by verbally saying the serial number(s) of the stock that will be used or by allowing the serial numbers to be read into the system from, for example, printer 18. Any method of communicating the id number (or other form factors) of the printable stock that the customer intends to use can be employed, including, for example, typing the information, scanning, PDF and the like.


During the validation process the system, using rules engine 13-3, will determine if the current transaction is “suspicious” i.e., contains undesirable parameter values. Essentially, the rules cover the amount of postage purchased, the frequency of the purchase and the longevity of the customer as a registered user. Also the parameters contain the fact as to whether or not a user is a regular customer and, for example, how many times has that user changed his/her credit card number. The frequency of credit card number changes is also a “suspicious” activity in that if a user changes the credit facility too often that can be an indication of fraudulent intent. This same thing applies to printing. If a particular user is attempting to (or has) printed unusual amounts of indicia or if the user is printing rather fast compared to the normal average, such that, for example, if a user is attempting to print $10,000 dollars worth of indicia in a day, one can suppose that fraud is occurring. Also, if the postage denominations are unusual, that could be an indication of improper usage.


Note also that while the charges may be made to a valid card and to the proper card holder, that user might, at a later date deny the charges and thus the amount will be charged back to the provider. When this happens it is important that subsequent purchases be inhibited or at least challenged.


In addition, the system keeps track of, for example in memory 13-2, actual parameter values and dates of downloads, postage purchases and/or postage indicia prints from each user (or from those users where there is reason to believe a problem might exist). Then when the volume suddenly changes, or the pattern of activity changes, a flag can be set to be on guard for possible fraudulent activity with respect to a credit facility or with respect to a particular user account.


Registration of the same credit facility to multiple users can be a trigger, as can be changes in account address, printer, computer, etc. Any number of parameters, such as those outlined above, can be stored and the values associated with each such parameter can be used and the range limit set for a group of users or for specific users. These range limits can be varied on a user by user or group by group basis, if desired. The range changes can be based on previous users or groups.


If the rules engine does not flag an indicia order having undesirable parameters, then after payment processing 14 determines that the transaction appears valid, the system matches, if desired, the user id to the serial number(s) and/or any other measured form factors to determine if a proper match exists. If the match is proper and/or if the stock count is proper, as determined from records maintained, for example in memory 13-2, and if the user is not known as a fraudster for other reasons, then postage data from postage vault 17 is sent for storage at PC 11 for subsequent printing under control of PC 11 at printer 18 on stock material 100.


In situations where the rules engine flags a suspicious activity, i.e., an activity or transaction that is outside of the acceptable limits for this particular user, the transaction is either blocked or additional checking, perhaps by a phone call or other personal interaction, is undertaken.


In some situations, the id of the user will identify the user as a trusted user and then material or other form factor matching may be waived, if desired. A trusted user in this context can be defined as desired, but usually would be a user who has been regularly downloading postage indicia without incident for a period of time. This information could be maintained, for example, in a table located in memory 13-2.



FIG. 1A shows one embodiment of stock 100 having the ability to print sixteen postage indicia (100-1 to 100-16) based upon value sent from postage vault 17 (FIG. 1). In some situations the user may desire to print less than the sixteen available postage indicia at a single time. In such situations, the user will then subsequently log on to server 13 using the same serial number as was previously used. The system would know, perhaps by a record maintained in memory 13-2, that there would only be say twelve possible indicia remaining because four indicia were used previously. This situation is shown in FIG. 1B.


Also under some conditions as will be discussed, multiple sheets of material 100 could have the same serial number and thus the number of pages utilized by the user is maintained so as to prevent fraudulent activity.



FIG. 2 shows one embodiment of a method such as method 20 for allowing a user to purchase stock online. In this embodiment, a customer logs onto the system such as server 13 (FIG. 1) under the control of process 201. Process 202 then obtains the customer id which could include a PIN number or any other method of authentication if desired. The identity could be, for example, electronic information sent from the user, or it could be any other method of identifying a unique customer, or a customer from a group of customers all of which could be authorized to use the same serial number or other control form factor.


Process 203 obtains the customer order for the desired stock. Process 204 checks the inventory to be certain that that order can be fulfilled. Process 205 processes the payment by accepting a credit card or other credit facility. Then, if all appears to be in order, process 206 ships the customer order to the physical location specified by the user.


Process 207 then stores the order information in association with the customer id so that subsequently it can be determined whether the serial number of stock material being utilized for postage printing, as well as the quantity (if desired) of that stock match the user. Note that had the user gone to a source other than the online source at location 120 as discussed above, then the third party who supplied the stock material to the user would have sent the serial number and other identification information to the system for recording as controlled by processes 207 and 208.



FIGS. 3A and B show one embodiment of a method, such as method 30, for allowing a customer to print postage indicia via an online system. Process 303 allows the customer to log-on to print postage in the well known manner. Process 304 checks for known problems (fraudsters), for example by comparing the customer's software id, or his/her hardware id or printer ids against a stored list of problems from prior transactions. This problem list can be maintained locally or could be obtained remotely, for example, from a national database of known fraudsters. Such a national database can be public or private, as desired.


If the customer is not on the problem list, then process 305 takes the print order from the customer using the customer's id. Note that id need not be a numerical value, but could be any manner of uniquely identifying the customer. Process 306 determines if the customer has previously obtained sufficient postage value to allow for the printing of the desired amount of postage indicia. If not, process 307 interactively works with the customer to replenish the postage value available for use by the customer. When this is complete, or if enough postage value already exists, then process 308 obtains from the customer, either manually, verbally with audio to digital translation or otherwise, the id information pertaining to the stock material that the customer wishes to use to print the postage.


Process 309 determines (optionally) if this user is a trusted user. If so, then the fraud detection (or a portion of the rules within the fraud detection) can be bypassed, if desired. Assuming the id is not one of a trusted user, then process 310 determines if a fingerprint has been taken of this user's equipment. If not, then process 316 determines if a fingerprint should be taken and if so process 317 controls the fingerprinting and storage, perhaps in memory 13-2 (FIG. 1), of the results.


If a previous fingerprint had been taken then process 312 determines if the “fingerprint” of the user's equipment matches the previous fingerprint. If not, then the mismatch can be used, if desired, as an indication that the current transaction is suspect. In such a case, process 318 will hold the transactions for further process, terminate the transaction, turn the transaction over for fraud processing or perhaps just change the rules levels.


When a fingerprint matches a previous fingerprint, process 313 enables the rules engine, such as rules engine 13-3 (FIG. 1) working with processor 13-1 (FIG. 1) to help determine if this user, or the transaction parameters of this transaction, cause concern. In this regard, chart 40 (FIG. 4) is helpful in understanding some of the many possible fraud and/or potential trouble conditions.


For example, line 402 of chart 40, shows that this user (as determined from the user's presented id or fingerprint id) shows how much postage per day this user has been using on average. The chart also could show the average postage per day for all users (or for a portion of users with a similar profile to this user). The rule then could be to only allow, for example, $75 worth of postage each day. The amount limit can be pre-calculated or it can be calculated dynamically based, for example, on factors established by the vendor from time to time and dependent on behaviors of the customer. Line 403 deals with the number of accesses to the system each day by this same user and while the user's number is lower than the average, a limit of 3 times a day is placed on the account, at least until a pattern has emerged.


Line 404 indicates that this user has been known to the system one week or less and until the user has been known to the system for at least 10 weeks the user will be treated with care and the highest level of scrutiny will occur. Note that the different rules and different values for each rule can be used based upon many factors for each user.


Some conditions, such as shown in lines 406, 407, 408, and 409, could be flag conditions such that if any of these transactions were to occur a trouble condition would be triggered. For example, in line 406 this user purchased 1000 sheets of stock material onto which postage indicia is to be printed. The average user in this category of user only buys 100 sheets. This then triggers a flag condition such that when the user logs-in to buy postage indicia his/her account can be immediately flagged for further processing, or more stringent rules can be applied.


Another example of a flag condition is shown in line 408. This user (same id or fingerprint) has switched credit facilities five times within a certain period (or since the user first identified him/herself) where the average number of changes is two times.


Returning now to FIG. 3A, process 315, based on the results of the rules checking determines whether or not to proceed with supplying value to this user.


Fingerprint checking can be used for many control functions. By way of example, in situation where “specials” are run, such as free (or reduced) postage for a month, providing the customer sign up for a year, some customers may simply use the free postage, cancel their subscription and then, at a later time, sign up again. By maintaining a record of the fingerprint, say of the customer's printer (or software, CPU, etc.) any subsequent “free trial periods” can be blocked under control of processes 313, 314 and 315 based on a fingerprint match to the previous “trial” period.


If process 315 allows fulfillment to continue, then process 320, FIG. 3B, determines if it is necessary to check for paper stock id numbers. If so, process 321 determines if the customer's stock id matches what the system believes is associated with that customer or group of customers. For example, process 315 may access database 13-2, FIG. 1, to see if this customer's id matches the range of ids associated with that customer. Note that the customer may be one of a group of people authorized within a range, or the customer may be a trusted user, in which case checking of the serial numbers may be optional for that user. In this context a trusted user is one where the likelihood of fraud has for one reason or another, such as exemplary behavior over a period of time, is reduced below a threshold.


Process 322 then, if necessary for this user, determines if the stock count is right. This count is necessary in some situations for example, because multiple sheets of material may have the same serial number. If the user has been determined to have used five sheets of material but still has five sheets remaining, the user would be allowed to purchase postage indicia up to five sheets. However, had the customer had five sheets available and this postage indicia would require a sixth sheet, then the sixth sheet worth of postage would be rejected via process 322. The order then would be held for further processing, and/or fraud identification under control of process 326. If process 322 determines that the stock count is right, then process 323 processes the order. This is done, for example, by process 324 which generating postage indicia data from postage vault 17 and transmits this data to PC 11. Process 325 then removes the stock id from the available stock, if applicable, and adjusts the stock count. Process 327 then under control of the customer and PC 11 generates postage indicia from the data transmitted from the system.


Note that chart 40, FIG. 4, shows only a few of the many situations that can be checked, including, for example, a check of the address (both physical and electronic), supplied phone numbers, etc. In some situations, the printer id can be captured and matched to the user. This could be part of the fingerprinting, or a separate operation. This id can be the actual number of the printer (MAC address or otherwise) or it could be a name given to the printer as contained in the operating system. Cookies can be downloaded and information received back pertaining to the identity of the user, if desired, all used by the rules engine and the processor to determine possible fraud conditions.


In some situations the system could be set up to block partial fingerprints, such as a MAC address. However, in some situations it is not practical to simply block the machine because it could be a shared “library” or “kiosk” machine. In those situations, additional detective work will be required to detect possible fraud conditions. In situations such as that, the system could mark the known shared machine as a trusted (or suspicious) location. In all cases, something else may trigger the fraud detection even though the postage is being printed at a trusted location.


Another twist is that the system might be designed to look at the sales channel from which the user is coming. Corporate channels could have less scrutiny than unaffiliated or otherwise unknown individuals. Triggers could be geared to payment type, such that if a user is using certain payment types that are more fraud driven than other types then the rule limits or parameters can be adjusted accordingly.


In some situations the IP address can be used to determine the geographical location of the user's machine. This, of course, can be spoofed, but in fact in many situations it is possible to determine, for example, that a transaction is coming in from outside the United States. The system can block based on the domain, depending on which country the user is coming from.


Although the present invention and its advantages have been described in detail, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions and alterations can be made herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims. Moreover, the scope of the present application is not intended to be limited to the particular embodiments of the process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, means, methods and steps described in the specification. As one of ordinary skill in the art will readily appreciate from the disclosure of the present invention, processes, machines, manufacture, compositions of matter, means, methods, or steps, presently existing or later to be developed that perform substantially the same function or achieve substantially the same result as the corresponding embodiments described herein may be utilized according to the present invention. Accordingly, the appended claims are intended to include within their scope such processes, machines, manufacture, compositions of matter, means, methods, or steps.

Claims
  • 1. A method of sending downloadable value indicia data over the Internet, said data used to generate value indicia which is stored on identifiable media for subsequent use by a recipient, said method comprising: receiving, by a server, information relating to a purchase of said identifiable media, the information including: identifiable portions of said identifiable media, an identity of a user who purchased said identifiable media, and a first fingerprint of computer equipment used by said user to purchase said identifiable media;storing, by said server, said identifiable portions of said identifiable media in association with said identity of said user and in association with said first fingerprint of said computer equipment;receiving, by said server from a remote computing device of said recipient, an order for specific downloadable value indicia data of said downloadable value indicia data to generate said value indicia, wherein said order specifies an identifiable medium to have printed thereon said value indicia;obtaining, by said server, a second fingerprint of said remote computing device;determining, by said server, whether said first fingerprint matches said second fingerprint;in response to a determination, by said server, that said first fingerprint matches said second fingerprint, determining, by said server, whether said specified identifiable medium of said order matches at least one of said stored identifiable portions of said identifiable media associated with said identity of said user who purchased said identifiable media to store said value indicia; andin response to a determination, by said server, that said specified identifiable medium of said order matches said at least one of said stored identifiable portions of said identifiable media associated with said identity of said user who purchased said identifiable media to store said value indicia, sending, by said server, over the Internet to said remote computing device, said specific downloadable value indicia data.
  • 2. The method of claim 1 wherein said sending said specific downloadable value indicia data to said remote computing device is further in response to determining whether said order contains a non-approved parameter, and wherein said sending said specific downloadable value indicia data to said remote computing device is blocked in response to a determination that said accepted order contains said non-approved parameter.
  • 3. The method of claim 2 wherein said information relating to said purchase of said identifiable media includes a quantity of said identifiable media purchased by said user, and wherein said determining whether said order contains a non-approved parameter includes: determining a remaining quantity of said identifiable media, said remaining quantity corresponding to unused identifiable media purchased by said user; anddetermining whether a quantity of identifiable media necessary for storing said value indicia is greater than said remaining quantity of said identifiable media.
  • 4. The method of claim 2 wherein said server includes a rules engine that uses rules to determine whether said order contains said non-approved parameter.
  • 5. The method of claim 1 wherein said identifiable portions are identified by a serial number.
  • 6. The method of claim 4 wherein at least some of said rules are adjusted from time to time for said computer equipment.
  • 7. The method of claim 6 wherein at least some of said adjustments are dependent upon prior orders accepted from said computer equipment.
  • 8. The method of claim 1 wherein said identifiable media is print stock, and wherein said identifiable media is provided to said recipient as multiple sheets of said print stock.
  • 9. A method of sending value indicia data to a remote computing device of a recipient, said method comprising: receiving, by a server from a computing device of a user, a request for purchase of at least one identifiable medium;obtaining a first fingerprint of said computing device in response to said request, wherein said first fingerprint comprises at least one of a physical address, an electronic address, a supplied phone number, a printer identification, and a MAC address;sending, to said user, said purchased at least one identifiable medium;recording, by the server, identifiable portions of said purchased at least one identifiable medium, wherein said recording indicates that said sent at least one identifiable medium was purchased by said user using said computing device having said first fingerprint;receiving, by said server from said remote computing device of said recipient, an order for said value indicia data, wherein said order specifies an identifiable medium;obtaining, by said server, a second fingerprint of said remote computing device in response to receiving said order;determining, by said server, whether said first fingerprint matches said second fingerprint;in response to a determination that said first fingerprint matches said second fingerprint, determining, by the server, whether said identifiable medium specified in said order matches one of said recorded identifiable portions of said at least one identifiable medium purchased using said computing device having said first fingerprint; andin response to a determination that said specified identifiable medium of said order matches said one of said recorded identifiable portions of said sent at least one identifiable medium purchased using said computing device having said first fingerprint, sending said value indicia data to said remote computing device.
  • 10. The method of claim 9 further comprising: storing a set of rules in association with said user,wherein said sending said value indicia data to said remote computing device is further in response to determining whether said order comprises a parameter that violates said set of rules, and, in response to a determination that said order comprises a parameter that violates said set of rules, blocking said sending said value indicia data to said computing device.
  • 11. The method of claim 9 wherein said identifiable medium is print stock with identification markings thereon.
  • 12. The method of claim 9 wherein said first fingerprint comprises information about at least one of: a software component of said computing device; anda hardware component of said computing device.
  • 13. The method of claim 1 wherein said information relating to said purchase of said identifiable media is received from a third party vendor of the identifiable media.
  • 14. The method of claim 1 wherein said first fingerprint of said computer equipment matches said second fingerprint of said remote computing device.
US Referenced Citations (281)
Number Name Date Kind
3833795 Shoshani et al. Sep 1974 A
4447890 Duwel et al. May 1984 A
4725718 Sansone et al. Feb 1988 A
4743747 Fougere et al. May 1988 A
4757537 Edelmann et al. Jul 1988 A
4775246 Edelmann et al. Oct 1988 A
4780828 Whisker Oct 1988 A
4802218 Wright et al. Jan 1989 A
4812994 Taylor et al. Mar 1989 A
4831555 Sansone et al. May 1989 A
4837702 Obrea Jun 1989 A
4853865 Sansone et al. Aug 1989 A
4872706 Brewen et al. Oct 1989 A
4900903 Wright et al. Feb 1990 A
4900904 Wright et al. Feb 1990 A
4908770 Breault et al. Mar 1990 A
4933849 Connell et al. Jun 1990 A
4935961 Gargiulo et al. Jun 1990 A
4939674 Price et al. Jul 1990 A
4949381 Pastor Aug 1990 A
4980542 Jackson et al. Dec 1990 A
5048085 Abraham et al. Sep 1991 A
5055657 Miller et al. Oct 1991 A
5058008 Schumacher Oct 1991 A
5075865 Kawamura et al. Dec 1991 A
5111030 Brasington et al. May 1992 A
5122987 Kihara Jun 1992 A
5142577 Pastor Aug 1992 A
5181245 Jones Jan 1993 A
5265221 Miller Nov 1993 A
5319562 Whitehouse Jun 1994 A
5325519 Long et al. Jun 1994 A
5328439 Goldberg Jul 1994 A
5341505 Whitehouse Aug 1994 A
5367148 Storch et al. Nov 1994 A
5377268 Hunter Dec 1994 A
5384886 Rourke Jan 1995 A
5390251 Pastor et al. Feb 1995 A
5408416 Gilham Apr 1995 A
5442162 Armel Aug 1995 A
5448641 Pintsov et al. Sep 1995 A
5452654 Connell et al. Sep 1995 A
5454038 Cordery et al. Sep 1995 A
5471925 Heinrich et al. Dec 1995 A
5491495 Ward et al. Feb 1996 A
5559934 Ogura et al. Sep 1996 A
5561795 Sarkar Oct 1996 A
5570465 Tsakanikas Oct 1996 A
5573277 Petkovsek Nov 1996 A
5598477 Berson Jan 1997 A
5600562 Guenther Feb 1997 A
5602743 Freytag Feb 1997 A
5621797 Rosen Apr 1997 A
5621864 Benade et al. Apr 1997 A
5626286 Petkovsek May 1997 A
5655023 Cordery et al. Aug 1997 A
5659616 Sudia Aug 1997 A
5666421 Pastor et al. Sep 1997 A
5668897 Stolfo Sep 1997 A
5671146 Windel et al. Sep 1997 A
5680629 Slayden et al. Oct 1997 A
5684951 Goldman et al. Nov 1997 A
5717596 Bernard et al. Feb 1998 A
5717597 Kara Feb 1998 A
5729460 Plett et al. Mar 1998 A
5729734 Parker et al. Mar 1998 A
5737729 Denman Apr 1998 A
5742683 Lee et al. Apr 1998 A
5768132 Cordery et al. Jun 1998 A
5778348 Manduley et al. Jul 1998 A
5781438 Lee et al. Jul 1998 A
5781634 Cordery et al. Jul 1998 A
5793867 Cordery et al. Aug 1998 A
5796841 Cordery et al. Aug 1998 A
5801944 Kara Sep 1998 A
5812990 Ryan, Jr. et al. Sep 1998 A
5812991 Kara Sep 1998 A
5819240 Kara Oct 1998 A
5822739 Kara Oct 1998 A
5825893 Kara Oct 1998 A
5848401 Goldberg et al. Dec 1998 A
5867578 Brickell et al. Feb 1999 A
5917924 Herbert Jun 1999 A
5918234 Shah et al. Jun 1999 A
5923406 Brasington et al. Jul 1999 A
5930796 Pierce et al. Jul 1999 A
5940383 Willkie Aug 1999 A
5949680 Kettelkamp Sep 1999 A
5953142 Chiaroni et al. Sep 1999 A
5956404 Schneier et al. Sep 1999 A
5957053 Hayama Sep 1999 A
5978013 Jones et al. Nov 1999 A
5978484 Apperson et al. Nov 1999 A
5983227 Nazem et al. Nov 1999 A
5987441 Lee et al. Nov 1999 A
5988897 Pierce et al. Nov 1999 A
5995985 Cai Nov 1999 A
6005945 Whitehouse Dec 1999 A
6009415 Shurling et al. Dec 1999 A
6009417 Brookner et al. Dec 1999 A
6010156 Block Jan 2000 A
6012890 Celorio Garrido Jan 2000 A
6026385 Harvey et al. Feb 2000 A
6029137 Cordery et al. Feb 2000 A
6030000 Diamond Feb 2000 A
6031020 Mehta et al. Feb 2000 A
6041411 Wyatt Mar 2000 A
6049671 Slivka et al. Apr 2000 A
6058384 Pierce et al. May 2000 A
6061671 Baker et al. May 2000 A
6064991 Reisinger et al. May 2000 A
6064993 Ryan, Jr. May 2000 A
6065117 White May 2000 A
6070150 Remington et al. May 2000 A
6081810 Rosenzweig et al. Jun 2000 A
6098058 Gravell et al. Aug 2000 A
6105063 Hayes, Jr. Aug 2000 A
6108643 Sansone Aug 2000 A
6134582 Kennedy Oct 2000 A
6151591 Pierce et al. Nov 2000 A
6155604 Greene et al. Dec 2000 A
6161139 Win et al. Dec 2000 A
6164528 Hills et al. Dec 2000 A
6192165 Irons Feb 2001 B1
6208980 Kara Mar 2001 B1
6209920 Fabel Apr 2001 B1
6223166 Kay Apr 2001 B1
6226752 Gupta et al. May 2001 B1
6233565 Lewis et al. May 2001 B1
6233568 Kara May 2001 B1
6244763 Miller Jun 2001 B1
6249777 Kara et al. Jun 2001 B1
6275824 O'Flaherty et al. Aug 2001 B1
6286098 Wenig et al. Sep 2001 B1
6296404 Pierce et al. Oct 2001 B1
6311214 Rhoads Oct 2001 B1
6324523 Killeen, Jr. et al. Nov 2001 B1
6334108 Deaton et al. Dec 2001 B1
6338049 Walker et al. Jan 2002 B1
6341274 Leon Jan 2002 B1
6353926 Parthesarathy et al. Mar 2002 B1
6367013 Bisbee et al. Apr 2002 B1
6381589 Leon Apr 2002 B1
6385504 Pintsov et al. May 2002 B1
6385654 Tanaka May 2002 B1
6385731 Ananda May 2002 B2
6405929 Ehrhart et al. Jun 2002 B1
6408286 Heiden Jun 2002 B1
6415983 Ulvr et al. Jul 2002 B1
6424954 Leon Jul 2002 B1
6427021 Fischer et al. Jul 2002 B1
6461063 Miller et al. Oct 2002 B1
6466921 Cordery et al. Oct 2002 B1
6473500 Risafi et al. Oct 2002 B1
6473743 Ryan, Jr. Oct 2002 B1
6505179 Kara Jan 2003 B1
6505980 Allday Jan 2003 B1
6525835 Gulati Feb 2003 B1
6526393 Fredman Feb 2003 B1
6546377 Gravell et al. Apr 2003 B1
6555579 Kritchevsky Apr 2003 B2
6567794 Cordery et al. May 2003 B1
6587880 Saigo et al. Jul 2003 B1
6592027 Kovlakas Jul 2003 B2
6594374 Beckstrom et al. Jul 2003 B1
6609117 Sutherland et al. Aug 2003 B2
6615194 Deutsch et al. Sep 2003 B1
6636983 Levi Oct 2003 B1
6674542 Shimamura Jan 2004 B1
6687684 Whitehouse et al. Feb 2004 B1
6701304 Leon Mar 2004 B2
6722563 Johnson et al. Apr 2004 B1
6735575 Kara May 2004 B1
6823319 Lynch et al. Nov 2004 B1
6842742 Brookner Jan 2005 B1
6868406 Ogg et al. Mar 2005 B1
6883140 Acker et al. Apr 2005 B1
6939063 Bussell Sep 2005 B2
6999938 Libman Feb 2006 B1
7085725 Leon Aug 2006 B1
7124101 Mikurak Oct 2006 B1
7149726 Lingle et al. Dec 2006 B1
7162460 Cleckler et al. Jan 2007 B2
7191158 Ogg Mar 2007 B2
7194957 Leon Mar 2007 B1
7243842 Leon et al. Jul 2007 B1
7260194 Meyers et al. Aug 2007 B1
7272728 Pierson Sep 2007 B2
7577618 Raju et al. Aug 2009 B2
7933845 Leon et al. Apr 2011 B1
8126821 Uslontsev et al. Feb 2012 B2
8360313 Leon et al. Jan 2013 B1
8546921 Ramadoss et al. Oct 2013 B2
20010034716 Goodwin Oct 2001 A1
20010037320 Allport et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010042052 Leon Nov 2001 A1
20010055388 Kaliski Dec 2001 A1
20020023057 Goodwin et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020033598 Beasley Mar 2002 A1
20020040353 Brown et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020046193 Bator et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020046195 Martin et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020055900 Kansal May 2002 A1
20020062283 Takahashi May 2002 A1
20020073039 Ogg et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020083007 Sutherland et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020083020 Leon Jun 2002 A1
20020095383 Mengin et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020107754 Stone Aug 2002 A1
20020166882 Roberts et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020178354 Ogg et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020194119 Wright et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030037008 Raju Feb 2003 A1
20030050891 Cohen Mar 2003 A1
20030055779 Wolf Mar 2003 A1
20030055780 Hansen et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030078893 Shah et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030101143 Montgomery et al. May 2003 A1
20030101148 Montgomery et al. May 2003 A1
20030130914 Cinotti et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030130954 Carr et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030140017 Patton et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030217017 Willoughby et al. Nov 2003 A1
20040074977 Rainey et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040088271 Cleckler May 2004 A1
20040133509 McCoy et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040215523 Wulff et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040220869 Perera Nov 2004 A1
20040225536 Schoen et al. Nov 2004 A1
20050065897 Ryan et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050075997 Rainey et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050080693 Foss et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050080747 Anderson et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050108165 Jones et al. May 2005 A1
20050114712 Devine et al. May 2005 A1
20050125367 Ogg et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050144145 Ogg et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050165674 Edwards et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050171822 Cagan Aug 2005 A1
20050187886 Stickler et al. Aug 2005 A9
20050195214 Reid et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050234835 Stonoha et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050256811 Pagel et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050278204 Weinberg et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050278235 Dietrich Dec 2005 A1
20050278266 Ogg et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060015457 Hau et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060032903 Wu Feb 2006 A1
20060045244 New Mar 2006 A1
20060050136 MacKay et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060053054 Baggett et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060136237 Spiegel et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060136325 Barry et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060143136 Low et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060173772 Hayes et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060173777 Torres et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060178946 Agarwal Aug 2006 A1
20060190353 Williams Aug 2006 A1
20060212387 Jensen Sep 2006 A1
20060218091 Choy Sep 2006 A1
20060233334 Bingaman et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060235721 Kavanagh et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060242059 Hansen Oct 2006 A1
20060248007 Hofer et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060248016 Ginter et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060249570 Seifert et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060253326 Patterson et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060253341 Goldstein et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060265325 Fajardo Nov 2006 A1
20060271443 Cahalane et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060273155 Thackston Dec 2006 A1
20060282327 Neal et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060282359 Nobili et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060282372 Endres et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060293908 Becker et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070011100 Libin et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070100672 McBrida et al. May 2007 A1
20070255664 Blumberg et al. Nov 2007 A1
20080025490 Meyers et al. Jan 2008 A1
20090219573 Ogg et al. Sep 2009 A1
20120200893 Ogg et al. Aug 2012 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (23)
Number Date Country
0360225 Mar 1990 EP
0576113 Dec 1993 EP
0604146 Jun 1994 EP
0604148 Jun 1994 EP
0647925 Apr 1995 EP
0840258 May 1998 EP
0854448 Jul 1998 EP
0892367 Jan 1999 EP
0927958 Jul 1999 EP
0927963 Jul 1999 EP
0948158 Oct 1999 EP
2235413 Mar 1991 GB
2318486 Apr 1998 GB
408230257 Sep 1996 JP
WO-9427258 Nov 1994 WO
WO-9813790 Apr 1998 WO
WO-9857302 Dec 1998 WO
WO-9857460 Dec 1998 WO
WO-9918514 Apr 1999 WO
WO-0019382 Apr 2000 WO
WO-0049580 Aug 2000 WO
WO-0070503 Nov 2000 WO
WO-2015000227 Jan 2015 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (44)
Entry
U.S. Appl. No. 11/616,529, Akbar Thobhani.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/239,424, Anthony Phoenix.
STIC Search Report EIC 3600, Various web site pages from the site www.stamps.com collected together in the file “stamps.com—waybl” from U.S. Appl. No. 11/616,513, search dated Sep. 24, 2009.
U.S. approves stamp software; Catherine Porter, Toronto Star, Toronto, Ont.: Jul. 18, 2002, p. D.05.
Bill would allow some scalping of tickets, Marsha Shuler; Advocate, Baton Rouge, La: May 3, 2006, p. 17.
Scanning, I D & bar coding, Canadian Industrial Equipment News. Oct. 1999, vol. 60; Iss. 10, p. 21.
Stamp paper scam, Mahesh Chandra, Business line, Chennai: Nov. 12, 2003, p. 1.
Various web site pages from the site www.stamps.com collected together in the file “stamps.com—wayback”.
“Multicolor Easily Printable Bar Code”, IBM Tech. Disci. Bull., vol. 14, No. 3, p. 783, Aug. 1971, 3 pages.
Fickel, Louise, “Know Your Customer,” Leaders for the Next Millennium, CIO Magazine, Aug. 15, 1999, 10 pages.
Sagner, James S., “Protecting Organizations from Electronic-Transaction Fraud,” Healthcare Financial Management, Feb. 1995, 2 pages.
United States Postal Service, “Information Based Indicia Program Postal Security Device Specification,” Jun. 13, 1996, 41 pages.
International Search Report, International Application No. PCT/US00/28539, dated Feb. 23, 2001, 8 pages.
Pastor, Jose; “Cryptopost™—A Cryptographic Application to Mail Processing,” Journal of Cryptologyi vol. 3; No. 2; 1991, 11 pages.
Ratcliffe, Mitch, “Ever feel you're being watched? You will.”; Digital Media; May 16, 1994; v 3, n12, 3 pages.
Tygar, J.D.'et al., “Cryptography: It's Not Just for Electronic Mail Anymore,” School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburg, PA, Mar. 1, 1993, 23 pages.
Tygar, J.D., et al., “Dyad: A System for Using Physically Secure Coprocessors,” School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburg, PA, May 4, 1991, 41 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/585,025, to Lingle, filed Jun. 1, 2000, “Online Value Bearing Item Printing,” 125 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/688,451, to Ogg et al., filed Oct. 16, 2000, “Auditing Method and System for an On-Line Value-Bearing Item Printing System,” 105 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/688,452, to Ogg et al., filed Oct. 16, 2000, “Role Assignments in a Cryptographic Module for Secure Processing of Value-Bearing Items,” 105 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/688,456, to Ogg et al., filed Oct. 16, 2000, “Cryptographic Module for Secure Processing of Value-Bearing Items,” 108 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/690,083, to Ogg et al., filed Oct. 16, 2000, “Cryptographic Module for Secure Processing of Value-Bearing Items,” 109 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/690,243, to Engelberg et al., filed Oct. 17, 2000, “Method and Apparatus for On-LineValue-Bearing Item System,” 66 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/690,798, to Ogg, filed Oct. 17, 2000, “Secure and Recoverable Database for On-Line Value-Bearing Item System,” 71 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/692,746, to Bussell, filed Oct. 18, 2000, “Method and Apparatus for Digitally Sjgning an Advertisement Area Next to a Value-Bearing Item,” 61 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/692,747, to Ogg et al., filed Oct. 18, 2000, “Machine Dependent Login for On-line Value-Bearing Item System,” 62 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/692,829, to Lingle et al., filed Oct. 18, 2000, “Postal System Intranet and Commerce Processing for On-Line Value-Bearing System,” 179 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/788,069, to Weisberg et al., filed Feb. 16, 2001, “On-Line Value-Bearing Indicium Printing Using DSA,” 43 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/083,236, to Ogg et al., filed Feb. 26, 2002, “Secured Centralized Public Key Infrastructure,” 101 pages.
The United States Postal Service (USPS); Information-Based Indicia Program (IBIP): Performance Criteria for Information-Based Indicia and Security Architecture for Closed IBI Postage Metering Systems (PCIBI-C); Jan. 12, 1999; 49 pages.
The United States Postal Service (USPS); Information-Based Indicia Program (IBIP); Performance Criteria for Information-Based Indicia and Security Architecture for Open IBI Postage Evidencing Systems (PCIBI-O); Jun. 25, 1999; 76 pages.
The United States Postal Service (USPS) Engineering Center, Information-Based Indicia Program (IBIP) Indicium Specification, Jun. 13, 1996, 22 pages.
Office Action dated Apr. 16, 2007 for U.S. Appl. No. 10/731,992 to Ogg, et al, entitled “Computer Postage and Mail Tracking Labels,” 17 pages.
Office Action dated Nov. 1, 2007 for U.S. Appl. No. 10/731,992, to Ogg, et al., entitled “Computer Postage and Mail Tracking Labels,” 20 pages.
Office Action dated May 28, 2008 for U.S. Appl. No. 10/731,992, to Ogg, et al., entitled “Computer Postage and Mail Tracking Labels,” 16 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 5, 2006 for U.S. Appl. No. 10/688,548, to Cleckler et al., entitled “Media Type Identification,” 6 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Jan. 5, 2007 for U.S. Appl. No. 10/994,768, to Leon et al., entitled “Computer-Based Value-Bearing Item Customization Security,” 7 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Jul. 15, 2008 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/635,871, to McBride et al., entitled “Formatting Value-Bearing Item Indicia,” 7 pages.
Office Action dated Dec. 14, 2004 for U.S. Appl. No. 09/975,532, to Ogg, et al., entitled “System and Method for Providing Computer-Based Postage Stamps,” 15 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated May 16, 2005 for U.S. Appl. No. 09/975,532, to Ogg, et al., entitled “System and Method for Providing Computer-Based Postage Stamps,” 9 pages.
Notice of Withdrawal from Issue dated Nov. 30, 2005 for U.S. Appl. No. 09/975,532, to Ogg, et al., entitled “System and Method for Providing Computer-Based Postage Stamps,” 1 page.
Office Action dated Apr. 12, 2006 for U.S. Appl. No. 09/975,532, to Ogg, et al., entitled “System and Method for Providing Computer-Based Postage Stamps,” 11 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 6, 2006 for U.S. Appl. No. 09/975,532, to Ogg, et al., entitled “System and Method for Providing Computer-Based Postage Stamps,” 8 pages.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/690,066, to Ogg et al., filed Oct. 16, 2000, “Cryptographic Module for Secure Processing of Value-Bearing Items,” 121 pages.