Loading...

Rules vs. Risk

August 23, 2010 by Keir Breitenfeld

The overarching ‘business driver’ in adopting a risk-based authentication strategy, particularly one that is founded in analytics and proven scores, is the predictive ‘lift’ associated with using scoring in place of a more binary rule set. While basic identity element verification checks, such as name, address, Social Security number, date-of-birth, and phone number are important identity proofing treatments, when viewed in isolation, they are not nearly as effective in predicting actual fraud risk. In other words, the presence of positive verification across multiple identity elements does not, alone, provide sufficient predictive value in determining fraud risk. Positive verification of identity elements may be achieved in customer access requests that are, in fact, fraudulent. Conversely, negative identity element verification results may be associated with both ‘true’ or ‘good’ customers as well as fraudulent ones. In other words, these false positive and false negative conditions lead to a lack of predictive value and confidence as well as inefficient and unnecessary referral and out-sort volumes.

The most predictive authentication and fraud models are those that incorporate multiple data assets spanning traditionally used customer information categories such as public records and demographic data, but also utilize, when possible, credit history attributes, and historic application and inquiry records.

A risk-based fraud detection system allows institutions to make customer relationship and transactional decisions based not on a handful of rules or conditions in isolation, but on a holistic view of a customer’s identity and predicted likelihood of associated identity theft, application fraud, or other fraud risk. To implement efficient and appropriate risk-based authentication procedures, the incorporation of comprehensive and broadly categorized data assets must be combined with targeted analytics and consistent decisioning policies to achieve a measurably effective balance between fraud detection and positive identity proofing results. The inherent value of a risk-based approach to authentication lies in the ability to strike such a balance not only in a current environment, but as that environment shifts as do its underlying forces.

Related Posts

Anti-money laundering and fraud prevention have historically been separated, but here's why that might not be a good idea.

March 27, 2024 by Julie Lee

Know Your Customer (KYC) procedures are a requirement for banks and other financial institutions to collect and verify the...

March 21, 2024 by Stefani Wendel

Optimization modeling provides actionable insights that drive decisioning, allowing businesses to achieve their marketing and growth goals.

March 12, 2024 by Julie Lee