Abstract:
A system and method for quantifying and communicating a quality of a subject entity between unrelated entities includes the steps of developing a plurality of factors of interest to the requesting entity, each of the factors having a plurality of attributes and each of the attributes having associated therewith a value, providing the factors, attributes and values to an entity asserting the trustworthiness, applying the factors and attributes to the individual such that a selected one of the associated values is assigned to each of the factors, compiling the values to develop a trust assertion value and communicating the trust assertion value to an entity requesting information regarding trustworthiness. The system of the invention may employ a computer network so that such information is transmitted over public networks such as the Internet. In the case where the subject entity is an individual, an advantage of the system and method of the present invention is that personal information derived from a relationship between an individual and the asserting entity may be transmitted to an unrelated requesting entity without violating privacy laws.

Description:
BACKGROUND  
       [0001]     The present invention relates to systems and methods for communicating information concerning a subject entity between an asserting entity and a requesting entity and, more particularly, to systems and methods for communicating information regarding the trustworthiness or reliability of a subject entity.  
         [0002]     It is often necessary in the services industry, and in particular the financial services industry, to establish a relationship between the provider of a service and a potential customer who is an individual. As a result of the widespread use of communication networks such as the Internet, and the mobility of individuals, service providers often must establish a financial relationship with an individual for whom no personal relationship between the service provider and individual previously existed. In such instances, it is necessary for the service provider to (i) authenticate the identity of the individual and (ii) determine the level of trustworthiness of the individual, especially with respect to that individual&#39;s likelihood of fulfilling financial obligations owed to the service provider. With respect to the former activity, there exist many ways to authenticate an individual, such as by requiring that individual to provide identifying information in the form of a Social Security number, a driver&#39;s license number and so called “non-wallet” information, such as personal bank account information.  
         [0003]     With respect to the latter activity, service providers, including financial institutions, traditionally have relied upon credit bureau reports as a baseline. When possible, that baseline would be augmented with other factors derived from a personal relationship between the service provider and the individual customer. In the case where the service provider is a bank, such additional information might be derived by the relationship between the individual and a bank branch manager of the financial institution.  
         [0004]     Accordingly, in order for a service provider to assess the trustworthiness and creditworthiness of an individual, it is desirable for the service provider to avail itself of such personal relationship information. However, currently, such relationship information is not available from third party sources other than the service provider itself as a result of restrictions on communication of nonpublic, personal information about an individual, such as those restrictions imposed by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Accordingly, there is a need for a system and method for quantifying and communicating trustworthiness of an individual between entities and yet maintain the confidentiality of specific personal relationship information required by law.  
         [0005]     There is also a need for a standardized way to evaluate or quantify a level or degree of a quality, such as trust or reliability, of a subject entity.  
       SUMMARY  
       [0006]     The present invention is a system and method for quantifying and communicating a quality of a subject entity from an asserting entity to a requesting entity without disclosing specific information pertaining to the quality of the subject entity. In a preferred embodiment of the invention, the quality that is quantified is the trustworthiness of an individual. With the method and system of the invention, such a quality is quantified and a value or score representing the level of the quality (i.e., the level of trustworthiness of the subject entity or individual) is communicated between entities without the transmission of nonpublic, personal information that might violate privacy laws and regulations.  
         [0007]     The method of the invention includes the steps of developing a plurality of factors of interest to the requesting entity, each of the factors having a plurality of attributes and each of the attributes having associated therewith a different value; communicating the factors, attributes and values to the asserting entity; the asserting entity applying the factors and attributes to the subject entity such that a selected one of the associated values is assigned to each of the factors; the asserting entity then compiling the values to develop a trust assertion value and finally, the asserting entity communicating the trust assertion value to the requesting entity.  
         [0008]     In this manner, the requesting entity is able to obtain a value or score that gives an indication of a level or degree of a quality. Thus, in the preferred embodiment, a single value or score that indicates a level or degree of trustworthiness of an individual is transmitted to the requesting party and may be based upon personal and confidential, often relationship-derived, information from an asserting party. Consequently, data representative of personal and confidential information, often relationship-based, may be communicated from a party in possession of the relationship information to an unrelated party who requires such data to evaluate the data without violating laws governing the communication of confidential information, since the data transmitted cannot be “reverse engineered” to determine any specific item of confidential information.  
         [0009]     In a preferred embodiment of the invention, the requesting and asserting entities are financial institutions and the requesting entity desires to evaluate the trustworthiness of an individual who has applied for credit but is unknown to the requesting entity. The asserting entity, on the other hand, has a relationship with that individual. Factors of interest in evaluating trustworthiness may include length of relationship, maximum dollar nonrepudiated transaction older than 30 days, number of transactions between the individual and the asserting entity, number of transactions in the immediately preceding three months between the individual and the asserting entity and the level of authentication used for the initial relationship between the individual and the asserting entity. Each of the factors would have associated with it an attribute and a value associated with that attribute. For example, the “length of relationship” factor might have attributes such as: “no relationship” (with a corresponding value of 0), “less than one month” (with a corresponding value of 1), “one to three months” (with a corresponding value of 2), “three to six months” (with a corresponding value of 3), “six months to two years” (with a corresponding value of 4) and “greater than two years” (with a corresponding value of 5).  
         [0010]     For the “number of transactions” factor, associated attributes and values may be the following: “no transactions” (assigned a value of 0), “fewer than 10 transactions” (assigned a value of 1), “eleven to fifty transactions” (assigned a value of 2) and “more than fifty transactions” (with a value of 3).  
         [0011]     Accordingly, a requesting entity, such as a financial institution, may request a trust assertion value from an asserting entity for a particular individual based upon the aforementioned length-of-relationship factor and number-of-transactions factor. The asserting entity would then examine its personal and confidential relationship with that individual and determine the appropriate attributes for the two factors. For example, if the length of relationship between the asserting entity and individual were three to six months, that factor would be assigned a value of 3 (the value of the associated attribute), and if the number of transactions between the individual and the asserting entity were between eleven and fifty, the value of 2 would be assigned to that factor, resulting in a total score of 5. The asserting entity would then communicate the trust assertion value of 5 (without the underlying bases for its calculation) to the requesting entity. The requesting entity would have established its own criteria for a satisfactory or acceptable trust assertion value. In this example, if the threshold acceptable value were to be set by the requesting entity at 4, the individual would meet the required level of trustworthiness with a trust assertion value of 5.  
         [0012]     It is within the scope of the invention to provide a number of factors and a concomitant adjustment in the total trust assertion value. It is also within the scope of the invention to provide values other than numeric values associated with each attribute. For example, values for each attribute could be a letter, such as A, B, C etc. so that the trust assertion value from the preceding analysis might be communicated as “AC.” The requesting institution would evaluate the “AC” rating against its own predetermined threshold of trustworthiness to arrive at a decision. Other values can be assigned as well to the attributes, provided that it would not be possible for the requesting entity to determine an individual score or value for a given attribute, for to do so might violate privacy laws.  
         [0013]     The system of the present invention may consist of any standard arrangement of personal computers or mainframe computers between the requesting and asserting entities. Furthermore, the information sent from the requesting entity to the asserting entity and from the asserting entity to the requesting entity may be transmitted by voice, by mail, by private computer network between computer systems or by a public network such as the Internet.  
         [0014]     The method and system of the present invention may be applied to communicate a quantified level of reliability between computers, and that reliability may relate to reliability of output of software running on the computer representing the asserting entity. Of course, issues of privacy may not be relevant in such an application, but the benefit of the invention is that it provides a methodology for providing a quantification of a quality of a subject entity, such as a software product.  
         [0015]     Accordingly, it is an object of the present invention to provide a system and method for quantifying and communicating a value representative of a quality of a subject entity between unrelated entities; a system and method that communicates data representative of confidential information yet at the same time does not violate privacy laws; a system and method that may be adapted to communicate a value indicative of a level of trustworthiness of an individual that is flexible and can be modified to accommodate a number of factors, including factors relating to a personal relationship between an individual and an entity; and a method and system for communicating trustworthiness, reliability and other qualities that is sufficiently flexible to be used by a variety of institutions in addition to financial institutions.  
         [0016]     Other objects and advantages of the present invention will be apparent from the following description, the accompanying drawings and the appended claims. 
     
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS  
       [0017]      FIG. 1  is a schematic of the architecture of a computer system of the present invention;  
         [0018]      FIG. 2  is a flow chart showing the steps of the method of the present invention; and  
         [0019]      FIG. 3  is a table showing typical factors, attributes and values of a preferred embodiment of the present invention. 
     
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION  
       [0020]     As shown in  FIG. 1 , a system used for implementing the present invention, generally designated  10 , establishes communication between a computer system, generally designated  12 , of an entity requesting information  13  and a computer system, generally designated  14 , of an entity asserting the information  15 . The information to be exchanged is a value or metric that represents a level of a quality of a subject entity.  
         [0021]     In a preferred embodiment, the requesting entity  13  may be a first financial institution, the quality may be trustworthiness and the subject entity may be an individual, previously known to the asserting entity  15 , who desires to receive financial services from the requesting entity, and the asserting entity  15  may be a second financial institution. Alternatively, the first and second financial institutions may be different lines of business of the same financial institution. In another preferred embodiment, the requesting and asserting entities  13 ,  15 , respectively, may be first and second computer systems, respectively, and the quality may be the reliability of software used by the second computer system. In a third preferred embodiment, the requesting and asserting entities  13 ,  15 , respectively, may be first and second employers, the subject entity may be an employee who had once been employed by the asserting entity and is now being considered for employment by the requesting entity, and the quality may be reliability, trustworthiness, or social skills.  
         [0022]     With any of the embodiments, the requesting and asserting entity systems  12 ,  14  preferably communicate over a network, such as the public network or Internet  16 . However, it is within the scope of the invention to utilize a proprietary network, telephone system or other means of transmitting information. The requesting entity system  12  may include a web server  18  that communicates with an application server  20  that, in turn, may communicate with a database  22  for storing information. The application server  20  also may communicate with a terminal or personal computer  24  having a monitor  26  for displaying information received from the asserting entity system  14  and an associated printer  28 . The web server  18 , application server  20 , database  22 , personal computer  24  and printer  28  all may be interconnected by a network such as a local area network (LAN) or wide area network (WAN). A firewall  30  is placed between the web server  18  and the Internet  16 . Additional firewalls (not shown) may also be employed in the system  12 .  
         [0023]     Similarly, the asserting entity system  14  includes a firewall  32 , web server  34 , application server  36  and database  38 . The asserting entity system  14  may also include a personal computer or terminal  40  having a display  42 . The database  38  may contain personal, nonpublic information pertaining to a relationship between the individual who is the subject of the inquiry by the requesting entity and the asserting entity.  
         [0024]     As shown in  FIG. 2 , the system and method of the present invention includes a multi-step process. The preferred embodiment of the invention is described herein with respect to information in the nature of a quality of a type that may be required by a requesting entity  13  ( FIG. 1 ) in the form of a financial institution and such information would be provided by an asserting entity  15  in the form of a financial institution. Such information may be nonpublic and of a personal, relationship-derived nature that may be based upon a relationship between an individual, who may be applying for financial services from the requesting entity  13 , and the asserting entity  15 . In this instance, in order to communicate information regarding a quality such as the trustworthiness of the individual based upon such personal information, such personal information must first be quantified and a value derived that is at the same time indicative of a level of trustworthiness of the individual to whom it pertains and does not disclose any specific fact used to derive the quantitative score. Accordingly, as shown in block  44  of  FIG. 2 , a table of factors and attributes is first developed and distributed to the asserting entity and the requesting entity. An example of such a table is shown in  FIG. 3  as table  46 . Such a table  46  may be developed by the requesting entity  13 , the asserting entity  15  or a third party such as a trade association.  
         [0025]     Table  46  includes factors such as “length of relationship”  48 , “maximum dollar nonrepudiated transaction older than 30 days”  50 , “number of transactions”  52 , “number of transactions in the last three months prior to the request”  54  and “level of authentication used for initial relationship”  56 . It is within the scope of the invention to provide additional factors, or factors that relate to other aspects of a personal relationship between the individual in question and the asserting entity  15 . Each of the factors  48 - 56  has associated with it a value representing whether that factor is required or optional. For example, the “length of relationship” factor  48  is not considered optional in block  58 , “maximum dollar nonrepudiated transaction older than 30 days” factor  50  is considered optional in block  60 , “number of transactions”  52  is considered optional as shown in block  62 , “number of transactions in last three months” is considered optional as shown in block  64 , and “level of authentication used for initial relationship”  56  is listed as not optional in block  66 .  
         [0026]     Each of the factors  48 - 56  has associated with it a number of attributes and each of the attributes has a different assigned value. As shown in  FIG. 3  in Table  46 , “length of relationship” factor  48  has associated with it attribute  68  “no relationship exists” with an assigned value  70  of 0, attribute  72  of “less than one month” with an associated value  74  of  1 , attribute  76  of “one to three months” with an associated value  78  of 2, attribute  80  of “three to six months” with an associated value  82  of 3, attribute  82  of “six months to two years” with an associated value  84  of 4 and attribute  86  of “greater than two years” with an associated value  88  of 5.  
         [0027]     Factor “maximum dollar nonrepudiated transaction older than 30 days”  50  has associated with it “no transactions have occurred” attribute  90  with an associated value  92  of 0, attribute  94  of “less than $10” with an associated value  96  of 1, attribute  98  of “$11-$100” with an associated value  100  of 2, attribute  102  of “$101-$1,000” and an associated value  104  of 3, attribute  106  of “$1,001-$10,000” with an associated value  108  of 4 and attribute  110  of “greater than $10,000” with an associated value  112  of 5.  
         [0028]     “Number of transactions” factor  52  has associated with it an attribute  114  of “no transactions” with an associated value  116  of 0, attribute  118  of “fewer than 10” with an associated value  120  of 1, attribute  122  of “11-50” with an associated value  124  of 2 and attribute  126  of “more than 50” with an associated value  128  of 3. “Number of transactions in the last three months” factor  54  has associated with it attribute  130  of “no transactions” and an associated value  132  of 0, attribute  134  of “fewer than 10” with an associated value  136  of 1, attribute “138 of 11-20” with an associated value  140  of 2 and attribute  142  of “more than 20” with an associated value  144  of 3.  
         [0029]     Similarly, “level of authentication used for initial relationship” factor  56  has associated with it attribute  146  of “government-issued credentials provided face-to-face” with a value  148  of 1 and attribute  150  of “government-issued credentials validated electronically” with a value  152  of 2. Table  46  preferably is stored in database  38  and is populated with customer information that may be entered manually at personal computer  40  by a bank employee or such information may be taken from customer database files in database  38  (see  FIG. 1 ).  
         [0030]     Referring to  FIG. 2 , the table of factors  46  discussed in block  44  and shown in  FIG. 3  may be created by a trade association, the asserting entity  15  (see  FIG. 1 ) or by the requesting entity  13  and transmitted to the asserting entity. The process of the present invention begins when an individual applies for credit from, and provides authentication information to, the requesting entity  13 , as indicated in block  154 . As indicated in block  156 , once the requesting entity  13  has satisfied itself that the individual is who he purports himself to be, by reviewing the authentication information, the requesting entity selects factors from the table  46  of  FIG. 3  from which a trust assertion score is to be determined for that individual, and thereafter transmits the individual&#39;s name and selected factors to the asserting entity  15 , which in the preferred embodiment may be the financial institution with whom the individual has conducted his routine banking. Such information is transmitted from the application server  20  (see  FIG. 1 ) through web server  18 , fire wall  30 , Internet  36 , asserting entity fire wall  32 , asserting entity web server  34  and application server  36 .  
         [0031]     As indicated in block  158  of  FIG. 2 , the asserting entity determines the attributes for each selected factor from the table  46  of  FIG. 3 . For example, if the requested factors were “length of relationship”  48 , “maximum dollar nonrepudiated transaction older than 30 days”  50  and “level of authentication used for initial relationship”  56 , the asserting entity would review the associated attributes  68 ,  72 ,  76 ,  80 ,  82 ,  86 ,  90 ,  94 ,  98 , 102 ,  106 ,  110 ,  146  and  150 . Continuing with the example, if the attribute associated with the “length of relationship factor”  48  were “six months to two years”  82 , the associated value  84  of 4 would be recorded. With respect to the “maximum dollar nonrepudiated transaction older than 30 days” factor  50 , if appropriate attribute were attribute  106 , “$1,001-$10,000,” the value  108  of “4” would be noted. And finally, with the “level of authentication used for initial relationship” factor  56 , if the “government-issued credentials provided face-to-face” attribute  146  were appropriate, the value  148  of “1” would be noted, for a total score or trust assertion value of 9. This aspect of the overall process is indicated in block  160  of  FIG. 2 .  
         [0032]     As shown in block  162 , in the next step of the process the asserting entity  15  transmits the trust assertion value ( 9 ) to the requesting entity. This is accomplished by transmitting the value from the application server  36  of the asserting entity system  14  through the web server  34 , fire wall  32 , Internet  16 , requesting entity fire wall  30 , web server  18  and application server  20  of the requesting entity system  12 . As shown in block  164  of  FIG. 2 , in the final step of the process, the requesting entity  13  applies the assertion value ( 9 ) to the credit application of the individual to determine the trustworthiness and reliability of the individual. In a preferred embodiment, the requesting entity would have a pre-established minimum trust assertion value (for example, 6) above which the trustworthiness of the individual, as indicated by the quantitative factor transmitted from the asserting entity, would indicate a sufficient level of trustworthiness.  
         [0033]     It should be noted in this example that, so long as a single set of factors (i.e., two or more factors) is requested of an individual by the requesting entity  13 , resulting in a single trust assertion value returned by the asserting entity  15 , it would not be possible for the requesting entity to derive a value for any one factor. Thus, the method of the present invention will not violate applicable privacy laws.  
         [0034]     Accordingly, the method and system of the present invention provides a simple mechanism for communicating the trustworthiness of an individual based upon confidential, relationship-related information between two unrelated entities without violating privacy laws. While the form of system and methods herein described constitute preferred embodiments of the invention, it is to be understood that other systems and methods may be employed without departing from the scope of the invention.