Patent No. US11349987 (titled "Call Authentication Service Systems And Methods") was filed by Silicon Valley Bank on Jun 21, 2019.
’987 is related to the field of call authentication, specifically addressing the problem of spoofed or malicious calls targeting enterprise call centers. Traditional authentication methods, such as Knowledge-Based Authentication (KBA), are time-consuming, frustrating for customers, and ineffective against fraud. Newer approaches focus on authenticating the calling number or device, but existing solutions often lack flexibility and cost-effectiveness, especially in the face of increasingly sophisticated spoofing techniques.
The underlying idea behind ’987 is to leverage a hybrid architecture combining a customer-premise component with a cloud-based Call Authentication Service (CAS) . The premise component monitors call traffic and provides access to raw call signaling data, while the CAS uses a decision engine to orchestrate various authentication plugins. This allows for a more flexible and cost-effective authentication process, adapting to different risk levels and business needs.
The claims of ’987 focus on a method and system for authenticating calls. The system includes a premise component with a SIP/RTP probe and a mediation server, and a cloud-based CAS. The CAS uses a REST API, Quality Authentication Service (QAS) parameters, and a decision engine with authentication plugins. The premise component transmits call information to the CAS, which then determines the necessary plugins based on the QAS parameters, generates an authentication result, and transmits it back to the premise component for use by an IVR system or agent.
In practice, the premise component acts as a local filter and orchestrator, deciding when and how to query the cloud-based CAS. It can access customer-specific data and implement call control actions based on the authentication result. The CAS, residing in the cloud, can quickly integrate new authentication plugins and adapt to evolving threats. The decision engine within the CAS dynamically selects and executes the most appropriate plugins based on factors like cost, speed, and desired level of authentication.
This approach differentiates itself from prior solutions by offering a flexible and scalable architecture that can adapt to different authentication needs and risk levels. Unlike purely premise-based systems, the cloud-based CAS can be easily updated with new authentication techniques, such as STIR/SHAKEN, without requiring changes to the customer's premise equipment. By orchestrating various authentication plugins and leveraging a decision engine, the system aims to provide a more cost-effective and accurate authentication solution compared to traditional methods or standalone approaches.
In the late 2010s when ’987 was filed, call authentication was typically implemented using knowledge-based authentication (KBA) methods, where systems commonly relied on static information such as PIN numbers or security questions. At that time, hardware or software constraints made real-time analysis of call signaling data and integration of diverse authentication techniques non-trivial, and enterprises often lacked the infrastructure to rapidly deploy new authentication plugins or adapt to evolving spoofing techniques.
The examiner approved the application because the prior art did not teach or fairly suggest providing a Call Authentication Service (CAS) that includes a Representational State Transfer (REST) Application Programming Interface (API), a plurality of Quality Authentication Service (QAS) parameters, and a decision engine comprising a plurality of authentication plug-ins. The examiner stated that the prior art did not teach receiving a call from a calling device at the premise component, transmitting information about the call to the CAS over the REST API, submitting at least one query to the CAS by the premise component, determining which authentication plugins are necessary based on QAS parameters, generating an authentication result by the CAS, transmitting the result to the premise component, and transmitting the result to an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system or an agent. The dependent claims were allowable for the same reasons as the independent claims.
This patent contains 12 claims, with claims 1 and 7 being independent. Independent claim 1 focuses on a method for authenticating calls, while independent claim 7 focuses on a system for authenticating calls. The dependent claims generally elaborate on and add detail to the elements and steps described in the independent claims.
Definitions of key terms used in the patent claims.

The dossier documents provide a comprehensive record of the patent's prosecution history - including filings, correspondence, and decisions made by patent offices - and are crucial for understanding the patent's legal journey and any challenges it may have faced during examination.
Date
Description
Get instant alerts for new documents