





Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                        D. M'Raihi
Request for Comments: 5941                                      VeriSign
Category: Informational                                        S. Boeyen
ISSN: 2070-1721                                                  Entrust
                                                           M. Grandcolas
                                              Grandcolas Consulting, LLC
                                                                S. Bajaj
                                                                VeriSign
                                                             August 2010


                     Sharing Transaction Fraud Data

Abstract

   This document describes a document format for exchanging transaction
   fraud (Thraud) information.  It extends the Incident Handling Working
   Group (INCH WG) Incident Object Description Exchange Format (IODEF)
   incident reporting document format.

Status of This Memo

   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
   published for informational purposes.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
   approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
   Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5941.
















M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                     [Page 1]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.





































M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                     [Page 2]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ....................................................4
   2. Requirements Terminology ........................................5
   3. Anatomy of a Transaction Fraud ..................................6
   4. IODEF-Document Incident Class ...................................7
   5. Thraud Record Class Definitions .................................8
      5.1. FraudEventPaymentType Class ................................9
           5.1.1. PayeeName ..........................................10
           5.1.2. PostalAddress ......................................10
           5.1.3. PayeeAmount ........................................10
      5.2. FraudEventTransferType Class ..............................10
           5.2.1. BankID .............................................11
           5.2.2. AccountID ..........................................12
           5.2.3. AccountType ........................................13
           5.2.4. TransferAmount .....................................13
      5.3. FraudEventIdentityType Class ..............................13
           5.3.1. IdentityComponent ..................................13
      5.4. FraudEventOtherType Class .................................14
           5.4.1. OtherEventType .....................................15
           5.4.2. OtherEventDescription ..............................15
      5.5. AmountType Class ..........................................15
           5.5.1. Class Contents .....................................15
           5.5.2. Currency ...........................................15
      5.6. AccountTypeType Class .....................................16
   6. IODEF Profile for an Activity Thraud Report ....................16
      6.1. Mandatory Components ......................................16
      6.2. Recommended Components ....................................17
      6.3. Deprecated Components .....................................17
   7. IODEF Profile for a Signature Thraud Report ....................19
   8. IODEF Additional Attribute Values ..............................19
      8.1. Purpose Attribute .........................................19
   9. Security Considerations ........................................19
   10. IANA Considerations ...........................................21
      10.1. Media Sub-Type ...........................................21
      10.2. XML Namespace ............................................22
   11. Conclusion ....................................................22
   12. References ....................................................22
      12.1. Normative References .....................................22
      12.2. Informative References ...................................23
   Appendix A. Thraud Record XML Schema...............................24
   Appendix B. Example of a Thraud Report.............................26









M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                     [Page 3]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


1.  Introduction

   Financial organizations and merchants that offer online access to
   their services frequently encounter fraud perpetrated against their
   customers' accounts.  In their attempts to combat these frauds, the
   organizations and their law enforcement agencies could benefit
   greatly by sharing intelligence about fraud incidents and patterns
   with similar organizations and agencies.  This specification
   standardizes a document format by which they can share such
   information.  It is intended to facilitate multi-vendor
   interoperability between conformant components of an open fraud
   reporting framework.

   Information sharing can take place directly between financial
   organizations and merchants.  However, the power of shared
   intelligence is multiplied many times if the information is gathered
   from multiple sources by a shared network, consolidated, and
   redistributed to participants.

   In this arrangement, incident reports submitted to the network are
   called "inbound reports", and reports issued by the network are
   called "outbound reports".

   Inbound reports will be submitted using a push-style protocol (such
   as email or the Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP)).  Outbound
   reports will be distributed using either a push-style protocol or a
   request/response protocol (such as HTTP).

   Inbound reports identify the contributor of the report, as this
   information is essential in evaluating the quality of the information
   it contains and in contacting the source for the purpose of
   clarification.  However, outbound reports commonly do not identify
   the original sources, as those sources may not wish to be identified
   to other subscribers.  Such reports should, instead, identify the
   consolidator as the source.

   A report may describe a particular transaction that is known to be,
   or believed to be, fraudulent, or it may describe a pattern of
   behavior that is believed to be indicative of fraud.  The former type
   of report is called an "activity report" and the latter a "signature
   report".

   The schema defined herein extends the IODEF XML incident reporting
   schema [RFC5070].

   In Section 3, we introduce the actors in a typical transaction fraud.
   Fraud reporting by means of an IODEF-Document is described in
   Section 4.  We define the elements of a Thraud Report in Section 5.



M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                     [Page 4]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


   In Section 6, we describe the Activity Thraud Report profile of the
   IODEF specification.  In Section 7, the profile for a Signature
   Thraud Report is described.  In Section 8, we define new attribute
   values for the IODEF Incident class.  Security considerations are
   described in Section 9.  Section 10 contains IANA considerations
   regarding the registration of the associated media sub-type and XML
   namespace identifier.  The Appendices contain the complete XML schema
   and a sample Thraud Report.

   Data elements in this document are expressed in Unified Modeling
   Language (UML) syntax [UML].

   XML namespace prefixes are used throughout this document to stand for
   their respective XML namespaces, as follows.

      iodef:   urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-1.0
      thraud:  urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:thraud-1.0
      xs:      http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema
      xsi:     http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance

2.  Requirements Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].


























M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                     [Page 5]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


3.  Anatomy of a Transaction Fraud

   The actors in a typical transaction fraud are shown in Figure 1.

    +--------------------------------------+
    |             Fraudsters               |
    | (collect & verify victim credentials |
    |   via phishing, malware, etc.)       |
    +--------------------------------------+
         |
         |recruit
         |
         |   ----------------disburse profits-----------------
         |   |                                               |
         v   v                                               |
    +-----------+                   +--------------+     +-------+
    |           |                   |              |     | Fraud |
    |           |--Open Dest Acct-->|  Financial   |---->| Dest. |
    |           |                   | Organization |     |Account|
    |   Fraud   |                   +--------------+     +-------+
    | Executors |                          ^ funds
    |           |                          | transfer
    |           |                   +--------------+     +-------+
    |           |                   |   Victim's   |     |       |
    |           |---Init Transfer-->|  Financial   |<-o--|Victim |
    |           |                   | Organization |  |  |Account|
    +-----------+                   +--------------+  |  +-------+
                                                      v
                                                +-----------+
                                                |   Fraud   |
                                                | Detection |
                                                |  Sensors  |
                                                |(realtime/ |
                                                |  offline) |
                                                +-----------+

                   Figure 1.  Transaction Fraud Elements

   Transaction fraud activities normally involve the following actors:

   1.  Fraudsters: individuals or organizations that collect victims'
       login credentials using a variety of means, including phishing
       and malware, and verify them (usually by attempting to log in to
       the victim's account).  Then, the Fraudsters may either recruit
       Fraud Executors themselves or wholesale the victims' credentials
       to other Fraudsters, who will, in turn, recruit Fraud Executors.





M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                     [Page 6]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


   2.  Fraud Executors: individuals who attempt the fraudulent funds
       transfer or payment.  In the case of fraudulent funds transfers,
       an account at either the same financial organization as that of
       the victim or a different one is opened as the destination
       account for the fraudulent transfer.  Alternatively, a fraudulent
       payment is made using a check or electronic transfer.

   3.  Victims of both credential theft and transaction fraud.

   4.  Financial organizations that hold the victim's and the Fraud
       Executor's accounts.

   5.  Sensors at the financial organization that detect fraudulent
       transaction attempts, either in real-time or after the fact.

   The intention of Thraud reporting is to enable any organization that
   has detected fraud to share this information, either internally or
   with other potential victim organizations.  The receiving
   organization can use this information, for example, to institute
   manual review of transactions initiated from suspicious IP addresses.

4.  IODEF-Document Incident Class

   A Thraud Report SHALL be an instance of the IODEF-Document class, as
   defined in [RFC5070].  The report SHALL contain at least one Incident
   object, as defined in [RFC5070].  Each Incident object SHOULD contain
   information about a single fraud strategy.  One Incident object MAY
   contain information about multiple fraudulent transactions that are
   consistent with the same fraud strategy.  Each fraudulent transaction
   SHALL be described in a separate EventData object.  The data model
   for the Incident class is defined in [RFC5070] and is repeated here,
   as Figure 2, for the reader's convenience.



















M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                     [Page 7]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


     +-------------+
     | Incident    |
     +-------------+
     |ENUM         |<>----------[ IncidentID ]
     | purpose     |<>--{0..1}--[ AlternativeID ]
     |STRING       |<>--{0..1}--[ RelatedActivity ]
     | ext-purpose |<>--{0..1}--[ DetectTime ]
     |ENUM         |<>--{0..1}--[ StartTime ]
     | lang        |<>--{0..1}--[ EndTime ]
     |ENUM         |<>----------[ ReportTime ]
     | restriction |<>--{0..*}--[ Description ]
     |             |<>--{1..*}--[ Assessment ]
     |             |<>--{0..*}--[ Method ]
     |             |<>--{1..*}--[ Contact ]
     |             |<>--{1..*}--[ EventData ]<>--[ AdditionalData ]
     |             |<>--{0..1}--[ History ]
     |             |<>--{1..*}--[ AdditionalData ]
     +-------------+

                Figure 2.  Data Model of the Incident Class

   The AdditionalData abstract class is an extension point in the schema
   of the EventData class.  Implementers SHALL include exactly one of
   the following objects in AdditionalData: FraudEventPayment,
   FraudEventTransfer, FraudEventIdentity, or FraudEventOther.
   Collectively, these are known as Thraud Records.  The corresponding
   classes are defined by this specification in Section 5, below.

   The Thraud profile of the Incident class is defined in Sections 6 and
   7, below.

5.  Thraud Record Class Definitions

   Thraud Records are expressed in XML.  Therefore, the dtype attribute
   of the AdditionalData element SHALL be assigned the value "xml".

   A payment Thraud Record SHALL be structured as shown in Figure 3.
   See also Section 5.1.

          +------------------+
          | AdditionalData   |
          +------------------+
          | ENUM dtype (xml) |<>-----[ FraudEventPayment ]
          +------------------+

                Figure 3.  The FraudEventPayment Extension





M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                     [Page 8]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


   A funds-transfer Thraud Record SHALL be structured as shown in
   Figure 4.  See also Section 5.2.

          +------------------+
          | AdditionalData   |
          +------------------+
          | ENUM dtype (xml) |<>-----[ FraudEventTransfer ]
          +------------------+

                Figure 4.  The FraudEventTransfer Extension

   An identity Thraud Record SHALL be structured as shown in Figure 5.
   See also Section 5.3.

          +------------------+
          | AdditionalData   |
          +------------------+
          | ENUM dtype (xml) |<>-----[ FraudEventIdentity ]
          +------------------+

                Figure 5.  The FraudEventIdentity Extension

   Other Thraud Records SHALL be structured as shown in Figure 6.  See
   also Section 5.4.  The FraudEventOther class has an open definition
   to act as a placeholder for event types that emerge in the future.

          +------------------+
          | AdditionalData   |
          +------------------+
          | ENUM dtype (xml) |<>----[ FraudEventOther ]
          +------------------+

                 Figure 6.  The FraudEventOther Extension

5.1.  FraudEventPaymentType Class

   The FraudEventPaymentType class is used to report payee instructions
   for a fraudulent payment or fraudulent payment attempt.  Fraudsters
   sometimes use the same payee instructions (including the amount) for
   multiple fraudulent payment attempts.  By reporting the payment
   instructions used in the fraud, other organizations may be able to
   detect similar fraudulent payment attempts to the same payee.

   The structure of the FraudEventPaymentType class SHALL be as shown in
   Figure 7.






M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                     [Page 9]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


          +-------------+
          | FraudEvent- |
          | PaymentType |
          +-------------+
          |             |<>--{0..1}--[ PayeeName ]
          |             |<>--{0..1}--[ PostalAddress ]
          |             |<>--{0..1}--[ PayeeAmount ]
          +-------------+

                Figure 7.  The FraudEventPaymentType Class

   The contents of the FraudEventPaymentType class are described below.
   At least one component MUST be present.

5.1.1.  PayeeName

   Zero or one value of type iodef:MLString.  The name of the payee.

5.1.2.  PostalAddress

   Zero or one value of type iodef:MLString.  The format SHALL be as
   documented in Section 2.23 of [RFC4519], which defines a postal
   address as a free-form multi-line string separated by the "$"
   character.

5.1.3.  PayeeAmount

   Zero or one value of type thraud:AmountType.  See Section 5.5.

5.2.  FraudEventTransferType Class

   The FraudEventTransferType class is used to report the payee
   instructions for a fraudulent funds transfer or fraudulent funds
   transfer attempt.  Fraudsters sometimes use the same payee
   instructions (including the amount) for multiple fraudulent funds
   transfer attempts.  By reporting the funds transfer instructions used
   in the fraud, other organizations may be able to detect similar
   fraudulent funds transfer attempts to the same payee.

   The structure of the FraudEventTransferType class SHALL be as shown
   in Figure 8.










M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 10]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


          +--------------+
          | FraudEvent-  |
          | TransferType |
          +--------------+
          |              |<>--{0..1}--[ BankID ]
          |              |<>--{0..1}--[ AccountID ]
          |              |<>--{0..1}--[ AccountType ]
          |              |<>--{0..1}--[ TransferAmount ]
          +--------------+

                Figure 8.  The FraudEventTransferType Class

   The contents of the FraudEventTransferType class are described below.
   At least one component MUST be present.

5.2.1.  BankID

   Zero or one value of type thraud:BankIDType.  The structure of the
   BankIDType class SHALL be as shown in Figure 9.  The contents SHALL
   be of type xs:string.  The namespace attribute SHALL be of type
   xs:anyURI and SHALL identify the numbering system used to identify
   the bank or account.

          +-------------------+
          | BankIDType        |
          +-------------------+
          | STRING            |
          |                   |
          |  STRING namespace |
          +-------------------+

                      Figure 9.  The BankIDType Class

   A list of registered namespace identifiers is maintained at:

      http://www.openauthentication.org/thraud/resources/bank-id-
      namespace.htm

   The following namespace attribute values and their semantics are
   registered.

   One of the nine-digit Routing Numbers registered to the financial
   organization that holds the account, as administered by The American
   Bankers Association.

      http://www.openauthentication.org/thraud/resources/bank-id-
      namespace.htm#american_bankers_association




M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 11]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


   The three-digit Institution Number registered to the financial
   organization that holds the account, as administered by The Canadian
   Payments Association.

      http://www.openauthentication.org/thraud/resources/bank-id-
      namespace.htm#canadian_payments_association

   The corresponding AccountID represents the ISO 13616 International
   Bank Account Number [ISO13616-1:2007] in the "electronic form" (i.e.,
   containing no spaces) that is assigned to the account, as
   administered by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial
   Telecommunication (SWIFT).  The corresponding BankID xs:string value
   SHOULD be set to the null string.  Receiving organizations SHOULD
   ignore the corresponding BankID value.

      http://www.openauthentication.org/thraud/resources/bank-id-
      namespace.htm#iso13616_1_2007

   The eight-character Bank Identifier Code [ISO9362:1994] registered to
   the financial organization that holds the account, as administered by
   SWIFT.

      http://www.openauthentication.org/thraud/resources/bank-id-
      namespace.htm#iso9362_1994

   Other namespace values MUST be agreed upon among participants.
   Requests to register new values SHOULD be made at:

      http://www.openauthentication.org/thraud/form/bank-id-namespace

   Note that a single organization may be identified by more than one
   value for any one or more of these namespaces.  Therefore, receiving
   organizations SHOULD take this into account in their matching
   procedure.

5.2.2.  AccountID

   Zero or one value of type xs:string.  The destination primary account
   number, as administered by the financial organization identified in
   the BankID element.  In the case where the BankID namespace attribute
   value is "iso13616_1_2007", this element SHALL contain the
   International Bank Account Number in the "electronic form" (i.e.,
   containing no spaces) that is assigned to the account.  In all other
   cases, the element SHALL contain only the account number, as
   administered by the financial organization that holds the account.
   The reporting organization SHALL remove all prefixes that identify
   the country, bank, or branch.




M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 12]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


5.2.3.  AccountType

   Zero or one value of type thraud:AccountTypeType.  See Section 5.6.

5.2.4.  TransferAmount

   Zero or one value of type thraud:AmountType.  See Section 5.5.

5.3.  FraudEventIdentityType Class

   The FraudEventIdentityType class is used to report a fraudulent
   impersonation or fraudulent impersonation attempt.  By reporting the
   impersonation event, other potential victims may be able to detect
   similar fraudulent impersonation attempts.

   The structure of the FraudEventIdentityType class SHALL be as shown
   in Figure 10.

          +--------------+
          | FraudEvent-  |
          | IdentityType |
          +--------------+
          |              |<>--{1..*}--[ IdentityComponent ]
          +--------------+

               Figure 10.  The FraudEventIdentityType Class

   The contents of the FraudEventIdentityType class are described below.

5.3.1.  IdentityComponent

   One or more values of type iodef:ExtensionType.  This specification
   defines two extensions: EmailAddress and UserID.

5.3.1.1.  EmailAddress

   In reporting an identity fraud event, the reporting institution MAY
   include the victim's email address.  This SHALL be achieved by
   placing an object of type iodef:Email in the IdentityComponent
   object.  It SHALL contain the email address of the intended fraud
   victim.

   The IdentityComponent.dtype attribute SHALL be set to the value
   "string".

   The IdentityComponent.meaning attribute SHALL be set to the value
   "victim email address".




M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 13]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


5.3.1.2.  UserID

   In reporting an identity fraud event, the reporting institution MAY
   include the victim's user identifier.  This SHALL be achieved by
   placing an object of type iodef:ExtensionType in the
   IdentityComponent object.  The data type of the extension contents
   SHALL be xs:string.  It SHALL contain the user identifier of the
   intended fraud victim.

   The IdentityComponent.type attribute SHALL be set to the value
   "string".

   The IdentityComponent.meaning attribute SHALL be set to the value
   "victim user id".

5.4.  FraudEventOtherType Class

   The FraudEventOtherType class SHALL be used to report fraudulent
   events other than those detailed above, such as new event types that
   may emerge at some time in the future.  This class enables such
   events to be reported, using this specification, even though the
   specific characteristics of such events have not yet been formally
   identified.  By reporting the details of these unspecified event
   types, other institutions may be able to detect similar fraudulent
   activity.

   The structure of the FraudEventOtherType class SHALL be as shown in
   Figure 11.

          +-------------+
          | FraudEvent- |
          | OtherType   |
          +-------------+
          |             |<>----------[ OtherEventType ]
          |             |<>--{0..1}--[ PayeeName ]
          |             |<>--{0..1}--[ PostalAddress ]
          |             |<>--{0..1}--[ BankID ]
          |             |<>--{0..1}--[ AccountID ]
          |             |<>--{0..1}--[ AccountType ]
          |             |<>--{0..1}--[ PayeeAmount ]
          |             |<>--{0..1}--[ OtherEventDescription ]
          +-------------+

                 Figure 11.  The FraudEventOtherType Class

   Many of the components of the FraudEventOtherType class are also
   components of the FraudEventPaymentType or FraudEventTransferType
   classes.  Their use in the FraudEventOtherType class is identical to



M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 14]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


   their use in those classes.  Therefore, their descriptions are not
   duplicated here.  Only components that are unique to the
   FraudEventOtherType class are described below.

5.4.1.  OtherEventType

   One value of type xs:anyURI.  A name that classifies the event.

   A list of registered "other event type" identifiers is maintained at:

      http://www.openauthentication.org/thraud/resources/other-event-
      type.htm

   Requests to register new values SHOULD be made at:

      http://www.openauthentication.org/thraud/form/other-event-type

5.4.2.  OtherEventDescription

   Zero or one value of type iodef:MLString.  A free-form textual
   description of the event.

5.5.  AmountType Class

   The AmountType class SHALL be as shown in Figure 12.  It SHALL be
   used to report the amount of a payment or transfer fraud.

          +------------------+
          | AmountType       |
          +------------------+
          | DECIMAL          |
          |                  |
          |  STRING currency |
          +------------------+

                     Figure 12.  The AmountType Class

   The contents of the AmountType class are described below.

5.5.1.  Class Contents

   REQUIRED DECIMAL.  The amount of the payment or transfer.

5.5.2.  Currency

   REQUIRED STRING.  The three-letter currency code [ISO4217:2008].





M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 15]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


5.6.  AccountTypeType Class

   The AccountTypeType class SHALL be as shown in Figure 13.  It SHALL
   be used to report the type of the destination account.

          +-----------------+
          | AccountTypeType |
          +-----------------+
          | STRING          |
          |                 |
          |  STRING lang    |
          +-----------------+

                   Figure 13.  The AccountTypeType Class

   Receiving organizations MUST be capable of processing contents
   containing spelling variations.

6.  IODEF Profile for an Activity Thraud Report

   This section describes the profile of the IODEF Incident class for a
   compliant Activity Thraud Report.

6.1.  Mandatory Components

   A Thraud Report SHALL conform to the data model specified for an
   IODEF-Document in [RFC5070].  The following components of that data
   model, while optional in IODEF, are REQUIRED in a conformant Thraud
   Report.

   Receiving organizations MAY reject documents that do not contain all
   of these components.  Therefore, reporting organizations MUST
   populate them all.

   Except where noted, these components SHALL be interpreted as
   described in [RFC5070].

   Incident.Contact.ContactName - The name of the reporting
      organization.  In case the reporting organization acts as a
      consolidator of reports from other organizations, elements of this
      class SHALL contain the name of the consolidator.
   Incident.Contact.Email - An email address at which the reporting
      organization may be contacted.
   Incident.Contact.Telephone
   Incident.EventData
   Incident.EventData.AdditionalData - SHALL contain exactly one Thraud
      Record.




M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 16]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


6.2.  Recommended Components

   Receiving organizations SHOULD be capable of processing the following
   components.  However, they MUST NOT reject documents because they are
   either present or absent.

   If available, reporting organizations SHOULD include these components
   in Thraud Reports.  Except where noted, these components SHALL be
   interpreted as described in [RFC5070].

   Incident.Contact.Contact
   Incident.Contact.Contact.ContactName - The name of the reporting
      fraud analyst.
   Incident.Contact.Contact.Email - The email address of the reporting
      fraud analyst.
   Incident.Contact.Contact.Telephone - The telephone number of the
      reporting fraud analyst.
   Incident.EventData.Method
   Incident.EventData.Method.Description
   Incident.Assessment.Confidence
   Incident.Assessment.Impact
   Incident.Assessment.MonetaryImpact
   Incident.EventData.DetectTime
   Incident.EventData.StartTime
   Incident.EventData.EndTime
   Incident.EventData.Flow
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Service
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Node.NodeName
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Node.Address

6.3.  Deprecated Components

   This profile provides no guidance to receiving organizations on the
   proper processing of the following components.  Therefore, the
   reporting organization has no assurance that the receiving
   organization will handle them in an appropriate manner and SHOULD NOT
   include them in a Thraud Report.  However, receiving organizations
   MUST NOT reject reports that do contain these components.

   Incident.DetectTime
   Incident.AlternativeID
   Incident.RelatedActivity
   Incident.StartTime
   Incident.EndTime
   Incident.ReportTime
   Incident.Description
   Incident.Method



M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 17]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


   Incident.History
   Incident.AdditionalData
   Incident.ext-purpose
   Incident.IncidentID.instance
   Incident.Contact.Description
   Incident.Contact.RegistryHandle
   Incident.Contact.PostalAddress
   Incident.Contact.Fax
   Incident.Contact.TimeZone
   Incident.Contact.AdditionalData
   Incident.Contact.Contact.Description
   Incident.Contact.Contact.RegistryHandle
   Incident.Contact.Contact.PostalAddress
   Incident.Contact.Contact.Fax
   Incident.Contact.Contact.TimeZone
   Incident.Contact.Contact.AdditionalData
   Incident.Contact.ext-role
   Incident.Contact.ext-type
   Incident.Contact.Contact.ext-role
   Incident.Contact.Contact.ext-type
   Incident.EventData.Method.Reference
   Incident.EventData.Method.Reference.Description
   Incident.EventData.Method.AdditionalData
   Incident.EventData.Method.Reference.URL
   Incident.Assessment.TimeImpact
   Incident.Assessment.AdditionalData
   Incident.Assessment.Impact.type
   Incident.EventData.Description
   Incident.EventData.Contact
   Incident.EventData.Assessment
   Incident.EventData.Expectation
   Incident.EventData.Record
   Incident.EventData.EventData
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.OperatingSystem
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Counter
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Description
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.AdditionalData
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.ext-category
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Node.Location
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Node.DateTime
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Node.NodeRole
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Node.Counter
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Node.Address.ext-category
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Service.ProtoType
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Service.ProtoCode
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Service.ProtoField
   Incident.EventData.Flow.System.Service.Application




M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 18]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


7.  IODEF Profile for a Signature Thraud Report

   A Signature Thraud Report SHALL convey information about the behavior
   associated with fraudulent events, rather than reporting the details
   of the specific events themselves.

   Sharing Signature Thraud Reports helps receiving organizations to
   detect suspicious behavior in their own systems.

   A Signature Thraud Report SHALL conform to the profile described in
   Section 6.

8.  IODEF Additional Attribute Values

   Additional IODEF attribute standard values are defined here.

8.1.  Purpose Attribute

   The following additional values are defined for the Incident.purpose
   attribute.

   Add - The enclosed Thraud Record values SHOULD be added to the corpus
   by the receiving organization.

   Delete - The enclosed Thraud Record types SHOULD be deleted from the
   corpus by the receiving organization.

   Modify - The enclosed Thraud Record values SHOULD replace the
   corresponding values in the corpus.  Where no corresponding types
   currently exist in the corpus, the enclosed values SHOULD be added to
   the corpus by the receiving organization.

9.  Security Considerations

   This document describes a document format for exchanging information
   about successful or attempted transaction and authentication fraud
   incidents.  The information is intended to be used to improve the
   effectiveness of participants' fraud detection and prevention
   programs.  The effectiveness of such programs depends critically on
   the accuracy, reliability, confidentiality, and timeliness of both
   the information and the participants in its exchange.  Threats to
   accuracy, reliability, and confidentiality include (but are not
   limited to) those described here.

   Fraudsters may attempt to introduce reports that delete or modify
   incident information in the corpus.  Therefore, origin authentication
   MUST be employed.  Human review SHOULD be performed prior to
   implementing modifications to the corpus.



M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 19]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


   Fraudsters may attempt to interrupt or redirect submissions, thereby
   preventing the sharing of intelligence concerning their fraud
   strategies.  Therefore, authenticated receipts SHOULD be employed.

   Fraudsters may attempt to impersonate legitimate submitters, thereby
   poisoning their reputations and rendering ineffective their future
   submissions.  Origin authentication MUST be used to ensure that the
   sources of reports are properly identified.

   Fraudsters that can view incident reports may adapt their fraud
   strategies to avoid detection.  Therefore, reports MUST be protected
   by confidentiality services including transport encryption and access
   control.

   In order to prevent inadvertent disclosure of incident data, incident
   reports SHOULD be encrypted while in storage.

   The submitter of an incident report may incorrectly identify
   legitimate activity as a fraud incident.  This may lead to denial of
   service by a receiving organization that relies on the report or
   information derived from the report.  Receiving organizations SHOULD
   operate a reputation service, in which the reliability of the
   information from particular sources is assessed and tracked and
   subsequent reports are weighted accordingly.  The source of reports
   MUST be authenticated.  Receiving organizations SHOULD use reports to
   step up authentication assurance, rather than simply denying service.

   A receiving organization may misuse a Thraud Report to deny service,
   resulting in a loss for a legitimate user.  If such a user were to
   learn the identity of the source of the information that led to the
   denial of service, then that source may become implicated in any
   resulting claim for compensation.  This, in turn, may discourage
   reporting organizations from participating in intelligence sharing.
   Therefore, original sources SHOULD NOT be identified in consolidated
   reports.

   Any origin authentication and data integrity mechanism that is
   acceptable to both parties MAY be used.

   Any transport confidentiality mechanism that is acceptable to both
   parties MAY be used.

   This specification does not include a data compression technique.
   Therefore, it does not introduce any denial of service
   vulnerabilities related to decompression.






M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 20]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


10.  IANA Considerations

   This specification registers two identifiers:

   o The media sub-type name "thraud+xml" in the standard registration
     tree.

   o The xml namespace identifier - urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:thraud-1.0.

10.1.  Media Sub-Type

   Type name: application

   Subtype name: thraud+xml

   Required parameters: none

   Optional parameters: "charset": same as the charset parameter of
      application/xml, as specified in [RFC3023].

   Encoding considerations: same as encoding considerations of
      application/xml, as specified in [RFC3023].

   Security considerations: in addition to the security considerations
      described in Section 9, this registration has all of the security
      considerations described in [RFC3023].

   Interoperability considerations: None beyond the interoperability
      considerations described in [RFC3023].

   Published specification: the media type data format is defined in RFC
      5941.

   Applications that use this media type: transaction and authentication
      fraud analysis and reporting applications, and risk-based
      transaction and authentication evaluation applications.

   Additional information
      Magic number(s): none
      File extension: .tfi
      Macintosh file type codes: none

   Person and email address to contact for further information:
      "D M'Raihi <davidietf@gmail.com>"

   Intended usage: LIMITED USE





M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 21]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


   Restrictions on usage: thraud media are intended for no usage other
      than the exchange of fraud intelligence data.

   Author: D M'Raihi

   Change controller: the IESG

10.2.  XML Namespace

   IANA has registered the xml namespace identifier:

   URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:thraud-1.0

   Registrant Contact:

      Siddharth Bajaj
      VeriSign, Inc.
      487 E. Middlefield Road
      Mountain View, CA  94043
      USA
      Email: sbajaj@verisign.com

   XML: None.  Namespace URIs do not represent an XML specification.

11.  Conclusion

   This specification introduces a transaction fraud (Thraud) reporting
   document structure that enables the sharing of fraud data.  Based on
   the IODEF-Document format, the proposed extension facilitates
   interoperability to increase the security of online applications.

12.  References

12.1.  Normative References

   [ISO13616-1:2007] Financial services - International bank account
                     number (IBAN) -- Part 1: Structure of the IBAN,
                     ISO 13616-1:2007.

   [ISO4217:2008]    Financial services - Codes for the representation
                     of currencies and funds, ISO 4217:2008.

   [ISO9362:1994]    Banking -- Banking telecommunication messages --
                     Bank identifier codes, ISO 9362:1994.

   [RFC2119]         Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
                     Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.




M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 22]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


   [RFC3023]         Murata, M., St. Laurent, S., and D. Kohn, "XML
                     Media Types", RFC 3023, January 2001.

   [RFC4519]         Sciberras, A., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access
                     Protocol (LDAP): Schema for User Applications",
                     RFC 4519, June 2006.

   [RFC5070]         Danyliw, R., Meijer, J., and Y. Demchenko, "The
                     Incident Object Description Exchange Format",
                     RFC 5070, December 2007.

12.2.  Informative References

   [UML]             Information technology -- Open Distributed
                     Processing -- Unified Modeling Language (UML)
                     Version 1.4.2, ISO/IEC 19501:2005.



































M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 23]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


Appendix A.  Thraud Record XML Schema

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<xs:schema targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:thraud-1.0"
xmlns:thraud="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:thraud-1.0"
xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
xmlns:iodef="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-1.0"
elementFormDefault="qualified"
attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
 <xs:import namespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-1.0"
schemaLocation="
http://www.cert.org/ietf/inch/schema/rfc5070.xsd"/>
 <xs:element name="FraudEventPayment"
type="thraud:FraudEventPaymentType"/>
 <xs:element name="FraudEventTransfer"
type="thraud:FraudEventTransferType"/>
 <xs:element name="FraudEventIdentity"
type="thraud:FraudEventIdentityType"/>
 <xs:element name="FraudEventOther"
type="thraud:FraudEventOtherType"/>
 <xs:complexType name="FraudEventPaymentType">
  <xs:sequence>
   <xs:element name="PayeeName" type="iodef:MLStringType"
minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="PostalAddress" type="iodef:MLStringType"
minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="PayeeAmount" type="thraud:AmountType"
minOccurs="0"/>
  </xs:sequence>
 </xs:complexType>
 <xs:complexType name="FraudEventTransferType">
 <xs:sequence>
   <xs:element name="BankID" type="thraud:BankIDType"
minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="AccountID" type="xs:string" minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="AccountType" type="iodef:MLStringType"
minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="TransferAmount" type="thraud:AmountType"
minOccurs="0"/>
  </xs:sequence>
 </xs:complexType>
 <xs:complexType name="FraudEventIdentityType">
  <xs:sequence maxOccurs="unbounded">
   <xs:element name="IdentityComponent"
type="iodef:ExtensionType"/>
  </xs:sequence>
 </xs:complexType>
 <xs:complexType name="FraudEventOtherType">



M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 24]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


  <xs:sequence>
   <xs:element name="OtherEventType" type="xs:anyURI"/>
   <xs:element name="PayeeName" type="iodef:MLStringType"
minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="PostalAddress" type="iodef:MLStringType"
minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="BankID" type="thraud:BankIDType"
minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="AccountID" type="xs:string" minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="AccountType" type="iodef:MLStringType"
minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="PayeeAmount" type="thraud:AmountType"
minOccurs="0"/>
   <xs:element name="OtherEventDescription"
type="iodef:MLStringType" minOccurs="0"/>
  </xs:sequence>
 </xs:complexType>
 <xs:complexType name="AmountType">
  <xs:simpleContent>
   <xs:extension base="xs:decimal">
    <xs:attribute name="currency" type="xs:string"/>
   </xs:extension>
  </xs:simpleContent>
 </xs:complexType>
 <xs:complexType name="BankIDType">
  <xs:simpleContent>
   <xs:extension base="xs:string">
    <xs:attribute name="namespace" type="xs:anyURI"
use="required"/>
   </xs:extension>
  </xs:simpleContent>
 </xs:complexType>
 <xs:element name="UserID" type="xs:string"/>
</xs:schema>

















M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 25]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


Appendix B.  Example of a Thraud Report

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<IODEF-Document xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-1.0"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-1.0"
lang="en">
 <Incident purpose="reporting">
  <IncidentID name="fraud.openauthentication.org">908711
       </IncidentID>
  <ReportTime>2006-10-12T00:00:00-07:00</ReportTime>
  <Assessment>
   <Impact severity="high" completion="failed"/>
   <Confidence rating="high"/>
  </Assessment>
    <Contact type="organization" role="creator">
         <ContactName>Example Corp.</ContactName>
         <Email>contact@example.com</Email>
         <Telephone>+1.972.555.0150</Telephone>
    </Contact>
  <EventData>
   <DetectTime>2006-10-12T07:42:21-08:00</DetectTime>
   <Flow>
    <System category="source">
     <Node>
      <Address category="ipv4-addr">192.0.2.53</Address>
     </Node>
     <Description>Source of numerous attacks</Description>
    </System>
   </Flow>
   <AdditionalData dtype="xml">
    <FraudEventTransfer xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:thraud-
1.0" xmlns:iodef="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-1.0"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:thraud-1.0">
     <BankID
namespace="http://www.openauthentication.org/thraud/resources/
bank-id-namespace.htm#american_bankers_association">123456789</BankID>
     <AccountID>3456789</AccountID>
     <AccountType lang="en">saving</AccountType>
     <TransferAmount currency="USD">10000</TransferAmount>
    </FraudEventTransfer>
   </AdditionalData>
  </EventData>
 </Incident>
</IODEF-Document>





M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 26]

RFC 5941             Sharing Transaction Fraud Data          August 2010


Authors' Addresses

David M'Raihi
VeriSign, Inc.
685 E. Middlefield Road
Mountain View, CA  94043
USA
Phone: 1-650-426-3832
EMail: davidietf@gmail.com


Sharon Boeyen
Entrust, Inc.
1000 Innovation Drive
Ottawa, ON, K2K 3E7
Canada
Phone: 1-613-270-3181
EMail: sharon.boeyen@entrust.com


Michael Grandcolas
Grandcolas Consulting, LLC
247 Ocean Park Blvd.
Santa Monica, CA  90405
USA
Phone: 1-310-399-1747
EMail: michael.grandcolas@hotmail.com


Siddharth Bajaj
VeriSign, Inc.
487 E. Middlefield Road
Mountain View, CA  94043
USA
Phone: 1-650-426-3458
EMail: sbajaj@verisign.com















M'Raihi, et al.               Informational                    [Page 27]

