What is our primary use case?
I'm working as an functional consultant for Manhattan Associates. I'm specialized in Manhattan's Active Omni cloud native solution. Our client is a world-renowned luxury retailer, they chose Riskified for protection against eCommerce fraud attacks (credit cards and Paypal).
Riskified integration with OMS systems, such as ours, is a simple and smooth process thanks to Riskified's team guidance. The process was as follows:
- sharing Riskified's endpoints so that the OMS can send data to Riskified during an order's lifecycle key stages.
- define the mapping requirements for each order's lifecycle key stages.
- define authentication protocols for forward and backwards flows.
How has it helped my organization?
Our clients have definitely avoided losing money on multiple occasions due to fraud.
What is most valuable?
The solution's main purpose is providing direct feedback on whether we can approve or decline orders to avoid fraud on eCommerce orders. Riskified's machine learning review process is fast: we receive the fraud response almost instantly upon requiring for an order review. Riskified's dashboard is also user friendly, simple and to the point.
For us, Riskified has been working great. The implementation was smooth. The communication with their customer support has been good. The solution itself was easy to implement.
What needs improvement?
I can't think of any major issues that we've faced that need to be improved. We didn't have the same consultants Riskified's side throughout the deployment, so we sometimes had to redefine the Business requests. However, this can happen on any project.
We haven't used all of the features that currently exist within Riskified, so it's a little hard for me to comment.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Riskified for over a year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Riskified feels completely stable. We never experienced any issues, stability-wise.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Scalability-wise, it's been good — no issues to report.
How are customer service and technical support?
The technical support was responsive to all of our project needs. Whenever we had any questions, they supplied us with quick feedback. The communication was smooth, which was really nice.
How was the initial setup?
Payments gateways can initially have decision manager processes, but they're not always efficient. Riskified acts as a second step of verification — that's usually why it's implemented. We just do a couple of initial sessions between our payment gateway platform, our solution, the clients, and Riskified. We define what type of verification will be required, what type of payment methods will need to go through the Riskified process. For example, for us, it was mainly for PayPal and Credit cards (Visa, MasterCard, Amex). They have other payment methods methods that can also be implemented but overall, we define what type of mapping will be used for each order lifecycle key stage. When you have one order, you can send it once or multiple times to Riskified, depending on the Business/order lifecycle. For the first checkup, if you update the order, the question is, do you still want to send it to Riskified? What if you cancel the order? It all comes down to the business, and what the client needs. We define the business scope, the flow, and according to that, and based on that, Riskified provided us the mapping that they need for each trigger in the life cycle.
What about the implementation team?
When we deployed Riskified, there were three people involved.
As far as job roles go: first, you need one design lead. He will define the overall design to make sure that we are covering all the bases. Secondly, there needs to be a technical consultant. He will be in charge of setting up APIs — the authentication process, the security process —, that will be used for authentication for the forward flow and the backward flow. And last, you would need a functional consultant who would ensure that end to end processes are working correctly, and that the full integration is working as expected.
Deployment time varies. If you have a big team, then you can do it in less than a month. On complex eCommerce projects, you might envision first implementing the vanilla flow then continuously upgrading to more complex flows.
What other advice do I have?
I would say it's a good solution. I would recommend it for any eCommerce projects that don't already have fraud implementation in place. Fraud risk management is essential, even more as we're seeing an accelerated shift towards online buying and a major increase in online payments. Omitting payment risk management in an eCommerce project is a major strategic mistake that can directly impact a company's revenue.
You should still work hand-in-hand with the payment gateways because of course, it depends on what type of options you include in the payment gateway. Some payment gateways offer decision manager review process. It's a good start if you already have a fraud processing payment gateway. But it's better to add a second security layer by implementing an eCommerce fraud protection solution.
When using Riskified, it's important to know exactly what is expected from the solution. Throughout a project, requirement changes/new requirements might come up. When they come up, you might have to go through the flow again and adjust accordingly. I think it's important to clarify with the client exactly what flows they want Riskified to check because what was in it initially is not what is going to be in the scope in the end. There are always new requirements that require new changes throughout the integration. I think is very important to be sure at first, prior to starting the process, what exactly are the flows that will be impacted by integration with Riskified.
On a scale from one to ten, I would give Riskified a rating of nine.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
