Having anti-SMS spoofing may not increase banks' liability
#1

Kenny Chee
Senior Tech Correspondent
UPDATED 7 HOURS AGO


SINGAPORE - A new registry that organisations, including banks, can sign up for could help reduce the spoofing of names used for sending SMSes, which happened in recent SMS phishing scams that caused many OCBC Bank customers to lose funds.

Some banks are already on the registry, with OCBC understood to have joined it recently.

But lawyers told The Straits Times that having the registry ...... might not increase banks' liability for the money customers lose.

Customers' actions still play a big part in the equation

......

If the customers give their banking details to scammers, even if they are tricked into doing so, and the banks' systems are not compromised and their practices meet industry standards, the customers are often responsible for the lost funds in the scams, not the banks, the lawyers said.


https://www.straitstimes.com/tech/tech-n...t-to-scams
Reply
#2

What a silly article

Of course it does not cure all as cybercrimals will always try other means but it makes it harder for them.

Banks not taking available9 precaution especially the easy ones are actually more liable as they attract scammers to their customers.

Why OCBC was the target and not banks in Indonesia or Phillipines?

I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
Reply
#3

(19-01-2022, 08:47 AM)sgbuffett Wrote:  What a silly article

Of course it does not cure all as cybercrimals will always try other means but it makes it harder for them.

Banks not taking available9 precaution especially the easy ones are actually more liable as they attract scammers to  their customers.

Why OCBC was the target and not banks in Indonesia or Phillipines?

Obviously, it is because there is generally more money per account in OCBC than banks in Indonesia or the Philippines.

However, I do wonder why DBS or UOB are not targeted.
Reply
#4

(19-01-2022, 09:06 AM)Levin Wrote:  Obviously, it is because there is generally more money per account in OCBC than banks in Indonesia or Philippines?

However, I do wonder why DBS or UOB is not targeted.

Maybe got data leak.
[+] 1 user Likes dynamite's post
Reply
#5

(19-01-2022, 09:06 AM)Levin Wrote:  Obviously, it is because there is generally more money per account in OCBC than banks in Indonesia or Philippines?

However, I do wonder why DBS or UOB is not targeted.
Likely that OCBC accounts are more meaty.
Reply
#6

Bcoz ocbc is as solid as rock. Scammers want the challenge.
[+] 1 user Likes Bigbluedot's post
Reply
#7

(19-01-2022, 09:06 AM)Levin Wrote:  Obviously, it is because there is generally more money per account in OCBC than banks in Indonesia or the Philippines.

However, I do wonder why DBS or UOB are not targeted.
Because you are brain dead

Why dun you put up some charts and graphs, like you always do?
Reply
#8

(19-01-2022, 09:13 AM)SotongOngTee Wrote:  Likely that OCBC accounts are more meaty.

The biggest tio scammed is half a mil.
Reply
#9

(19-01-2022, 08:47 AM)sgbuffett Wrote:  What a silly article

Of course it does not cure all as cybercrimals will always try other means but it makes it harder for them.

Banks not taking available9 precaution especially the easy ones are actually more liable as they attract scammers to  their customers.

Why OCBC was the target and not banks in Indonesia or Phillipines?

Why a silly question "Why OCBC was the target and not banks in Indonesia or Phillipines?"

Because the level of english there is as lousy as you, so better to target sinkie..

1. I have served the nation in a combat unit for 2.5 + 10 years. I had fulfilled my duty as a citizen, but has the country do it's part for me?
2. I don't know where the threat of CCP is, but I know the threat of CECA is already at my doorsteps
3. I had been called a CCP, JHK, Pinoy, but they never called me a CECA..
Reply
#10

So, how?

What is the best solution?
Reply
#11

(19-01-2022, 08:47 AM)sgbuffett Wrote:  What a silly article

Of course it does not cure all as cybercrimals will always try other means but it makes it harder for them.

Banks not taking available9 precaution especially the easy ones are actually more liable as they attract scammers to  their customers.

Why OCBC was the target and not banks in Indonesia or Phillipines?

Because Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, etc. dun use English in business over there. Actually we use English is good for the country as it made Singapore very international. However, using English also put us, the citizens,  in bad position when comes to scamming and job competition. My niece in Thailand heads an IT department in Thai telecom. I told her that our IT jobs in Singapore are stolen by foreigners and it might happen in Thailand too. She confidently told me that this will never happen because they use Thai for business communication there and it is not easy for CECA to learn....... Rolleyes

 Thinking is difficult, that's why most people judge
                    Carl Jung
[+] 1 user Likes Huliwang's post
Reply
#12

If bank don't hold liability, then what if bank lose money or cannot generate enough profit for investors, can bank ownself scam their own customer, then pretend they are victim? Rotfl 

if bank cannot assure customers security issue, then either don't use the bank and its services. best solution for now.
[+] 1 user Likes wulala's post
Reply
#13

best solution is all banks set a straight standard, any sms from any bank, no action to be taken. any call, no action to be taken, all action must be done in bank only.
[+] 1 user Likes wulala's post
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)