Does MAS, IMDA’s phishing scam framework protect small consumers or big corporations?
Making consumers responsible for transactions they did not authorise may erode their trust in the banks
Add BT as a preferred source
THE Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) unveiled a much-anticipated shared responsibility framework (SRF) for phishing scams last week.
On the face of it, the SRF protects consumers from a potentially ruinous form of fraud. It sets out specific duties for financial institutions (FIs) and telecommunications companies (telcos) to mitigate the risk of consumers falling prey to phishing scams; and assigns all losses from these scams to FIs and telcos that fail to discharge their respective duties.
The FIs stand first in line to bear these losses, as they are custodians of their customers’ deposits. The telcos are second in line, given their secondary role of facilitating the delivery of SMSes associated with online banking transactions.
TRENDING NOW
Malaysian tycoon Vincent Tan’s sell-downs point to pruning rather than an exit plan
OCBC rolls out AI-native banking, to hire 600 relationship managers in wealth push
High Court dismisses StanChart's appeal to strike out US$2.7 billion 1MDB-linked lawsuit
Malaysia’s Forest City family office push gains traction, but ecosystem gaps remain
