Miserly marks get smart to UK phishing fraudsters
Attacks up, but losses down
Incidents of phishing targeted against holders of UK bank accounts are up, but losses are down.
UK banking association APACS cites more than 10,000 reported phishing incidents in the first quarter of 2008, a more than 200 per cent rise from the same period last year. Online banking fraud losses, however, decreased by a third from £33.5m in 2006 to £22.6m in 2007.
APACS research shows that although the number of people ignoring phishing email has increased from 75 per cent in 2006 to 82 per cent last year, there are still nearly one in five people who don’t follow these common sense precautions . In addition, although 93 per cent of people have anti-virus software on their PCs, almost one in three people (29 per cent) don’t have any anti-spyware software.
Security firm RSA backed these findings, reporting UK banking brands were the second most attacked in the world over the last 14 months. In addition, the firm found that the number of targeted institutions has gone up 23 per cent year-over-year. So, crooks are widening their nets to target small banks and financial institutions.
Recent reports suggested the increased prevalence of phishing attacks has prompted UK banking code changes that place liability for online banking losses in the hands of customers instead of banks. However, an APACS spokesman said that sections of the 2008 code that placed the onus on bank customers to take reasonable care and make sure that their anti-virus and anti-spyware software are up to date have appeared in the code since 2005. As before, customers may also be held liable for negligence if they hand over online banking credentials in response to phishing emails.
The Banking Code is a voluntary code which sets standards of good banking practice for financial institutions when dealing with personal customers in the UK. The latest version of the code can be found here (pdf) .
Historically, UK banks have taken the hit for phishing losses from online bank accounts without questioning whether victims had followed "safe computing" best practices. But provisions in the code give them the right to withhold payments in cases where customers are negligent. ®