DNB explains new payment fraud figures
De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) will now publish semi-annual figures on fraudulent transactions at banks and payment institutions. The central bank explains the definition of fraud and the utility of these new statistics.
Defining fraud, driving transparency
De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) defines a fraudulent transaction as an unauthorised payment or attempted theft, typically occurring when fraudsters obtain personal data or manipulate victims into transferring funds.
This includes both direct theft via compromised PINs and social engineering scams where fraudsters impersonate trusted entities.
DNB is now publishing these figures bi-annually to provide greater transparency for consumers, politicians, and anti-fraud investigators.
The goal is to foster a clearer understanding of the fraud landscape, which is crucial for developing effective countermeasures.
This initiative stems from a 2022 European law mandating institutions to disclose such data.
DNB's statisticians have accumulated sufficient data since 2022 to identify reliable trends, enabling better monitoring of developments and more targeted anti-fraud strategies.
Tools, reporting, and scope
Financial institutions deploy various tools, including advanced software for pattern detection and dedicated staff, to detect fraudulent transactions.
These measures, while not always preventing fraud, significantly hinder perpetrators.
Institutions must report all detected fraudulent transactions to their supervisory authority, De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) in the Netherlands, which then aggregates the figures anonymously.
The published data covers cash withdrawals from ATMs, card payments (in-shop and online), and bank transfers (via apps or online banking).
DNB currently excludes specific types of fraudulent transactions, such as those involving 'e-money' (e.g., gift vouchers), but plans to incorporate these in future reports.
Transparency with caveats
The DNB's move to publish detailed fraud figures is a commendable step towards greater transparency in a critical area.
However, the current exclusion of 'e-money' transactions leaves a notable gap, potentially understating the full scope of digital fraud.
While a good start, the data's true utility will depend on its evolution to cover all emerging fraud vectors.