As the December 31st deadline approaches for FTC enforcement of the Red Flags Rule, we still seem quite a ways off from getting out from under the cloud of confusion and debate related to the definition of ‘creditor’ under the statutory provisions. For example, the Thune-Begich amendment to “amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act with respect to the applicability of identity theft guidelines to creditors” looks to greatly narrow the definition of creditor under the Rule, and therefore narrow the universe of businesses and institutions covered by the Red Flags Rule. The question remains, and will remain far past the December 31 enforcement deadline, as to how narrow the ‘creditor’ universe gets. Will this amendment be effective in excluding those types of entities generally not in the business of extending credit (such as physicians, lawyers, and other service providers) even if they do provide service in advance of payment collection or billing? Will this amendment exclude more broadly, for example ‘buy-here, pay-here’ auto dealers who don’t extend credit or furnish data to a credit reporting agency? Finally, is this the tip of an iceberg in which more entities opt out of the requirement for robust and effective identity theft prevention programs? So one has to ask if the original Red Flags Rule intent to “require many businesses and organizations to implement a written Identity Theft Prevention Program designed to detect the warning signs – or “red flags” – of identity theft in their day-to-day operations, take steps to prevent the crime, and mitigate the damage it inflicts” still holds true? Or is the idea of protecting consumer identities only a good one when it is convenient? It doesn’t appear to be linked with fraud risk as healthcare fraud, for example, is of major concern to most practitioners and service providers in that particular industry. Lastly, from an efficiency perspective, this debate would likely have been better timed at the drafting of the Red Flags Rule, and prior to the implementation of Red Flags programs across industries that may be ultimately excluded.
Red Flags Rule – just weeks until the FTC enforcement date of December 31. Well beyond that for clarity.
Related Posts
Fraud rings cause an estimated $5 trillion in financial damages every year, making them one of the most dangerous threats facing today’s businesses. They’re organized, sophisticated and only growing more powerful with the advent of Generative AI (GenAI). Armed with advanced tools and an array of tried-and-true attack strategies, fraud rings have perfected the art of flying under the radar and circumventing traditional fraud detection tools. Their ability to adapt and innovate means they can identify and exploit vulnerabilities in businesses' fraud stacks; if you don’t know how fraud rings work and the right signs to look for, you may not be able to catch a fraud ring attack until it’s too late. What is a fraud ring? A fraud ring is an organized group of cybercriminals who collaborate to execute large-scale, coordinated attacks on one or more targets. These highly sophisticated groups leverage advanced techniques and technologies to breach fraud defenses and exploit vulnerabilities. In the past, they were primarily humans working scripts at scale; but with GenAI they’re increasingly mobilizing highly sophisticated bots as part of (or the entirety of) the attack. Fraud ring attacks are rarely isolated incidents. Typically, these groups will target the same victim multiple times, leveraging insights gained from previous attack attempts to refine and enhance their strategies. This iterative approach enables them to adapt to new controls and increase their impact with each subsequent attack. The impacts of fraud ring attacks far exceed those of an individual fraudster, incurring significant financial losses, interrupting operations and compromising sensitive data. Understanding the keys to spotting fraud rings is crucial for crafting effective defenses to stop them. Uncovering fraud rings There’s no single tell-tale sign of a fraud ring. These groups are too agile and adaptive to be defined by one trait. However, all fraud rings — whether it be an identity fraud ring, coordinated scam effort, or large-scale ATO fraud scheme — share common traits that produce warning signs of imminent attacks. First and foremost, fraud rings are focused on efficiency. They work quickly, aiming to cause as much damage as possible. If the fraud ring’s goal is to open fraudulent accounts, you won’t see a fraud ring member taking their time to input stolen data on an application; instead, they’ll likely copy and paste data from a spreadsheet or rely on fraud bots to execute the task. Typically, the larger the fraud ring attack, the more complex it is. The biggest fraud rings leverage a variety of tools and strategies to keep fraud teams on their heels and bypass traditional fraud defenses. Fraud rings often test strategies before launching a full-scale attack. This can look like a small “probe” preceding a larger attack, or a mass drop-off after fraudsters have gathered the information they needed from their testing phase. Fraud ring detection with behavioral analytics Behavioral analytics in fraud detection uncovers third-party fraud, from large-scale fraud ring operations and sophisticated bot attacks to individualized scams. By analyzing user behavior, organizations can effectively detect and mitigate these threats. With behavioral analytics, businesses have a new layer of fraud ring detection that doesn’t exist elsewhere in their fraud stack. At a crowd level, behavioral analytics reveals spikes in risky behavior, including fraud ring testing probes, that may indicate a forthcoming fraud ring attack, but would typically be hidden by sheer volume or disregarded as normal traffic. Behavioral analytics also identifies the high-efficiency techniques that fraud rings use, including copy/paste or “chunking” behaviors, or the use of advanced fraud bots designed to mimic human behavior. Learn more about our behavioral analytics solutions and their fraud ring detection capabilities. Learn more
Fraud never sleeps, and neither do the experts working to stop it. That’s why we’re thrilled to introduce Meet the Maker, our new video series spotlighting the brilliant minds behind Experian’s cutting-edge fraud solutions. In our first episode, Matt Ehrlich, Senior Director of Identity and Fraud Product Management, and Andrea Nighswander, Senior Director of Global Solution Strategy, share how they use data, advanced analytics, and deep industry expertise to stay ahead of fraudsters. With 35+ years of combined experience, these fraud-fighting veterans know exactly what it takes to keep bad actors at bay. Watch now for an exclusive look at the minds shaping the future of fraud prevention. Stay tuned for more episodes featuring the visionaries driving fraud innovation.
The days of managing credit risk, fraud prevention, and compliance in silos are over. As fraud threats evolve, regulatory scrutiny increases, and economic uncertainty persists, businesses need a more unified risk strategy to stay ahead. Our latest e-book, Navigating the intersection of credit, fraud, and compliance, explores why 94% of forward-looking companies expect credit, fraud, and compliance to converge within the next three years — and what that means for your business.1 Key insights include: The line between fraud and credit risk is blurring. Many organizations classify first-party fraud losses as credit losses, distorting the true risk picture. Fear of fraud is costing businesses growth. 68% of organizations say they’re denying too many good customers due to fraud concerns. A unified approach is the future. Integrating risk decisioning across credit, fraud, and compliance leads to stronger fraud detection, smarter credit risk assessments, and improved compliance. Read the full e-book to explore how an integrated risk approach can protect your business and fuel growth. Download e-book 1Research conducted by InsightAvenue on behalf of Experian