FinancialCrimeRiskOfficers.com

In 2015, I wrote "Cleaning up the 'Net." It was an action plan to reduce incidence of financial and other crime committed over the internet. One of the main principles of the book is that those that provide services to internet users - including domain name registrars and others - were enabling and profiting from crime.

Is 2021 the year when someone listens and starts to take seriously the ease with which criminals can, for example, register domain names that even the most basic know-your-customer would establish is more likely than not to be used for some improper purpose?

On the weekend when, at last, the USA gets laws to require at least some degree of declaration of the ownership of companies, is there an appetite to tackle this even bigger problem?

Hint: it's not...

We haven't seen this one for a while, or rather we've not seen it in this format.

The simplest and oldest 419 scam is back in time for Christmas.

And once more, Google is complicit. Look at the "reply to" address. How is not possible that they are not required to identify and block things such as this? Oh, yes. They say "we are google. We are big. You can bog off."

The news (Al Jazeera) that Zimbabwe's sortie into restoring its own currency is in crisis is extremely unwelcome.

Just as we saw in Russia in and about 1997 there is rampant inflation (now reaching 800%) and the local currency being eschewed in favour of US dollar bank notes.

Strict controls are now being imposed on so-called peer-to-peer payment systems.

The so-called 419 scam is not the only fraud that has a long history of coming out of Nigeria - and other countries. The old "we'll get your stuff past inspection" was a major money spinner but another, even more lucrative one, has just landed. We've not seen it for a very long time.

The criminals are increasing the pace - one scam after another from the same source. The tag, again, is Philip Schofield.

"Brits Are Listening To Ant McPartlin And They’re Raking In Millions From Home" screams the headline - then the e-mail launches into a pitch that is a near replica of what we've seen before. It's using Ant McPartlin as a hook but also Phillip Schofield who is currently riding a wave of publicity.

In Harris County, Texas, a lawyer who was disbarred in 2016, has become the focus of attention : the District Attorney, Kim Ogg, has issued an appeal for information that might identify victims of fraud by David A. Chaumette.

Should financial institutions consider the character of customers as a risk factor? A recent case in Australia suggests that it might be wise to do so.

It's development of an old scam but it's bizarrely humorous.

This is so amateur that it's worth our publishing it. The "reply to" address is at a free and anonymous mail account in Hungary: georgievakristalina01@vipmail.hu . But there is something interesting.

For the background to this story, see here: https://www.pleasebeinformed.c... and here: https://www.pleasebeinformed.c...

Now the fraudsters, or their associates, are back. And this time they have new telephone numbers.

You know that thing about airport security, where no one gets on a flight if they aren't who they say they are? And you know that the USA is so obsessed with airport security under its "war on terror" thing that all flights are locked down tighter than a tight thing?

It's not true and this document fraud shows how lax security really is in the US aviation industry. Remember this the next time some one questions a detail on your ticket at check-in. It's the old thing - the bigger the lie, the less people are likely to spot it.

The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) has imposed additional conditions on the Australian financial services (AFS) licence of Societe Generale Securities Australia Pty Ltd (SGSAPL) to ensure compliance with clients' money regulations.

You just know it's going to be a fraud when the subject line reads "[email address], KINDLY GET BACK TO ME ASAP!!!"

When the "from" is a pretentious name for a law firm ('SMITH GLOBAL LAW') and the address an obviously fictitious "Smithlegaloffice@Un.org" The deal is almost sealed. That final nail in the coffin of the approach is the return address: Smithlegaloffice@mail.ru . If he'd sent from that, our filters which automatically delete undelivered and unread items from mail.ru would have meant it didn't reach its target.

But we're glad it did - for it's a demonstration of the cyclical nature of fraud. This is a genuinely vintage classic.

Well, hello, Kate Winslett. We bet you just love this!