Forum: Scammed of $100,000, but fault is not mine alone

noname2016

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
704
Reaction score
533
yes exactly.

@harbinger255 @Capitalist

what are you contributing than just mocking and being patronising to victims? everyone will have times of inalertness or too busy. this case is not like say hyflux or dbs bonds when those 'victims' went in with greed knowingly but act blur later.

when it is already shown ocbc do send official sms using bit.ly...

look at their urls even, is there even a 'standard' url?

ocbc already change protocols after this event, meaning there was weakness..

victims cant even quickly disable or recall the funds.
Also want to add - the scam was going on for days - started on Dec 8. Ocbc must have been aware on Dec 23 (or even earlier) as they then send out warning not to click such links on Dec 23. But most of the money was lost after dec 23. despite being aware of the scam, they still didn’t flag out all the suspicious txns made - bank accounts accessed from new devices and emptied out to new overseas account. How can Ocbc be totally blameless in this? It went on for days snowballing to 9 mil…

“An additional 26 customers also reported a loss of about S$140,000 between Dec. 8 and Dec. 17.

OCBC added that it sent out its first media advisory on Dec. 23 to warn of a surge in these scams
Dec. 24 to 26 saw 186 customers lose up to S$2.7 million from these three days alone.”
 

kimsix

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
8,988
Reaction score
1,503
Also want to add - the scam was going on for days - started on Dec 8. Ocbc must have been aware on Dec 23 (or even earlier) as they then send out warning not to click such links on Dec 23. But most of the money was lost after dec 23. despite being aware of the scam, they still didn’t flag out all the suspicious txns made - bank accounts accessed from new devices and emptied out to new overseas account. How can Ocbc be totally blameless in this? It went on for days snowballing to 9 mil…

“An additional 26 customers also reported a loss of about S$140,000 between Dec. 8 and Dec. 17.

OCBC added that it sent out its first media advisory on Dec. 23 to warn of a surge in these scams
Dec. 24 to 26 saw 186 customers lose up to S$2.7 million from these three days alone.”

kns 8 to 23 Dec....**** show confirm

yalor reading victims accounts, they did what they can apart from momentarily lapse in concentration at the very start...

even was mentioned why certain process was not needed or received at their ends

not say they send money to nigerian prince or see payment request from http://ocbc_banking.sg.co.in....
 

Apex01

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
7,030
Reaction score
1,573
MAS still diam diam with all these....

==
The couple was also baffled at how scammers were able to conduct so many high-risk activities with their account, such as changing transfer limits and setting up the OneToken, without ever giving out their one-time password (OTP).

Denise said this was revelatory and could indicate some systemic lapses in OCBC’s account security.
 

fascist

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
11,500
Reaction score
1,520
Ok SMS is not secure.

The SMS is just a 2nd factor authentication.

You still need the userid and password to log in. If these information are not supplied to scammers, your account is still secure.

True. But even if you had supplied the userid and password, a physical token could have prevented the transfer limit from being increased. The loss would have been limited to 5-25k rather than >100k.

That's the use of the physical token, and is a reason why top secret files in govt/military installations are not connected to the internet.

I'm surprised why people still think that its ultimately only the "stupidity" of people which allow scams to succeed. Evidently got critical thinking problems. Its the systematic processes at play as nothing is perfect.
 

Apex01

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
7,030
Reaction score
1,573
yes exactly.

@harbinger255 @Capitalist

what are you contributing than just mocking and being patronising to victims? everyone will have times of inalertness or too busy. this case is not like say hyflux or dbs bonds when those 'victims' went in with greed knowingly but act blur later.

when it is already shown ocbc do send official sms using bit.ly...

look at their urls even, is there even a 'standard' url?

ocbc already change protocols after this event, meaning there was weakness..

victims cant even quickly disable or recall the funds.
Those govt supporters got selfish, arrogant mentality, like to talk lanjiao wei.

We must have independent analysts to find out the problems for banking scams instead of letting govt covering up for banks and not taking responsibility
 

MyWill

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2016
Messages
22,319
Reaction score
2,800
Aiya.... banks always bully sinkies wan. Remember lehman bros high note? Our ceca bank didnt compensate sinkies based on "willing buyer willing seller" arguement.... but later agreed to compensate investors in hongkong. Then sinkies kpkb unfair... then i lose track liao. Cant rem if sinkies were compensated similarly as hong kong.
 

Tuckie

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
22,810
Reaction score
236
Sorry, did she say she re-read? Then still fall into the scammer’s trap? Then really nothing can save her from scams.
 

tanakow

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2004
Messages
8,077
Reaction score
478
Ppl like u is why we have stupid schemes like cpf. U are responsible to protect urself from being cheated. Not the gahmen.

cheating happens because u are naive. u r responsible for urself

You are obviously not very smart or you are an IB. I would not want to say that you are probably lowly educated as some lowly educated can be quite smart.

A fraud has been committed and yes, it is likely the fault of the victim. Does that mean that the G or SPF don't need to investigate? So if you kill your wife because your wife cuckolds you, the SPF don't need to investigate because it was her fault?

It just shows how 'naive' you are to bring in the Government b@stardisation of the CPF scheme including CareShield, Medishield and CPF Life which are not relevant in this thread.
 
Last edited:

yokine3a

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
2,487
Reaction score
871
You mean all that was needed is a single OTP? Additional high risk transactions didn’t require another OTP?

Sounds like poor security to me
There are 2 sections, 1 is normal tranx using single otp, while another high risk for tranx over certain limit which requires additional otp. I usually set the lowest amount for all limits.
 

xiaosinsinful

Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
9,736
Reaction score
3,215
i heard the limit also dont need otp. so it is the scammer go change the limit and it didnt trigger the otp. so in a sense this somewhat the bank fault
I have never heard change limit no need OTP.

if that’s really the case then what’s the point of the limit? got limit no limit no diff :s13:
 

Carrot010

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
339
Reaction score
132
Actually how to insure against stupidity/ignorance? I also want to insure against it, in case I kana. Thanks!
Only open your bank app to see what irregularities in your account lei……
Don’t any how click on the link. You not playing fishing game or shooting game………..

don’t alway wait for people to spoon feed you like giving a link and you click on it for convenient.
 

xiaosinsinful

Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
9,736
Reaction score
3,215
There are 2 sections, 1 is normal tranx using single otp, while another high risk for tranx over certain limit which requires additional otp. I usually set the lowest amount for all limits.

according to @gravity_infinity he say change limits no need OTP. You set lowest also no use
i heard the limit also dont need otp. so it is the scammer go change the limit and it didnt trigger the otp. so in a sense this somewhat the bank fault
 

gravity_infinity

High Supremacy Member
Joined
May 10, 2013
Messages
46,830
Reaction score
1,766
I have never heard change limit no need OTP.

if that’s really the case then what’s the point of the limit? got limit no limit no diff :s13:
thats what i heard... i also find it funny.

any ocbc user can verify if otp is needed for paynow limit changes?
 

tanakow

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2004
Messages
8,077
Reaction score
478
Also want to add - the scam was going on for days - started on Dec 8. Ocbc must have been aware on Dec 23 (or even earlier) as they then send out warning not to click such links on Dec 23. But most of the money was lost after dec 23. despite being aware of the scam, they still didn’t flag out all the suspicious txns made - bank accounts accessed from new devices and emptied out to new overseas account. How can Ocbc be totally blameless in this? It went on for days snowballing to 9 mil…

“An additional 26 customers also reported a loss of about S$140,000 between Dec. 8 and Dec. 17.

OCBC added that it sent out its first media advisory on Dec. 23 to warn of a surge in these scams
Dec. 24 to 26 saw 186 customers lose up to S$2.7 million from these three days alone.”
OCBC has no way of knowing which transaction is suspicious or not. What happens is that OCBC has been presented with the correct authentication and authorisation for the transfer and OCBC has acted on the authorisation.

People who still think that it is OCBC's fault should avoid online banking or anything involving financial online because they simply do not understand the whole online thingy work.
 
Last edited:
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Terms of Service for more information.
Top