For the electronic fraud industry, which is estimated at trillions of dollars, it is one of the most difficult details of its control and disruption, is social engineering. This engineering means how to get fragmented about details about potential victims, communicate with them and start deceiving them. It is often through social media and networks. Banks, law enforcement and telecommunications and technical enterprises are increasing to unite their efforts to ward off fraud over the past few years. There is an agreement between them that the point of weakness, which is the platforms that criminals find through their victims, needs the worst types of censorship, but they do not. Students who fight on internetpirates on cyberfronte in the UK are an opportunity for the communications regulator to change that if you can use new online safety laws to impose major financial fines on websites such as Facebook and X.. But in countries such as the United States, where a limited responsibility is on the content platform, the defense that consumers are lower. British laws, which are currently being considered under the Internet Safety Act, approved at the end of 2023, will increase the clear differences between the United States and the United Kingdom. In Britain, banks must return money in most fraud, of no more than 85,000 pounds ($ 109565), as the regulations came into effect last year, while banks in the United States argue that people should protect themselves and reject most compensation requests. Prevention is better than treatment. The UK allows banks to delay suspicious payments for up to four days, so they can investigate their recipients and encourage potential victims to talk to friends and family about what they do. In the United States, legislation efforts have been stumbled that will have to follow similar rules in countries such as California and Pennsylvania. But once the victim agrees to pay, fraud has occurred. Therefore, prevention is better than treatment, and financial institutions have previously called on the technology platforms to participate in the remuneration for the victims, hoping to motivate them to follow and prohibit the perpetrators. Rivlet Bank, based in the UK, has criticized the “Meta platforms” Facebook owners for being the starting point for most online fraud reported by its customers. Mughats from the achievement of ‘Business Week’ on extortion of adolescents online, the laws implemented by the UK can improve this motivation. Some aspects are clearly covered; For example, selling lists with details of stolen credit cards online or other materials that can be used in definite fraud. The online safety legislation also holds the platforms responsible for rejecting paid advertisements that offer false goods or services. The supervisory apparatus that oversees the communication and internet services, which is the communications office or ‘Ofcom’, has begun to enforce the laws on illegal content via the Internet from the middle of the March, and will ask the biggest reports on how to address it and make more effort if the answers are not satisfactory. A fine of ten global revenue, as it can claim the suspension of part of the service if it does not meet certain criteria and tries to impose more serious fines on companies whose transgressions continue through the courts, and the maximum fine can reach 10% of their global income, but the attorneys believe it is fines. A girl who responds to the SAA is a man who created her account with the purpose of sexual extortion, Arnaf Joshi, the lawyer of the Kelford Chinese information technology, told me: “The existence of the Safety Act via the Internet in itself intends to be a deterrent.” But the rules associated with social engineering are more ambiguous as there is no law that prevents communication with strangers or seeking friendship with it. There are also legal reasons for the identity of others or the spread of false content (for example, irony). OfCom wants to develop ways to monitor it and report how they work. Companies on social media may face the maintenance procedures if it is proven that fraud has arisen on their platform after its incidence. The efforts of social media platforms will somehow have to do with this, as about half of all the fraud begins with a target message to a potential victim, most of whom are through a direct message, according to the research of ‘OFCUM’. However, it may require a lot of fraud and submit a great lawsuit to test this approach. Companies like “Mita” said they were working hard to disrupt the fraudsters’ activities. Last year, two million accounts related to industrial fraud centers in Southeast Asia and the United Arab Emirates removed, as well as 63,000 accounts associated with sexual extortion gangs in Nigeria. Meta requires celebrities to use the improvement of the improved face to check their right accounts to block false accounts more easily, but it warns that fraudsters are increasingly falsifying the second class celebrities or local public figures as a taste. Also aimed at accounts that send messages to a very large number of accounts that are not associated with hunting victims, but they also say that the fraudsters discover the boundaries of their investigations and change their approach quickly. Electronic attacks reveal the absence of ‘digital health’ despite these efforts, the size of fraudulent content and social media care is still very large, according to banks, software companies and law enforcement. With the increasing skill in the fraudsters in the use of obstetrician artificial intelligence, technology and deterrents must also be improved. “Many of these are very clear and are still on the internet,” said a high specialist at the National Crime Agency in the UK, and she talked about Jin’s name to hide her personality, as the normal risks of reputation alone do not seem sufficient to push social media platforms. The publication of “Officom” can be effective and exposed in the UK, although I am not sure. But actual financial fines, or the imposition of fees to help finance the remuneration of the victims, which affect the profits of platforms, will be stronger. But it even seems out of the UK. In the United States, the face of the global fraud industry is a leftist responsibility for people.
-
-
-
-
