From Scam Risk to Scam Liability: What Every Enterprise Must Do to Meet Global Scam Regulations

Regulators aren’t just cracking down on digital fraud – they’re rewriting the rules on who’s responsible when it happens. Across every major region, laws are shifting liability closer to the first point of compromise: the login session. If your digital environment can’t detect a spoofed page, stop a phishing attempt, or block credential theft in real time, you’re not just at risk – you may be out of compliance.

For security and fraud leaders, this isn’t about ticking a checkbox – it’s about proving that your controls and defenses can identify and neutralize scam-related threats before customers literally pay the price.

Related reading: What Domain Takedown Services Miss & How to Close Gaps

Why Enforcement Trends Matter to Fraud & Security Teams

• Accelerated payment rails leave no time for post-fraud recovery.
• Shared liability models are extending beyond banks to telcos and platforms.
• Increased fines for inadequate technical measures, including failure to detect fake sites.
• Mandatory real-time monitoring and incident reporting in multiple regions.

In 2025, compliance with scam-related fraud prevention mandates increasingly depends on proving that you can detect and disrupt attacks as they happen, not just investigate it afterward.

Regional Regulatory Landscape & Aligned Controls

North America

United States – Regulation E (EFTA)

Status: In force
Requirement: Reimburse victims for unauthorized electronic transfers.
Aligned controls: Use fake login page detection and browser-level credential theft prevention to limit refund exposure under Reg E.

Related reading: How Browser-Level Signals Prevent Credential Stuffing

Latin America (LATAM)

Brazil – Pix Security Rules & MED

Status: In force
Requirement: Limit high-risk transfers, enable special refund mechanisms.
Aligned controls: Detect and block spoofed Pix payment portals before users enter credentials to prevent fraudulent transfers.

Mexico – CNBV Anti-Fraud Program

Status: In force
Requirement: Maintain documented fraud prevention plans.
Aligned controls: Integrate session-layer browser detection tools to proactively identify and neutralize impersonation attempts.

Chile – Authentication & Chargeback Reform

Status: In force
Requirement: Stronger authentication and chargeback claim controls.
Aligned controls: Strengthen authentication and detect fraudulent login/checkout attempts to reduce chargeback exposure.

Colombia – ID Theft Liability Law

Status: In force
Requirement: Bank liability for proven impersonation-based fraud.
Aligned controls: Use session-aware phishing detection to prevent identity data capture that could lead to ID theft claims.

Peru – SBS 2FA Mandate (2025 Update)

Status: Updated 2025
Requirement: Strong 2FA for all card transactions.
Aligned controls: Ensure phishing defenses protect the integrity of mandated 2FA processes.

Europe, Middle East & Africa (EMEA)

EU – Instant Payment Regulation (2024/886)

Status: In force
Requirement: Detect fraud before instant transfers complete.
Aligned controls: Apply real-time redirect detection and phishing prevention at session start to intercept threats before payments begin.

EU – DORA

Status: Effective Jan 2025
Requirement: Real-time monitoring and reporting.
Aligned controls: Implement browser-session telemetry and behavioral anomaly monitoring to meet real-time fraud event requirements.

EU – PSD3 (Draft)

Status: Draft
Requirement: Proposes shared liability for impersonation scams targeting users of financial and digital platforms.
Aligned controls: Deploy real-time impersonation and spoof detection to meet PSD3’s proposed liability for social-engineering scams.

Spain – GDPR Art. 32 Enforcement

Status: In force
Requirement: Appropriate technical measures for data protection.
Aligned controls: Use real-time spoofed session detection and credential misuse prevention to demonstrate adequate technical controls. This mirrors patterns seen in EMEA enforcement cases.

UK – APP Scam Reimbursement Rule

Status: In force
Requirement: Mandatory reimbursement for many scam victims.
Aligned controls: Detect phishing-driven ATO precursors at login to help prevent downstream scam losses.

Asia-Pacific (APAC)

Singapore – Shared Responsibility Framework

Status: In force
Requirement: Banks and telcos share scam liability.
Aligned controls: Deploy session-level scam detection to demonstrate proactive fraud mitigation across digital channels.

Related reading: Detect & Stop Reverse Proxy Phishing Attacks in Real-Time

Status: In force
Requirement: Multi-sector obligations for scam prevention.
Aligned controls: Implement browser-session monitoring to detect scam activity in real time across financial and telco services.

Australia – AFCA Liability Precedent

Status: In force
Requirement: Refunds where security is inadequate.
Aligned controls: Use real-time credential misuse detection and anomaly tracking to show reasonable care.

Hong Kong – HKMA/Police Scam Pact

Status: In force
Requirement: Early detection and reporting of mule/scam accounts.
Aligned controls: Detect credential theft and flag suspicious accounts for early reporting in line with the scam pact.

Indonesia – OJK Reg. No. 12/2024

Status: In force
Requirement: Fraud monitoring and reporting.
Aligned controls: Implement session-aware phishing detection and telemetry collection to support regulatory reporting.

India – RBI Fraud Risk Master Direction

Status: In force
Requirement: Early-warning fraud detection.
Aligned controls: Deploy browser-level behavioral monitoring and phishing site referral tracking to provide early alerts.

Japan – Bank-Police Data Sharing Pact

Status: In force
Requirement: Early reporting of suspicious accounts.
Aligned controls: Block credential harvesting at login to reduce downstream suspicious account activity.

At-a-Glance: Newly Enforceable, and Emerging Scam Regulations (Plus the Aligned Controls for Staying Compliant)

How to Prepare for the Scam Regulation Tsunami

To align with evolving fraud regulations across regions, security and fraud teams should take the following preparatory steps:

• Map regulatory exposure across digital journeys
  Identify where login, session, and impersonation threats intersect with liability triggers in fraud regulations.
• Audit current phishing and spoofed session detection capabilities
  Ensure controls detect fake logins and credential harvesting before users reach transactional stages.
• Ensure documentation of impersonation threat mitigation
  Maintain internal audit records of how impersonation is detected, blocked, and reported — aligned with GDPR, DORA, SRF, etc.
• Align fraud response workflows across legal, fraud, and IT teams
  Confirm roles and response processes for scam-related incidents, including evidence capture and reporting.
• Map technical controls to specific regulatory mandates
  Link fraud prevention mechanisms to clauses like GDPR Art. 32, DORA Article 11, or Reg E dispute procedures
  
• Collect and retain real-time evidence of fraud prevention efforts
  Store logs of session-level detections, user alerts, and threat neutralization as part of audit and dispute readiness.

Key Takeaways for Security & Fraud Leaders

• Regulatory shifts are moving liability upstream to the point of login.
• Real-time detection is becoming a baseline compliance expectation.
• Demonstrating proactive controls is now a defense in reimbursement and fine cases.
• Session-layer protection aligns with multiple regional mandates.

Support Compliance With Global Scam Liability Mandates, with Memcyco

Global scam regulations are converging on one message: enterprises must prove they can detect and stop scams in real time. Liability is no longer just financial – it’s regulatory and reputational. Organizations that align early with mandates like Reg E, DORA, PSD3, SRF, and beyond will not only avoid penalties but also strengthen customer trust.

Memcyco helps enterprises prepare for this new era of shared liability by delivering real-time detection, visibility into victims, and upstream scam disruption. To learn more, schedule a product demo.

FAQs

What is the biggest regulatory shift impacting fraud prevention in 2025?

The combination of instant payment regulations and shared liability frameworks is driving the need for real-time scam detection across sectors.

How can session-layer phishing protection help with PSD3 and other platform liability rules?

By blocking impersonation and session spoofing, it provides a control that aligns with expanded platform obligations.

Which APAC regulations have the strongest scam prevention mandates?

Singapore’s SRF, Australia’s Anti-Scam Law, and India’s RBI Fraud Risk Master Direction are leading examples.

Can session-layer protection stop authorized push payment scams?

It cannot stop a user from authorizing a payment, but it can prevent the phishing-driven ATOs that precede many APP scams.

What is the link between instant payments and impersonation fraud risk?

Instant payments remove recovery windows, making pre-transaction impersonation detection critical.

Which regulations require proof of proactive phishing site detection?

Spain’s GDPR Art. 32 enforcement, DORA, and several APAC mandates require demonstrable detection of fake or spoofed sites.

How do shared liability frameworks change fraud prevention strategies?

They force closer coordination between banks, telcos, and platforms, making early-session detection essential to reduce liability exposure.

What technical measures satisfy “appropriate” security requirements under GDPR?

Real-time phishing detection, decoy credential injection, and fake-site blocking are examples of appropriate technical measures.

Can detection integrate into existing fraud risk engines?

Yes. High-fidelity, browser-level attack data can enrich existing models without adding user friction.

Julian Agudelo

Head of Content Marketing