Meta reckons it’s already “detected and disrupted” close to eight million accounts across Facebook and Instagram that were in bed with scam centres through messaging, crypto, dating apps, and social media. That’s on top of the platform ridding WhatsApp of more than 6.8 million scam accounts in the first half of 2025.

Click HERE to WIN!!!

Meta’s methods here are simple yet elegant and should — because old folks can’t always take the hint — put an end to certain scams plaguing the platforms. As seen in the image above, Meta will display a warning for anyone looking to share their screen with an unknown contact during a video call. Users will be forced to click on ‘Continue’ before they’re allowed to share their screen with just anyone.

Online scams on WhatsApp often rely on bad actors pressuring their victims into sharing their screens with them to glean sensitive information, such as banking details, passwords, and OTPs. Meta also offered a reminder that the app supports passkeys that’ll require the same fingerprint, face, or PIN as your device’s lock screen.

Read More: WhatsApp’s working out a new method to rein in spam messages

As for Messenger, Meta claims it’s begun testing “advanced scam detection in chats.” It’s similar to WhatsApp’s new methods, as it automatically detects when a new contact sends a “potentially scammy message,” and throws up all sorts of warning signs — with the option to forward those messages to Meta for AI scam review.

Should the app successfully detect a scam, it’ll pass on information about the scams typical of the modern minefield that is the internet, and offer suggestions to block the contact in question or report it to Meta. Beyond that, you’re on your own, grandpa.

The post WhatsApp, Messenger introduce alerts to foil scammers targeting the elderly appeared first on Stuff South Africa.

Users who change their job titles to anything recruiter- or executive-related will have additional hoops to leap through in the form of (slightly) more stringent verification. The change probably won’t have much impact on existing scam networks, as it only applies to new changes going forward.

Even more LinkedIn

Still, LinkedIn profiles that hop between job roles to convince users that they totally have a job for them might be a little stymied. Any user who changes their job title to something recruitment-related (like ‘recruiter’ or ‘talent specialist’) or to an executive-level position (‘director’, ‘vice president’, and others) will be asked to verify themselves on the platform.

The hoop isn’t too onerous — an official company email address using the company domain name is required to receive a verification code. Somebody listing themselves as the Executive Vice President of Human Resources Decisions will struggle to make the change with a boring old Gmail address. If the IT department is slack when it comes to creating those, they’ll just have to nerd a bit harder, won’t they?

This isn’t really aimed at making the lives of average users simpler, though. This new function is part of a new “Premium Company Page subscription”, a paid-for service for companies looking to be given Verified status on LinkedIn.

Giving Microsoft’s platform more money will help convince job applicants that you’re trustworthy enough to send a CV to, apparently. It might even work. Receiving a non-verified job offer from a company that is known to have paid for executive VIP status will be a rather large red flag.

Source

The post LinkedIn to require more verifications in a bid to cut down on employment scams appeared first on Stuff South Africa.

Online platforms like Facebook Marketplace and Gumtree have revolutionised the way we buy and sell secondhand goods. They’re convenient, easily accessible, and put you and potential buyers and sellers in the same ‘room’. Thing is, it could be a dodgy ordeal if you end up trusting the wrong person.

It is crucial to remain vigilant when navigating these online marketplaces to protect yourself from scammers who seek to exploit unsuspecting users. There are a few ways to do this.

Verify, verify, verify

We know, we sound just like Gmail’s 2FA notifications, but this one’s essential. Before initiating any transaction, take the time to verify the identity of the seller. Look for genuine profiles with complete information and a history of positive interactions.

Check if the seller has any reviews or ratings from previous buyers, as this can provide valuable insights into their credibility. Communicate with them through the platform’s messaging system to maintain a record of your conversation. Also, it’s good practice not to just go on the person’s ID document – this is a common tactic used by sellers to persuade you into selling to them. A copy of an ID document means little in South Africa.

Go with your gut

Trust your instincts and be cautious of any red flags. If an offer appears too good to be true or the seller’s behaviour seems suspicious, it’s best to exercise caution. Scammers often use tactics such as offering excessively low prices when selling things. It’s a good bet to compare similar products online to see if the asking price is unrealistically low.

Other tactics, like pressuring you for immediate payment or creating a false sense of urgency, should also be considered. Remember, it’s better to miss out on a deal than to become a victim of fraud.

Close to home

When buying or selling secondhand goods, always opt for in-person meetings in public, well-lit areas. Consider meeting at a local police station or busy mall. Bringing a friend along can also provide an added layer of security.

This goes hand-in-hand with ‘trust your gut’. If the person shies away from meeting in public, or your GPS preview seems to lead to an unsavoury area, best stay away. Use your heightened South African trouble tracker to know when you have to back out of a deal. Also, avoid meeting in secluded locations or allowing strangers into your home, as this can compromise your personal safety.

Cash-only business?

Cash payments are the most common form of payment for goods bought from online marketplaces. However, exercise caution when handling cash and be wary of counterfeit currency. Verify the authenticity of banknotes using security features and consider conducting the transaction at a bank or other secure location where the money can be verified.

Alternatively, consider using secure online payment methods such as immediate EFT or Cash Send. These methods offer some level of buyer protection and can help resolve disputes if the transaction goes awry. It’s advised that sellers don’t accept an EFT notification if the money doesn’t reflect in their account. It’s most likely not going to reflect, as South African scammers easily forge these notifications.

A PSA: Avoid sharing your financial information, such as credit card details, over unsecured platforms or with unverified sellers. This should be common knowledge, but we feel it necessary to mention. You know, just in case.

Don’t overshare

Protect your personal information by being cautious about the data you share online. Scammers may attempt to collect sensitive information such as your full name, address, or bank account details.

Just be sure to avoid sharing these details unless absolutely necessary, and be cautious of phishing attempts disguised as legitimate inquiries.

Be the whistleblower

If you encounter a suspicious seller or fall victim to a scam, report that person to the platform’s customer support immediately. By reporting fraudulent accounts or listings, you help create a safer online environment for other users.

Additionally, consider reporting the incident to your local police station, especially if you’re in possession of counterfeit Rands.

While online platforms like Facebook Marketplace and Gumtree offer tremendous opportunities for buying and selling secondhand goods. Stay safe, and be lekker, folks.

The post Don’t get scammed – A South African guide appeared first on Stuff South Africa.

Squid Game memecoin dies a meme death

To bring you up to speed, a group of unknown individuals with no connection or affiliation to the show or its creators, took it upon themselves to create a new memecoin called $SQUID because it’s 2021 and that’s what we do now, apparently.

Just an FYI, ‘memecoin’ refers to cryptocurrencies like ‘dogecoin’ or the newish, dogecoin-killer ‘Shiba Inu’ that are usually created as a joke and aren’t meant to be taken too seriously, unless you’re Elon.

In typical memecoin fashion, it peaked briefly at $2,856 before crashing to $0.0007926. If you want to know what that looks like The_Dent was streaming on Twitch when it happened. 

Crypto shit coin rug pull #SquidGameToken LIVE! #shib is next$squid pic.twitter.com/mdauJNfHvb

— SimonZ (@SimonZawa) November 1, 2021

If it looks and smells like a scam…

The actual motivations behind the Squid Game coin were a little murky, to begin with. It was showing all the signs of a crypto scam which was all but confirmed with the crash, or what is known by the crypto community as a ‘rug pull’. The creators drained the wallets and receded into the digital shadow realm. The website no longer exits and the Twitter and Medium profiles disappeared. On coinmarketcap.com, you’re met with the message:

“We have received multiple reports that the website and socials are no longer functional & users are not able to sell this token in Pancakeswap. There is growing evidence that this project has rugged. Please do your own due diligence and exercise extreme caution. This project, while clearly inspired by the Netflix show of the same name, is NOT affiliated with the official IP.”

Smells like a scam to us.

The post Squid Game cryptocurrency crashes into oblivion appeared first on Stuff South Africa.

Crypto, but all grown up

According to Bloomberg (via BusinessTech), the South African Prudential Authority (or, the banking regulator) has revealed that it will have a regulatory framework ready for the new currency in the upcoming months. Of course, it feels like a ‘too little, too late’ situation, but it’s about time proper regulations are drafted in SA regarding crypto trading. 

Kuben Naidoo, chief executive officer of the Prudential Authority and deputy governor of the SA central bank details that proposals were drafted earlier in June, and these still have to go through a public comment stage before proper approval. 

“We are trying to put in place the regulatory framework quickly,” says Naidoo. “Defining this as a financial product and then developing the regulatory framework is important.”

Thing is, trading crypto is all but new in South Africa, and exchanges and apps are appearing all over the place. Popular local trading apps like Luno and VALR have already amassed many local traders. The Africrypt scam is a situation that could’ve easily been dissuaded using proper regulations. 

Remember Mirror Trading International? Bloomberg recalls its collapse as being the biggest crypto-related scam of 2020 by Chainalysis.

The post South Africa rethinking its crypto regulations appeared first on Stuff South Africa.

The point of the hack? To lure followers into sending US$1,000 in Bitcoin, with the classic scammer’s false promise of sending back twice as as much.

After a preliminary investigation, Twitter said it believed the incident was “a coordinated social engineering attack by people who successfully targeted some of our employees with access to internal systems and tools”.

Our investigation is still ongoing but here’s what we know so far:

— Support (@Support) July 16, 2020

The details are still far from clear, but it seems likely someone with administrative rights may have granted the hackers access, perhaps inadvertently, despite the presence of two-factor authentication on the accounts – widely considered the gold standard of online security. It appears insiders may have been involved, although the story is still unfolding.

The use of the niche currency Bitcoin limited the number of potential victims, but also makes the hackers’ loot impossible to trace. Ironically enough, Bitcoin is a currency designed for a post-trust world, and the anonymity of its transactions makes the hackers even harder to track down.

Whom do we trust?

This is not the first time we have seen the complex and profound impact social media can have. In 2013, hackers gained access to @AP, the official Twitter account of the respected Associated Press news agency, and tweeted:

Breaking: Two Explosions in the White House and Barack Obama is Injured.

The stock market dived by US$136.5 billion almost immediately but bounced back within six minutes, illustrating the interconnected systems that move so quickly a human cannot intervene – algorithms read the headlines and the stock market collapsed, albeit fleetingly.

By shorting stocks, whoever hacked AP’s Twitter account stood to make enormous profits from the temporary stock market tank. We do not know what the financial benefits, if any, to the hackers in 2013 were.

This week’s Twitter hack definitely had financial motives. The Bitcoin scammers in this recent hack netted more than US$50,000.

More sinister still, however, are the implications for democracy if a similar hack were carried out with political motives.

What if a reliable source, such as a national newspaper’s official account, tweets that a presidential candidate has committed a crime, or is seriously ill, on the eve of an election? What if false information about international armed attacks is shared from a supposedly reliable source such as a government defence department? The impacts of such events would be profound, and go far beyond financial loss.

https://twitter.com/jonathanbruck/status/1283594548233613312?

This is the inherent danger of our growing reliance on social media platforms as authoritative sources of information. As media institutions decline in size, funding and impact, the public increasingly relies on social media platforms for news.

The Bitcoin scam is a reminder that any social media platform can be hacked, tampered with, or used to spread false information. Even gold-standard technical systems can be outwitted, perhaps by exploiting human vulnerabilities. A disgruntled employee, a careless password selection, or even a device used in a public space can pose grave risks.

Who’s in charge?

The question of who polices the vast power accrued by social media platforms is a crucial one. Twitter’s reaction to the hack – temporarily shutting down all accounts verified with the “blue tick” that connotes public interest – raised the ire of high-profile users (and prompted mirth among those not bestowed with Twitter’s mark of legitimacy). But the underlying question is: who decides what is censored or shut down, and under what circumstances? And should companies do this themselves, or do they need a regulatory framework to ensure fairness and transparency?

Broader questions have already been raised about when Twitter, Facebook or other social media platforms should or should not censor content. Facebook was heavily criticised for not removing oppressive posts about Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, and what the United Nations referred to as a genocide ensued. Twitter much later suspended some accounts that had been inciting violence, with some criticism.

What is the responsibility of such platforms, and who should govern them, as we become more heavily reliant on social media for our news? As the platforms’ power and influence continue to grow, we need rigorous frameworks to hold them accountable.

In an idea world, social media giants would regulate themselves. But here in the real world, the stakes are too high to let the platforms police themselves.

• Kobi Leins is Senior Research Fellow in Digital Ethics, University of Melbourne
• This article first appeared on The Conversation

The post The Twitter hack targeted the rich and famous. But we all lose if trusted accounts can be hijacked appeared first on Stuff South Africa.

We can already hear the comments section: “I don’t get it, I thought DStv Premium was already a scam!” Which is a good joke, we all laughed here in the office. But that doesn’t detract from the fact that folks are being taken advantage of. DStv posted a blog update making users aware that the amount of scams plaguing customers is on the rise. The most common of these ruses involves tricking customers into providing a one-off bulk payment for a year of DStv Premium, which isn’t how Multichoice conducts business.

Money for nothing

There are loads of other scams being run too. Customers have reported receiving emails seemingly from Multichoice asking for personal banking details to claim a ton of cash for being loyal to the service or winning a DStv-sponsored competition. Others have been sent an SMS demanding an overdue payment that needs to be paid immediately and includes personal bank details. Weirder still, several people have noted seeing fraudulent social media posts recruiting for Multichoice. It should go without saying, but Multichoice wants everyone to know that they don’t offer to drive people to interviews. So don’t hop into stranger’s cars, folks. Unless they work for Uber and you summoned ’em, obvs.

“MultiChoice will never request your personal details via email or SMS – please do not hand over your personal information to anyone claiming to be from DStv. Also, do not make payments directly to an individual claiming they are from MultiChoice or DStv – use one of our direct platforms to make your payments to your DStv account,” reads the blog post.

Be aware of folks looking to make a quick buck off the gullible. Scammers are everywhere and more than a few people have fallen prey to them in the past. There’s a reason scammers are still around. Keep your wits about you and if you think you’ve been sent a scam by someone using the Multichoice name, you can email the company at help@dstv.com to report the incident.

The post Keep your eyes peeled for these DSTV Premium scams doing the rounds appeared first on Stuff South Africa.

Skermunkel

People have been defrauded by ‘companies’ called variously ‘Wireless Nerds’, ‘Your Wi-Fi Specialists’ and ‘Wi-Fi and Networking Specialists’… all of which are Mahlangu’s fronts for his fraudulent activities. Mahlangu plies his cons in areas where Vumatel has deployed fibre and has been known to pose as a Vumatel employee in addition to his positions at one of the aforementioned fictitious companies.

According to Vumatel, Mahlangu (if that’s even his real name) claims to be a technician and charges a call-out fee upfront (the first thing that should make alarm bells ring). Sometimes he advises his ‘customers’ that they require more equipment to improve their internet experience, like new Wi-Fi routers and wireless extenders. He charges unsuspecting people for this equipment and then disappears. In other instances, he has installed ‘equipment’ in homes but disappears as soon as they realise it doesn’t work.

Vumatel has advised customers to use its official channels online to find a real internet service provider and/or technicians… and if a Lucky Mahlangu comes a knocking, turn him away, unless you want to get unlucky, that is.

The post Got Vumatel in your hood? Look out for this scammer appeared first on Stuff South Africa.

From researching blockchain, cryptocurrency and cybercrime, I can see that some cryptocurrency fraudsters rely on tried-and-true Ponzi schemes that use income from new participants to pay out returns to earlier investors.

Others use highly automatized and sophisticated processes, including automated software that interacts with Telegram, an internet-based instant-messaging system popular among people interested in cryptocurrencies. Even when a cryptocurrency plan is legitimate, fraudsters can still manipulate its price in the marketplace.

An even more basic question arises, though: How are unsuspecting investors attracted to cryptocurrency frauds in the first place?

Fast-talking swindlers

Some cryptocurrency fraudsters appeal to people’s greed, promising big returns. For example, an unknown group of entrepreneurs runs the scam bot iCenter, which is a Ponzi scheme for Bitcoin and Litecoin. It doesn’t provide information on investment strategies, but somehow promises investors 1.2% daily returns.

The iCenter scheme operates through a group chat on Telegram. It starts with a small group of scammers who are in on the racket. They get a referral code that they share with others, in blogs and on social media, hoping to get them to join the chat. Once there, the newcomers see encouraging and exciting messages from the original scammers. Some newcomers decide to invest, at which point they are assigned an individual bitcoin wallet, into which they can deposit bitcoins. They agree to wait some period of time – 99 or 120 days – to receive a significant return.

During that time, the newcomers often use social media to share their own referral codeswith friends and contacts, bringing more people into the group chat and into the investment scheme. There’s no actual investment of the funds in any legitimate business. Instead, when new people join, the person who recruited them gets a percentage of the new funds, and the cycle continues, paying out to earlier participants from each round of newer investors.

Some members work especially hard to bring in new funds, posting tutorial videos and pictures of themselves holding large amounts of money as enticements to join the scam.

Lies and more lies

Some scammers go for straight-up deception. The founders of scam cryptocurrency OneCoin defrauded investors of $3.8 billion by convincing people their nonexistent cryptocurrency was real.

Other scams are based on impressing potential victims with jargon or claims of specialized knowledge. The Global Trading scammers claimed they took advantage of price differences on various cryptocurrency exchanges to profit from what is called arbitrage – simply buying cheaply and selling at higher prices. Really they just took investors’ money.

Global Trading used a bot on Telegram, too – investors could send a balance inquiry message and get a response with false information about how much was in their account, sometimes even seeing balances climb by 1% in an hour. With returns looking like that, who could blame people for sharing the scheme with their friends and family on social media?

Exploiting friends and family

Once a scheme has started, it stays alive – at least for a while – through social media. One person gets taken in by the promise of big returns on cryptocurrency investments and spreads the word to friends and family members.

Sometimes big names get involved. For instance, the kingpin behind GainBitcoin and other alleged scams in India convinced a number of Bollywood celebrities to promote his book, “Cryptocurrency for Beginners.” He even tried to make himself a bit of a celebrity, proclaiming himself a “cryptocurrency guru,” as he led efforts that cost investors between $769 million and $2 billion.

Not all the celebrities know they’re involved. In one blog post, iCenter featured a video that purported to be an endorsement by Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, holding a sign featuring iCenter’s logo. Videos of Justin Timberlake and Christopher Walken were deceptively edited so they appeared to praise iCenter, too.

Fraudulent initial coin offerings

Another popular scam technique is called an “initial coin offering.” A potentially legitimate investment opportunity, an initial coin offering essentially is a way for a startup cryptocurrency company to raise money from its future users: In exchange for sending active cryptocurrencies like bitcoin and ethereum, customers are promised a discount on the new cryptocoins.

Many initial coin offerings have turned out to be scams, with organizers engaging in cunning plots, even renting fake offices and creating fancy-looking marketing materials. In 2017, a lot of hype and media coverage about cryptocurrencies fed a huge wave of initial coin offering fraud. In 2018, about 1,000 initial coin offering efforts collapsed, costing backers at least $100 million. Many of these projects had no original ideas – more than 15% of them had copied ideas from other cryptocurrency efforts, or even plagiarized supporting documentation.

Investors looking for returns in a new technology sector are still interested in blockchains and cryptocurrencies – but should beware that they are complex systems that are new even to those who are selling them. Newcomers and relative experts alike have fallen prey to scams.

In an environment like the current cryptocurrency market, potential investors should be very careful to research what they’re putting their money into and be sure to find out who is involved as well as what the actual plan is for making real money – without defrauding others.

• Nir Kshetri is Professor of Management, University of North Carolina – Greensboro
• This article first appeared on The Conversation

The post How cryptocurrency scams work appeared first on Stuff South Africa.