Are Telcos Responsible for Protecting Citizens from Fraud?

Telecom-driven fraud is especially dangerous due to its interconnected impact. Scammers no longer operate in silos; they manipulate telecom mediums to engineer trust, but the financial damage is often inflicted through banks, fintech platforms, or even identity theft.

• A simple call from a "bank executive" can lead to fraudulent transactions.
• A fake SMS from a "government agency" can trick citizens into handing over sensitive data.
• A social media advertisement promoting a fake "customer care number" can empty someone's digital wallet.

This issue affects individuals not merely as telecom subscribers but as citizens navigating a hyper-connected world. A fraudulent SMS or call can ripple across their digital existence, impacting finances, identity, and emotional well-being. So, the key question arises: Beyond protecting their own revenue streams, should telecom operators take on the social responsibility of safeguarding citizens, or is it a regulatory obligation they must fulfill?

Social Responsibility vs. Obligation

For many customers, telecom networks are the first and obvious visible link in a fraud scheme — calls, messages, and digital communications are how fraudsters reach them. As a result, when fraud occurs, victims often blame their telecom provider, questioning why it wasn’t prevented.

However, is it fair to hold telecom operators solely accountable for fraud prevention? Should their role be one of social responsibility, or does it extend to a legal obligation?

1. Customer Perception

• Customers often believe telecom operators "allowed" the fraud to happen, not realizing that scammers exploit multiple platforms, including banks, OTT messaging apps, and payment gateways.
• Unlike financial institutions that can reverse fraudulent transactions, telecom operators cannot always prevent social engineering fraud, as these involve human manipulation rather than network breaches.
• Many victims feel that telcos should do more than just provide connectivity, expecting them to detect, block, and even compensate for fraud-related losses, a demand that raises complex regulatory and operational questions.

Telcos can take proactive steps to mitigate fraud risks and educate consumers:

• Advanced Fraud Detection: Deploy AI-driven analytics to detect patterns of fraudulent calls and messages before they reach customers.
• Blocking & Authentication: Strengthen measures like STIR/SHAKEN, AI-based call verification, and SMS filtering to prevent scams from reaching users.
• Customer Awareness Campaigns: Conduct widespread fraud education via SMS alerts, awareness drives, and social media campaigns.
• Cross-Sector Collaboration: Work with banks, fintech companies, and regulatory bodies to share fraud intelligence in real time.

Some governments are now pushing for stronger legal enforcement to make fraud prevention a regulatory requirement rather than a corporate choice:

• Stricter Fraud Prevention Mandates: Countries like the UK and Singapore have enforced policies requiring telcos to block scam calls and filter phishing messages.
• Mandatory Real-Time Verification: Governments may demand enhanced customer authentication for high-risk transactions via telecom channels.
• Liability & Accountability: Should telecom providers be held responsible for fraud committed via their networks, even when the fraud leverages human psychology over technical flaws?

Breaking Silos: A Unified Protection Approach

Since fraudsters operate across domains, tackling the problem requires a cross-sector approach. Telecom, banking, financial services, social media applications, and regulators must work together to:

• Share real-time fraud intelligence to prevent scams before they happen.
• Establish global fraud detection standards using AI and data analytics.
• Implement multi-layer authentication measures to make scams harder to execute.
• Raise customer awareness through proactive fraud alerts and joint education campaigns.

Unlike financial institutions, telcos have no unified global regulatory body for fraud prevention. Countries like the UK, USA, and Singapore have strict anti-fraud telecom regulations, but many nations lack robust frameworks. Collaboration at a global level for such new-age frauds is yet to materialize. A global Telecom-Banking-OTT alliance is perhaps needed to ensure holistic fraud protection.

Final Thought

Fraud prevention isn't just a compliance metric — it’s about preserving digital trust. In today’s hyperconnected world, the global framework must empower telecoms to evolve from being passive channels to proactive defenders of citizen safety. The call for global cooperation is no longer optional — it’s urgent.