
Ministers will no doubt have been gratified to read most of the reactions to the Pension Schemes Bill. It’s pretty rare for legislation to attract words like “game-changer”, “blockbuster”, or “a pivotal moment” (other than in ministers’ own press releases, of course) but on this occasion, it seems many - even most - in the pensions industry are positively inclined.
There are, of course, dissenting voices. Former Pensions Minister, Steve Webb acknowledged “many worthy measures” in the Bill, but bemoaned the absence of any measures to boost pension adequacy, warning that “with every passing year that this issue goes unaddressed, time is running out for people already well through their working life to have the chance for a decent retirement”.
Others voiced concerns (not all of them new) about the possibility of government mandating pension investment in UK markets, or of new rules on scheme surpluses affecting members’ incomes in the longer term.
But perhaps a more interesting response came in a blog from the Pensions Regulator CEO, Nausicaa Delfas, in which she welcomed the Bill, but cautioned that it only provides the “pieces of the jigsaw”. The UK pension system, she continued, is “unfinished business”, with considerable room for development in areas like innovation and quality of trusteeship. And, though optimistic that the Bill can be “the defining moment it promises to be”, her conclusion offered a timely wake-up call to the broader pensions sector: “everyone working in the pensions industry needs to be thinking now about their own role in making these reforms a success.”

The "traditional" UK retiree is a vanishing demographic. As of 2026, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and the DWP report that over 1.1 million UK pensioners now reside overseas. This isn't just a trend for high-net-worth individuals; it is a cross-demographic shift driven by global mobility and the search for lower costs of living.
However, the risk to pension schemes doesn't start at the point of retirement. It begins decades earlier.
While pensioners moving abroad is a well-documented trend, a more systemic risk is quietly accumulating in the "deferred" category: The Young Mobile Workforce.
1. The Fiduciary "Out of Touch" Trap
A trustee’s duty of care does not end when a member moves overseas. Traditional UK-centric tracing is no longer a "reasonable endeavor" when a significant portion of the membership is international. Without global data, trustees cannot fulfill mandated disclosure requirements or support members in making informed retirement choices.
2. The Mortality Blindspot
The most significant financial risk is overpayment. Without robust international mortality screening, schemes can continue paying benefits for years after a member has passed away overseas. Reclaiming these funds from foreign jurisdictions is legally complex and often impossible.
3. Member Welfare & Social Responsibility
Small pots represent a member's future livelihood. When schemes lose touch, they lose the ability to provide value. For the mobile workforce, being "out of touch" means being "under-saved."
To address these complexities, the industry is moving toward AI-enabled web intelligence that looks beyond standard registry searches. Heka’s approach focuses on three core pillars to restore scheme integrity:
As the UK workforce becomes more international, the risk of "lost" members is no longer a fringe issue – it is a core governance challenge. Trustees who bridge the global data gap today will protect their members’ welfare and their scheme’s long-term financial health.

The digital trust ecosystem has reached a breaking point. For the last decade, the industry’s defense strategy was built on a simple premise: detecting anomalies in a sea of legitimate behavior. But as we enter 2026, the mechanics of fraud have fundamentally inverted.
With global scam losses crossing $1 trillion and deepfake attacks surging by 3,000%, the line between the authentic and the synthetic has been erased. We are now witnessing the birth of "autonomous fraud" – a landscape where barriers to entry have vanished, and the guardrails are gone.
At Heka, we believe we have reached a critical pivot point. The industry must move beyond the futile arms race of trying to outpace generative models by simply using AI to detect AI. The new objective for heads of fraud and risk leaders is not just detecting attacks; it is verifying life.
Here is how the landscape is shifting in 2026, and why "context" is the only defense left that scales.
The most dangerous shift in 2026 is the democratization of high-end attack vectors. What was once the domain of sophisticated syndicates is now accessible to anyone with an internet connection.
This "Fraud as a Service" economy has lowered barriers to entry so drastically that 34% of consumers now report seeing offers to participate in fraud online – an alarmingly steep 89% year-over-year increase.
But the true threat lies in automation. We are witnessing the rise of the "Industrial Smishing Complex." According to insights from the Secret Service, we are seeing SIM farms capable of sending 30 million messages per minute – enough to text every American in under 12 minutes.
This is not just spam; it is a volume game powered by AI agents that never sleep. In the "Pig Butchering 2.0" model, automated scam centers are replacing human labor with AI systems that handle the "hook and line" conversations entirely autonomously. When a single bad actor can launch millions of attacks from a one-bedroom apartment, volume becomes a weapon that overwhelms traditional defenses.
Traditional fraud prevention relies on identifying outliers – high-value transactions or unusual behaviors. In 2026, fraudsters have inverted this logic using two distinct strategies:
1. The Shapeshifting Agent
Static rules fail against dynamic adversaries. We are now facing "shapeshifting" AI agents that do not follow pre-defined malware scripts. Instead, these agents learn from friction in real-time. If a transaction is declined, the AI adjusts its tactics instantly, using the rejection data to "shapeshift" into a new attack vector. As noted by risk experts, these agents autonomously navigate trial-and-error loops, rendering static rules useless.
2. "Dust" Trails and Horizontal Attacks
While banks watch for the "big heist," fraud rings are executing "horizontal attacks." By skimming small amounts – often around $50 – from thousands of victims simultaneously, attackers create "dust trails" that stay below the investigation thresholds of major institutions.
Data from Sardine.AI indicates that fraud rings are now using fully autonomous systems to execute these attacks across hundreds of merchants simultaneously. Viewed in isolation, a single $50 charge looks like a normal transaction. It is only when viewed through the lens of web intelligence –seeing the shared infrastructure across the wider web – that the attack becomes visible.
Perhaps the most alarming trend in 2026 is the erosion of confidence in digital channels. Because AI-generated identities and deepfakes have reached such sophistication, 75% of financial institutions admit their verification technology now produces inconsistent results.
This failure has triggered a defensive regression: the return to physical branches. Gartner estimates that 30% of enterprises no longer trust biometrics alone, leading some banks to demand customers appear in person for identity proofing.
While this stops the immediate bleeding, it is a strategic failure. Forcing customers back to the branch introduces massive friction without solving the core problem. As industry experts note, if a teller reviews a driver's license "as if it's 1995" while facing a fraudster with perfect AI-generated documentation, we are merely adding inconvenience, not security.
The issue facing our industry is not a failure of digital identity itself; it is a failure of context.
Trust is fragile when it relies on a single signal, like a document scan or a selfie. In an AI-versus-AI world, seeing is no longer believing. However, while AI can fabricate a driver's license or a video feed, it consistently fails to recreate the messy, organic digital footprint of a real human being.
To survive the 2026 threat landscape, organizations must pivot toward:
1. Web Intelligence: Linking signals together to see the wider web of interactions rather than isolated events.
2. Long-Term, Consistent Presence: analyzing the continuity of an identity over time. Real humans have history. Synthetic identities, no matter how polished, lack the depth of a long-term digital existence.
3. Cross-Channel Consistency: Looking for the shared infrastructure and overlapping identities that horizontal attacks inevitably leave behind.
The future offers a clear path forward. Fraud prevention is no longer about beating a single control – it is about bridging the gaps between them.
While identity and behavior are easier to fake in isolation, the real advantage lies in the complexity of real-world signals. These are the signals that remain expensive to manufacture at scale. Organizations that embrace this context-driven approach will do more than just stop the $1 trillion wave of autonomous fraud; they will unlock a seamless experience where trust is automatic.
Stay informed. Stay adaptive. Stay ahead.
At Heka Global, our platform delivers real-time, explainable intelligence from thousands of global data sources to help fraud teams spot non-human patterns, identity inconsistencies, and early lifecycle divergence long before losses occur.
.png)
Fraud is no longer a technical skill. It’s a shopping experience.
What used to require specialized knowledge, custom scripting, and underground connections is now available through polished marketplaces that look indistinguishable from mainstream e-commerce platforms. Scrollable product cards. Star ratings. Tiered subscriptions. “Customers also bought…” recommendations.
Fraud-as-a-Service (FaaS) is not just an ecosystem – it is a parallel economy, built on the same principles as Amazon, Fiverr, and Shopify, but optimized for identity crime.
The result is a dramatic shift in the threat landscape: lower entry barriers, lower operational costs, and attacks that scale instantly. Fraud is no longer limited by human capability – it is limited only by how quickly these marketplaces can generate new products.
This blog exposes how the FaaS ecosystem actually works, what is available inside these marketplaces, and why the industrialization of fraud is reshaping digital risk.
The biggest misconception about digital crime is that it is messy, unstructured, and technically demanding. The truth is the opposite.
Today’s fraud marketplaces offer:

The experience mirrors legitimate SaaS:
And like Fiverr, each vendor specializes. There are providers for:
Fraud hasn’t just scaled – it has industrialized.
This is the part most institutions underestimate. The breadth and maturity of offerings is staggering. Here is what is openly sold across FaaS platforms – with the same clarity you’d expect from Amazon.

Full synthetic personas sold as complete packages:
Vendors guarantee the profile will pass KYC at specific institutions.
And the price range? $25–$200 per profile.
These aren’t crude Photoshopped IDs. They include:
Some vendors offer automated generation APIs: “Generate 1,000 EU passports → Deliver in 40 seconds.”

Pre-built phishing engines with:
Price: $10–$50 per campaign, often with free updates.
Many platforms now include "Fraud-GPT” engines – fraud-tuned GenAI models capable of producing tailored scam messages, emotional manipulation scripts, romance-fraud personas, and real-time social-engineering dialog. These systems can hold multi-turn conversations with victims while dynamically adjusting tone, urgency, and narrative to increase conversion rates.

Not just credential stuffing – full operational bots:
These bots now learn from failure and retry with adjusted parameters.
Just add username and phone number. These bundles include:
They are marketed explicitly: “ATO at scale. 94% success rate on XYZ bank. Guaranteed replacement if blocked.”
Highly organized product categories:
Every item has age, source, and validity score.

Turnkey operations:
When you step back from the catalog of available tools, one truth becomes impossible to ignore: fraud is no longer defined by human capability. It is defined by the capabilities of the systems that now produce and distribute it.
Every component of the fraud economy – identity creation, verification bypass, account takeover, social engineering, automation – has been modularized, optimized, and packaged for scale. The human actor is no longer the limiting factor. The marketplace provides the expertise, the automation provides the execution, and the criminal business model provides the incentive structure.
The result is a threat landscape that looks less like episodic misconduct and more like a supply chain. Fraud behaves like a coordinated operation, not a series of individual attempts. It adapts quickly, repeats consistently, and expands effortlessly – because the work is performed by tools, not people.
This is why traditional controls struggle. Identity verification was built on the assumption that inconsistencies, friction, and human error would reveal risk. But the industrialization of fraud produces identities that are consistent, documents that are polished, and behavioral patterns that are machine-stable. What used to feel like a red flag – a clean file, a frictionless onboarding journey – is now a symptom of a system-generated identity.
The deeper consequence is strategic: the attacker no longer “thinks” like a human adversary. They probe controls the way software tests an API. They run parallel attempts the way a product team runs A/B tests. They scale operations the way cloud infrastructure scales workloads. And because their tooling is continuously updated, their learning curve is steep – while defenses remain constrained by review cycles, risk committees, and static models.
For financial institutions, the rise of Fraud-as-a-Service has exposed the limits of a decades-old assumption: that identity can be validated by inspecting individual attributes. In an industrialized fraud economy, every discrete signal – documents, device profiles, PII, behavioral cues – can be purchased, replicated, or simulated on demand. A synthetic identity can now satisfy every checkbox a traditional onboarding flow requires.
What it cannot reliably produce is contextual coherence.
Real customers exhibit history, relationships, communication patterns, platform interactions, and digital residue that accumulate organically. Their identities make sense across time, across channels, and across environments. Their behavior reflects inconsistency, natural drift, and the kinds of imperfections that automated systems struggle to fabricate.
Synthetic identities, even sophisticated ones, tend to be:
This is the gap FIs must now address. Identity is no longer something you confirm once. It is something you understand – continuously – by examining whether its story holds together.
The operational shift is simple to articulate, harder to execute:
Verification must move from checking attributes to validating coherence.
Does the identity align with long-term behavioral patterns?
Does the footprint exist beyond the onboarding moment?
Does it behave like a human navigating life, or a system navigating workflows?
Does it fit the context in which it appears?
Fraud has become industrial. Identity fabrication has become automated. What separates real from synthetic is no longer the presence of data, but whether that data forms a believable whole.
Financial institutions that recalibrate their controls toward coherence – contextual, cross-signal intelligence – will be positioned to detect what Fraud-as-a-Service still struggles to imitate: the complexity of genuine human identity.
At Heka Global, our platform delivers real-time, explainable intelligence from thousands of global data sources to help fraud teams spot non-human patterns, identity inconsistencies, and early lifecycle divergence long before losses occur.
In an AI-versus-AI world, timing is everything. The earlier your system understands an identity, the sooner you can stop the threat.