Shufti

A fundraiser went viral in India this week on the strength of four documents: a hospital letterhead, a prescription, a treatment estimate and an ID. Over ₹1.5 lakh moved in roughly 24 hours.

Nothing about the documents failed a visual check. The formatting was right. The letterhead was real, lifted from a Delhi eye hospital. Thousands of people looked at the appeal and had no reason to doubt it.

Then one person called the hospital. The records did not exist. The hospital later issued a public warning that someone had created a fake patient record, prescription and estimate on its letterhead and was approaching NGOs and individuals for money.

Three things worth pulling out of this:

- The forgery did not need to be sophisticated. It needed to look right to people who were never going to check.

- The hospital found out after the money moved, not before. It had no way of knowing its letterhead was in circulation.

- The only thing that broke it was verification against the issuing source. Not a sharper eye. A phone call to the organisation named on the paper.


That gap is not specific to fundraisers. Every onboarding flow that accepts a document as proof runs on the same assumption, that a document which looks authentic is authentic. Those are two different claims, and only one of them can be checked.

Fraud also repeats. The same letterhead, the same template, a new name on the form. Recognising that takes a system that remembers what it has already seen.

Read the full story: www.freepressjournal.in/india/jay-singh-rathore-sc…

9 hours ago | [YT] | 0

Shufti

Three hours to go.

Shufti and AMLintelligence are going live to talk about what AMLR expects from the customers already on your books.

Don't miss out. Join now: zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_RemRIG7iT_mTFPnYV-uDBQ

12 hours ago | [YT] | 0

Shufti

AMLR does not stop at the first check.

Shufti and AMLintelligence are hosting a session on exactly that: Beyond the First Check: How AMLR Extends KYC Across the Customer Lifecycle.

Meet the panel:

Zhanel Auèzova, Lead Global Sanctions Procedures at Rabobank
Paul O'Donoghue, Senior Correspondent at AML Intelligence
Raja Hassan Fayyaz, VP Product Development & Marketing at Shufti

Tomorrow, 25 September, 2:00 PM GMT

Reserve your spot: zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_RemRIG7iT_mTFPnYV-uDBQ…

1 day ago | [YT] | 0

Shufti

Compliance used to be a question of whether you monitored. Now it's whether you monitor the exact way your regulator told you to.

Supervisors and financial intelligence units have stopped publishing vague principles and leaving the interpretation to you:

FINTRAC issues operational alerts on specific laundering methods
FinCEN publishes advisories with named red-flag indicators
Central banks now hand new licensees scenario lists to monitor from day one

So the work changed. It is no longer "build a monitoring programme." It is "build these 56 scenarios, correctly, and prove it."

And the clock starts on day one. The regulator does not wait for you to catch up. Every named typology you haven't covered is a scenario you are already accountable for. Miss one, and it is not a delay. It is a finding.

Transaction Trust Monitoring ships those scenarios already built, mapped to your jurisdiction and sector. When the regulator names a typology, it is already in your system. You tune it to your risk. You don't rebuild the rulebook they already wrote.

The regulator wrote the rules. Your monitoring should already know them.

Experience now: shuftipro.com/transaction-monitoring/

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4

1 day ago | [YT] | 0

Shufti

Shufti has won two awards at the Datos Insights 2026 Impact Awards.

- Best KYC/KYB Innovation
- Best Financial Crime RegTech Innovation

Both categories point to the same thing: stopping financial crime before it becomes someone else's problem.

That starts at onboarding. A synthetic identity, a deepfaked selfie, a shell company with an owner nobody can name. Each is a fraud loss and an AML failure at the same time.

Shufti verifies the person, verifies the business, and screens both before an account opens, against:

- 3,500+ watchlists
- 215+ sanction regimes
- 2.6 million PEP profiles

Then it keeps going. Transaction monitoring scores risk on 1,600+ data points in under 500 milliseconds, so the account that passed six months ago is still being watched today.

Fraud and AML teams usually solve the same case in two different systems. That separation is the vulnerability.

Fraud detection and financial crime controls were never two problems.

2 days ago | [YT] | 0

Shufti

Bank account verification usually means adding another vendor.

A separate tool checks the account, on a separate integration, with its own records. It sits next to your identity and AML checks rather than with them. The result:

More integrations to maintain
Separate audit trails to reconcile when someone asks who was paid

Shufti Bank Account Verification works differently. It runs on the same platform already verifying your customers, so identity, AML and account ownership resolve in one decision, against one record. No second vendor. No second integration. No second audit trail.

Because the account is checked against the identity you already verified, the person you onboarded and the account receiving the money stay tied together. When a payment is questioned, the proof is in one place, ready to hand over.

Identity, AML and the account, in one decision.

Book a demo: shuftipro.com/request-demo/

Skip the Carousel

1 2

2 days ago | [YT] | 1

Shufti

Five US regulators just told banks they can accept a phone as an ID. The part worth reading closely is what they carefully did not do.

On 9 September, FinCEN, together with the Federal Reserve, FDIC, NCUA and OCC, issued new FAQs confirming that banks and credit unions may use state-issued mobile driver's licenses and other government digital credentials to identify customers under the Customer Identification Program rules.

The wording is deliberate. The guidance says the CIP rule neither requires nor prohibits accepting a digital credential, and that the institution still has to form a reasonable belief it knows the customer's true identity, and still has to act on signs of fraud. So you're allowed to accept the credential. You are not let off verifying it.

That gap is the whole point. The guidance defines a mobile driver's license as something:

Digitally signed by the issuer
Cryptographically bound to the device
Locked behind an activation factor like a PIN or a biometric

Accepting one still means checking it was genuinely issued by the state, that it hasn't been tampered with, and that the person holding the phone is the person it belongs to. Doing that face to face is straightforward. Doing it online, where someone has to build the reader side of the presentment, is the part most institutions haven't tackled yet.

There's a second line that deserves attention. The same framework lets a private third-party credential count as a non-documentary verification method, but the bank stays on the hook for making sure that a third party applies the same standard of authentication the bank would apply itself. The credential can be outsourced. The responsibility can't.

So this isn't really a story about phones replacing plastic. Presenting ID got easier. Proving it's real, unaltered and tied to the right person did not.

If you work in onboarding or financial crime: is your CIP actually being rewritten for digital credentials yet, and who owns the verification step, you or a vendor you're now answerable for?

Read the full article: idtechwire.com/u-s-regulators-clarify-banks-can-us…

2 days ago | [YT] | 0

Shufti

Shufti is attending RegTech Exchange London on 23 September, an invite-only forum bringing together compliance, financial crime and risk leaders from UK banks and financial institutions.

Max Irwin will be there for the discussions on:

Modernising compliance operations through automation
The practical use of AI in financial crime
Continuous risk intelligence
Keeping up with regulatory change

If you're also attending RegTech Exchange London, feel free to reach out!

3 days ago | [YT] | 0

Shufti

Your payouts cross borders. Does your account verification?

Shufti Bank Account Verification confirms an account is real and belongs to the payee, on the same platform already verifying your customers, across 240+ regions.

It runs across the whole money lifecycle:

Account linking
Payouts and withdrawals
Direct debits and refunds
Beneficiary changes

Integrate once, and each market returns the strongest answer it allows: a bank-confirmed name, a match verdict, or a validated IBAN.

When payout or withdrawal details change, Shufti asks for step-up biometric re-authentication with liveness, so funds can't be quietly redirected to an account the customer doesn't control. Every check leaves an audit-ready record in one place, not scattered across vendors.

Secure payments with confirmed ownership.

See it live: shuftipro.com/request-demo/

3 days ago | [YT] | 0

Shufti

Shufti is a finalist for RegTech of the Year at the US FinTech Awards 2026.

The category is named after regulation, but it isn't judged solely on regulation. It's judged on whether the technology lets a compliance team keep pace with the business it protects.

That gap is where most of this industry lives:

- A new market opens and onboarding takes months to support it.
- A rule changes and the flow waits on an engineering release.
- A regulator asks about a decision made eighteen months ago, and three systems have to be reconciled before anyone can answer.

We've never accepted that as the cost of doing this the right way. Identity verification, AML screening, KYB and the evidence behind every decision belong on one platform, in 240+ countries and territories, across 10,000+ document types, in a record that still holds up years later.

Compliance is not where a business slows down. It's how a business earns the right to move.

#USFinTechAwards #RegTech #FinTech #Compliance

4 days ago | [YT] | 0