Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

Study: ID Fraud Varies With Victims' Income Level

'Economic divide' may lead businesses to develop more customized defenses for different customer types, Javelin research says

An analysis of a company's identity fraud victims may shed new light on identity thieves' tactics, end user reactions, and strategies for defending the customer, according to a new report published this week.

There are significant differences in the frequency and effectiveness of ID fraud attacks on users in different income brackets, according to a study by Javelin Strategy & Research.

Paradoxically, consumers who make $35,000 or less are hit harder by ID fraud than their higher-income counterparts. Customers who made between $15,000 and $25,000 annually incurred the largest average fraud amounts -- over $6,000 -- of any group in the study. Consumers who made $25,000-$35,000 incurred the largest out-of-pocket costs ($858), and consumers who made less than $15,000 experienced the longest time to resolution (44 hours) of their fraud problems.

"There's a general image out there that fraud hits higher-income users harder, but as we saw in the study, that's not always the case," says Rachel Kim, an analyst at Javelin and author of the study.

High-income victims -- those who make six figures or more -- did report the highest frequency of fraud of any group (7.25 percent had experienced an incident), but their average fraud loss was less than $5,600 and their out-of-pocket costs were the lowest in the study ($210).

Lower-income victims experience more debit card fraud than their high-income counterparts, where higher-income victims reported more credit card fraud (74 percent) than debit card fraud (20 percent).

Victims' reactions to the fraud also varied widely among income brackets, the study says. Lower-income consumers were significantly more likely to change merchants or financial institutions in response to an incident (40 percent to just 12 percent in the high income bracket), and many of them reacted by simply ceasing online banking (60 percent) and e-shopping activity. Higher-income customers, by contrast, increased their use of online services such as credit monitoring and online banking.

"What this says is that rather than making a mass outreach to all customers using the same message, financial institutions and other companies should probably vary their educational efforts in different customer brackets," Kim says. "On the back end, it may mean that you should vary your fraud filtering capabilities with different groups of customers."

For example, in the lower-income bracket, it might be beneficial to launch an educational campaign that brings out the advantages of online banking and encourages them to remain loyal to the company. Higher-income customers may need more coaching on how to use credit monitoring services or reduce the likelihood of targeted attacks.

"Phishers, in particular, are getting better at identifying high-income targets, so that's a trend we expect to continue," Kim says. "We're seeing spear-phishing attacks that are surprisingly convincing, and targeting specific individuals who are highly-placed in the organization," she says. "And these attacks are becoming a lot more convincing -- if you don't know what to look for, you would have no way of knowing they aren't genuine."

Whether their customers are predominantly in the lower-income bracket or higher-income bracket, however, companies should consider varying their educational and defensive strategies for identity theft according to those users' vulnerabilities and likely behavior, Kim advises.

"There are some very significant differences," she says. "It doesn't make sense to lump them all together."

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Discuss" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

  • Javelin Strategy and Research

    Tim Wilson is Editor in Chief and co-founder of Dark Reading.com, UBM Tech's online community for information security professionals. He is responsible for managing the site, assigning and editing content, and writing breaking news stories. Wilson has been recognized as one ... View Full Bio

    Comment  | 
    Print  | 
    More Insights
  • Comments
    Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
    News
    Former CISA Director Chris Krebs Discusses Risk Management & Threat Intel
    Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  2/23/2021
    Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
    Security + Fraud Protection: Your One-Two Punch Against Cyberattacks
    Joshua Goldfarb, Director of Product Management at F5,  2/23/2021
    News
    Cybercrime Groups More Prolific, Focus on Healthcare in 2020
    Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  2/22/2021
    Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
    White Papers
    Video
    Cartoon Contest
    Current Issue
    2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
    We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
    Flash Poll
    Building the SOC of the Future
    Building the SOC of the Future
    Digital transformation, cloud-focused attacks, and a worldwide pandemic. The past year has changed the way business works and the way security teams operate. There is no going back.
    Twitter Feed
    Dark Reading - Bug Report
    Bug Report
    Enterprise Vulnerabilities
    From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
    CVE-2021-22861
    PUBLISHED: 2021-03-03
    An improper access control vulnerability was identified in GitHub Enterprise Server that allowed authenticated users of the instance to gain write access to unauthorized repositories via specifically crafted pull requests and REST API requests. An attacker would need to be able to fork the targeted ...
    CVE-2021-22862
    PUBLISHED: 2021-03-03
    An improper access control vulnerability was identified in GitHub Enterprise Server that allowed an authenticated user with the ability to fork a repository to disclose Actions secrets for the parent repository of the fork. This vulnerability existed due to a flaw that allowed the base reference of ...
    CVE-2021-22863
    PUBLISHED: 2021-03-03
    An improper access control vulnerability was identified in the GitHub Enterprise Server GraphQL API that allowed authenticated users of the instance to modify the maintainer collaboration permission of a pull request without proper authorization. By exploiting this vulnerability, an attacker would b...
    CVE-2020-10519
    PUBLISHED: 2021-03-03
    A remote code execution vulnerability was identified in GitHub Enterprise Server that could be exploited when building a GitHub Pages site. User-controlled configuration of the underlying parsers used by GitHub Pages were not sufficiently restricted and made it possible to execute commands on the Gi...
    CVE-2021-21353
    PUBLISHED: 2021-03-03
    Pug is an npm package which is a high-performance template engine. In pug before version 3.0.1, if a remote attacker was able to control the `pretty` option of the pug compiler, e.g. if you spread a user provided object such as the query parameters of a request into the pug template inputs, it was p...