infinix x yugatech

GCash: Full Explanation of Massive Phishing Incident

Listen to article

GCash has finally made a full explanation about the recent unauthorized transactions that happened last ay 8, 2023.

This explanation is very similar to the theory we provided earlier this week (How that GCash Hack Attempt could have been Made 50) sans the DeathNote link.

Technically, the “phishing activity” was already accomplished way before this week’s incident. There was indeed an actual transfer of funds from victims’s GCash account into the two bank accounts from East West Bank and Asia United Bank (AUB).

East West Bank has made an statement that their Fraud Team discovered the fund transfers. Money from those GCash transactions actually went to an East West Bank account and they immediately froze it.

On the other hand, AUB also confirmed that some funds were also transferred to one of their bank accounts after GCash notified them.

GCash further explains that these transactions were “illegally” authorized but thru an external system that provided the correct credentials (via MPIN and OTP). Hence, these transactions went thru the system and funds were actually transferred from GCash to the two banks.

However, since this was discovered early and both East West and AUB were alerted right away, the target bank accounts were frozen right away and funds could be returned to the respective GCash users.

What was not divulged here was the exact vector where the credentials came from. What it a fake website, a 3rd party app or something else. There’s also no lead yet as to who the perpetrators are behind this attempt.

Frequently Asked Questions

What caused the unauthorized GCash transactions on May 8, 2023?
Phishing activity provided correct MPIN and OTP credentials through an external system, allowing illegal transfers.
Which banks received the transferred funds from the GCash incident?
Funds were transferred to accounts at East West Bank and Asia United Bank (AUB).
Were the stolen funds recovered for GCash users?
Yes, the target bank accounts were frozen, and funds could be returned to the respective GCash users.
React to this article:
Written by
Abe Olandres

Abe Olandres

Editor-in-chief

Abe is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of YugaTech with over 20 years of experience in the technology industry. He is one of the pioneers of blogging in the country and is considered by many as the Father of Tech Blogging in the Philippines.

View all posts by Abe Olandres →

3 Comments

BE
Beyond Just Paying Bills: GCash vs. Maya for Everyday Finances – PINAS FINANCE · 1 year ago

[…] there wasn’t a direct hack, many users fell victim to clever scams​ as reported from BitPinas, YugaTech, and […]


Reply
JO
JohnnyB · 3 years ago

I do believe information from victims were gather through phishing. However as mention in the article there are still unanswered question. While the victim phone and MPIN where gather and if including OTP, does this mean their number was cloned? were there OTP indeed sent? Doesn’t gcash tokenized each transaction? While phishing is part of the modus, I strongly believe that a security hole was exploit, could be through gcash app path or if it’s through a 3rd party app.


Reply
AN
Anthony Abayon · 3 years ago

Diko alam na ganito sana mabalik pira ko


Reply

Leave a Reply

Loading next article...