Source : SPF.

The Singapore Police Force (SPF) alerted members of public that there was a new variation in the impersonation of Police officer scam which involved a fake SPF website.

A 41-year-old woman lodged a Police report on Wednesday (21 September) regarding a call received from an unknown person who claimed to be a Police officer.

She said that the caller alleged the woman for being involved in money laundering activities and she was provided with a link to a website to key in her personal details and internet banking credentials, purportedly for investigation purposes.

Later, she found out that her bank account was accessed illegally and multiple unauthorised transactions were made. The woman lost $80,000.

Preliminary investigations revealed that the said website bore resemblance to the SPF website with changes made to the “E-Services” page.

The Police would like to clarify that the official SPF website is www.police.gov.sg. Members of the public are advised to take the following precautions when they receive unsolicited calls, especially from unknown parties:

a. Ignore the calls. Scammers may use Caller ID spoofing technology to mask the actual phone number and display a different number. Calls that appear to be from a local number may not actually be made from Singapore. If you receive a suspicious call from a local number, hang up, wait five minutes, then call the number back to check the validity of the request.

b. Ignore instructions to remit or transfer money. No government agency will inform you to make a payment through a telephone call, especially to a third party’s bank account.

c. Refrain from giving out personal information and bank details, whether on the website or to callers over the phone. Personal information and bank details such as internet bank account usernames and passwords, OTP codes from tokens, are useful to criminals.

e. If you have information related to such crime or if you are in doubt, please call the Police hotline at 1800-255-0000, or submit the information online atwww.police.gov.sg/iwitness. Please dial ‘999’ if you require urgent Police assistance.

The fake “E-Services” page.
The fake “E-Services” page.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Lesser Economic growth for a Better Singapore.

By Terry Xu Speaking at the parilament today, Mr Inderjit Singh, MP…

许渊臣针对《防假消息法》表达看法 通讯新闻部发文澄清

上周五,《网络公民》总编许渊臣在个人脸书,针对《防止网络假信息和防止网络操纵法案》(POFMA)发表个人观点,提出该法上诉时间程序,在选举期间可能被滥用,限制公民发表言论的忧虑。 《防假消息法》刚在本月2日起生效。自提呈国会以来,就已饱受争议,不仅政界人士,包括国内外学术界、媒体、公民组织等都已对该法提出质疑,例如担忧法案“定义笼统”、部长/执法机关权力过于广泛、以及可能产生寒蝉效应等,反而不利于公民间对公共政策的良性讨论。 依据该法,如部长/指定人士发出更正/撤除内容/文章的指示,如当事者不满可提出上诉,对上诉的审核期限为两日。 不过,如果上诉也被部长驳回怎么办?可以上诉到高等法院。根据《防假消息法》的附属条例,法庭常务官(Duty Registrar)安排审理当事者上诉个案的聆讯日,通常会是第六个工作日后。 对此,许渊臣认为,仅仅是对部长提出上诉、被驳回再申请法庭聆讯,整个申诉过程就至少要耗掉八天(工作日)的时间,而且还未算上当事人收到指示、以及寻求法律咨询、准备申诉辩词所需的时间。 再者,也没有任何指南显示在聆讯后何时必须作出判决。 反观,新加坡选举从提名日到投票,通常仅需时九日。故此许渊臣打个比方,假设有者要在2015年大选前,想针对集体感染C型肝炎事故进行爆料,执政政府会否发出撤文/跟更正指示,要求证实有关消息是确凿的?那么一般选民就没有机会去听一听,到底爆料消息想表达什么。 而且爆料当事人恐怕要走繁冗的上诉程序,要在工作日抽空提交法律文件到法庭。尽管针对部长撤文指示的上诉聆讯首三日免费,但是第四个聆讯日起,就要6000新元的收费。 有鉴于鲜有政府败诉的先例,这些不利因素,可能让一般民众望而却步,似乎足以堵住悠悠众口。 许渊臣对此讽喻,可能将来新加坡的牛津词典会出现一个新词,形同行动党政府“泼马”(pofma’d)了前方障碍,透过限制公民揭发有关部长和政策的负面消息,在选举中取得空前胜利。 《网络公民》英语站也分享了总编的贴文。…

Singaporeans have no self-respect, says Jackie Chan

“When you don’t have self-respect, the government will have to control you,” he says.

学校、幼园如期下周一开课 网民:应优先学生和教职员安全

昨日(19日)教育部长王乙康宣布,尽管目前疫情严峻,但学校与幼儿园仍将在下周一(23日)开课,而且学校也会采取严谨的防疫措施,如曾到过海外的学生和教职员,自返校日起,都必须遵守14天缺席假;学校内必须暂停所有课外活动,还有学生间必须保持距离。 而对于学前教育中心,则会实施全体教职员和学生进行频繁体温检测。 他表示,经过与跨部门工作小组和医疗专家讨论,才作出上述要求3月14日回国后学生教职员,需遵守缺席假的决定。 此决定引起网民的反弹,大部分网民认同教育部固然面对两难处境,但认为一切比教育更重要的是,学生与教职人员的安全,在疫情严峻的情况下,教育部无法阻止那些家庭执意趁着未开学期间出国旅游,建议暂时展延开学时间,避免更多的传染。   网民反映有学校仍在办活动 网民OtBo:部长大人,你的声明相当矛盾,我女儿的学校今天明天仍然在办理课外活动和青年节 动,若要对那些刚回国参加活动的人实施缺席假未免也太晚了。很不幸的是,我们真的有不负上任何社会责任的家庭。我强烈呼吁我们的部长赶快行动,让学校延期甚至关闭,确保安全,有些学生是需要搭上公共交通上课,这风险太高而且会无形中将病毒传染到其他人身上。 网民 Diana Kristen:谢谢教育部的决定,然而缺席假代表着他们又可以在新加坡内乱晃?为什么不是居家通知,而且我们要怎么确保他们会向教育部通报自己的旅行史,即使是只有一日游。 网民Kelly…