The Central Bank has prepared a draft regulation on mandatory requirements for the protection of information by Russian banks and branches of foreign credit organizations to counter transactions without the client’s consent (OBS). This provision will replace the current 683-P. According to experts, one of the main innovations is the possibility for customers of systemically important banks and credit organizations that are important in the market of payment services to send crime reports to the Ministry of Internal Affairs through the bank.

Electronic document flow between the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Central Bank and credit organizations is already up and running, now it is being extended to clients as well — the function “send a crime report to the Ministry of Internal Affairs” will appear in mobile applications, explains independent expert Yevhen Karpov. That is, the chain of the client, the bank, the Central Bank, the Ministry of Internal Affairs is formed, and the expert refines it.

At the same time, the banks themselves will have to record a set of parameters and metadata of financial transactions with each application from the client, in particular accounts, details of electronic wallets, phone numbers, clarifies the leading information security consultant of Aktiv.Consulting Oleksandr Moiseyev.

According to Karpov, this is important because it will not only save the client time and help fill out the documents correctly, but also ensure that the police will have all the information they need, and they will not require the victim to provide bank statements and the like.

The local police have problems investigating such cases, both in terms of competences and in relation to interaction with banks, and they try to return the papers to the citizen in any way, Karpov notes.

One of the problems during the investigation of frauds is the loss of time, and it will be possible to cover it a little, confirms the director of the technical department of RTM Group Fedir Muzalevsky.

According to experts, the clause according to which cryptographic keys can be made not only by the client himself, but also by the bank for the client is controversial. In this case, there is a risk of the client denying the transactions confirmed by this key, which will require additional protection mechanisms and registration of transactions from banks.