Cyber scams soar in New Zealand as AI & crypto drive threats
The analysis, compiled by Gen's team of cybersecurity researchers, recorded a substantial year-on-year increase in scams and malicious activity, suggesting that both criminal tactics and the scale of potential harm are evolving, largely fuelled by economic pressure and the availability of AI-powered tools.
Crypto scams and economic uncertainty
According to Gen, crypto scams have become an area of particular concern, with blocked attacks rising from thousands to millions within a few short months. The reported increase was 69,508% globally, with New Zealand experiencing an even sharper uptick of 77,721%, markedly above the worldwide average. "This quarter's global trends reveal a troubling surge in cyber threats, from AI-powered ransomware to cryptocurrency scams and sextortion," said Mark Gorrie, Managing Director APAC for Gen Digital. "With the rise of AI and widespread data breaches, scams have become faster, more personalised, and harder to spot. New Zealand is not immune to these trends."
Gorrie added, "In a weaker economy, people facing financial uncertainty are increasingly drawn to quick fixes like crypto, creating fertile ground for scammers to exploit."
Sextortion and personalisation
The report highlights a 170% rise in sextortion scams within New Zealand during Q2/2025, compared to a 100% global increase.
New Zealand now ranks 19th on Gen's list of the top 20 countries most at risk of sextortion. This list spans a diverse range of affected countries, including Japan, Czechia, Singapore, and South Africa.
Sextortion scams typically involve criminals threatening to release compromising content unless a ransom, often in cryptocurrency, is paid. Recent tactics reportedly include the use of personal data harvested from major breaches, along with the manipulation of services such as Google Maps to make threats appear more credible and invasive.
Attackers have used actual names, addresses, and email addresses to heighten victims' anxiety and pressure them into complying with demands.
Facebook and technical support scams
Elsewhere, the report identified a significant rise in scams exploiting social media. Worldwide, 14% of blocked Facebook-related threats in Q2/2025 were tied to so-called Technical Support Scams.
These frequently present as fake Messenger-style pages that attempt to lock browsers and prompt users to call fraudulent help lines, leveraging Facebook's global reach and advertising platform for scalability.
Push notifications and phishing
In New Zealand, there was a 278% rise in malicious push notifications during the quarter. These deceptive pop-ups, often disguised as system alerts or video players, direct users to phishing websites or trigger unwanted downloads. The tactic is being increasingly employed to lure users into scams or malware installations. "Scammers are counting on panic clicks; they exploit the split second where you react before you think. And that single click can take a person straight to a scammer's doorstep," Gorrie explained. "If an alert feels aggressive or off, trust your instincts and double-check through your antivirus software directly, and avoid giving notification permissions to untrusted websites."
AI involvement and ransomware
Gen also revealed that Q2/2025 saw the takedown of the first known ransomware strain built with the assistance of generative AI.
The malware, named FunkSec, managed to encrypt data and demand payment, but Gen's research team was able to discover a cryptographic flaw and, in coordination with law enforcement, help victims restore their files without payment using a free decryptor issued by Avast. Since this intervention, there has been no reported activity from the FunkSec group.
Other key findings
The global threat landscape continues to expand, as highlighted by a 21% rise in data breach events, and almost a 16% increase in breached email addresses. The report also notes that financial scams climbed by 340% and that small businesses continue to be vulnerable to infostealers, exploits, and remote access attacks.
Of particular concern is the resurgence of older threats such as DealPly adware in markets including the United States, Brazil, France, and India. Malvertising and various scam types - especially phishing, generic scams, and e-shop or dating scams - ranked among New Zealand's top threats for the quarter.
Remote access attacks grew by 62% and malicious push notifications spiked by 317% globally, indicating a broadening portfolio of tactics used by cybercriminals.
Efforts to counter these risks are ongoing, with Gen's researchers continuing to collaborate on threat mitigation tools and public awareness campaigns.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
14 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Couple take previous home owner to court after she refuses to leave
A couple who bought a Pāpāmoa Beach house needed a High Court order to remove the previous owner after she refused to leave the property. New owners Benjamin and Chelsea Brown bought the two-bedroom home at a mortgagee sale this year, with settlement taking place on May 21. But the previous owner, Terina O'Connell, said she had been trying to "negotiate a solution with ASB for two years" and had not consented to the sale of her home. As a result, she refused to move out and even went as far as reaching out to people on social media and asking them to come to her home and support her before settlement day. The new owners sought a trespass order on May 22 to remove O'Connell and her supporters, and when that didn't work, they took their case to the High Court. 'The bank does not own my property' According to a recently released High Court decision, Justice Dani Gardiner held a telephone conference on June 6, where O'Connell's position could be heard by all parties. The court was also referred to a Facebook post she made, where she invited supporters to join her at the house. There are two posts still on her Facebook page, in which she did a "call-out" for support, saying "all I know is that the supposed settlement is Tuesday, 20 May 2025 – tomorrow". She said the purchasers had "made a deal with the devil" and that "the bank does not own my property, I have no business with you and I am not bound by any contract you made". She posted that she "would appreciate some support at my home ... tomorrow afternoon ... tomorrow night and for the next couple of days". While not discussed in the High Court judgment, there was also a livestreamed Facebook interview that O'Connell did with Counterspin Media in which she explained her views on the "alleged debt" owed to the bank. In it, she said she had paused her mortgage repayments while the bank refused to provide her with documentation she had requested or answer questions she had. Judge: Any issues between her and bank, not new owners The judge summarised O'Connell's position as primarily taking issue with the mortgagee sale process conducted by ASB. O'Connell told the court she'd tried to "negotiate a solution" for two years, had not consented to the mortgagee sale and said ASB went ahead with the sale anyway. She also said ASB's solicitor advised her of the settlement date, but said she was told the couple's lawyer would contact her about vacating. O'Connell said that never happened and, the day after settlement, the new owner arrived at the property, followed by security guards and police, and she had been "harassed". She rejected the couple's claim that her presence at the house, with others, had posed a risk of damage to the property, adding they were there to "support her through this stressful time" and that she would experience emotional and financial hardship if forced to leave. But Justice Gardiner's decision said the Browns were the registered owners and any issues that O'Connell had before the mortgagee sale were "between her and ASB". "These issues do not affect the plaintiffs' legal ownership of the property," Justice Gardiner said. The judge said while it may have been unfortunate if O'Connell had been unaware the couple intended to take possession of the property immediately on settlement, that was the usual case. She also accepted there was a risk of damage to the property by O'Connell or her supporters. The High Court judgment also noted that while O'Connell remained at the property, the couple were in breach of their insurance policy, as they couldn't change the locks or get an electrical warrant of fitness. They were also unable to rent the property to service their mortgage, which placed them at risk of default. The judge made an order requiring O'Connell and any other occupants to vacate the property by Monday, June 9. Are mortgagee sales on the rise? Cotality New Zealand data showed a "minor lift" to 81 mortgagee sales in the second quarter of this year, up on the previous quarter when there were 52. This marked the highest number since the fourth quarter of 2023, when there were 101 mortgagee sales. However, Cotality head of research Nick Goodall said the number was "still very low in a longer-term context, especially compared to the Global Financial Crisis". "I think this illustrates a more stable financial lending environment over the last decade or so, as well as the willingness and ability of banks to work closely with borrowers who may be struggling, rather than resort to mortgagee sales, which doesn't really benefit either party." OneRoof has 58 properties currently listed as "mortgagee sales" in New Zealand, with the total number of properties listed sitting at just over 38,000. New Zealand Banking Association chief executive Roger Beaumont said banks are responsible lenders. They typically have dedicated teams to deal with those experiencing financial difficulty and mortgagee sales were "rare and always a last resort". "There are several options that banks may offer ... depending on their particular circumstances. That may, for example, include temporarily moving to interest-only repayments." Beaumont said in the six months from July to December 2024, there were 1.4 million home loans across 1.1 million customers. "As an indication of potential financial issues, of the total number of home loans in that period, 17,445 loans switched from principal and interest repayments to interest-only repayments." By Hannah Bartlett, Open Justice reporter
Otago Daily Times
14 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Couple take former home owner to court after she refuses to leave
A couple who bought a Pāpāmoa Beach house needed a High Court order to remove the previous owner after she refused to leave the property. New owners Benjamin and Chelsea Brown bought the two-bedroom home at a mortgagee sale this year, with settlement taking place on May 21. But the previous owner, Terina O'Connell, said she had been trying to "negotiate a solution with ASB for two years" and had not consented to the sale of her home. As a result, she refused to move out and even went as far as reaching out to people on social media and asking them to come to her home and support her before settlement day. The new owners sought a trespass order on May 22 to remove O'Connell and her supporters, and when that didn't work, they took their case to the High Court. 'The bank does not own my property' According to a recently released High Court decision, Justice Dani Gardiner held a telephone conference on June 6, where O'Connell's position could be heard by all parties. The court was also referred to a Facebook post she made, where she invited supporters to join her at the house. There are two posts still on her Facebook page, in which she did a "call-out" for support, saying "all I know is that the supposed settlement is Tuesday, 20 May 2025 – tomorrow". She said the purchasers had "made a deal with the devil" and that "the bank does not own my property, I have no business with you and I am not bound by any contract you made". She posted that she "would appreciate some support at my home ... tomorrow afternoon ... tomorrow night and for the next couple of days". While not discussed in the High Court judgment, there was also a livestreamed Facebook interview that O'Connell did with Counterspin Media in which she explained her views on the "alleged debt" owed to the bank. In it, she said she had paused her mortgage repayments while the bank refused to provide her with documentation she had requested or answer questions she had. Judge: Any issues between her and bank, not new owners The judge summarised O'Connell's position as primarily taking issue with the mortgagee sale process conducted by ASB. O'Connell told the court she'd tried to "negotiate a solution" for two years, had not consented to the mortgagee sale and said ASB went ahead with the sale anyway. She also said ASB's solicitor advised her of the settlement date, but said she was told the couple's lawyer would contact her about vacating. O'Connell said that never happened and, the day after settlement, the new owner arrived at the property, followed by security guards and police, and she had been "harassed". She rejected the couple's claim that her presence at the house, with others, had posed a risk of damage to the property, adding they were there to "support her through this stressful time" and that she would experience emotional and financial hardship if forced to leave. But Justice Gardiner's decision said the Browns were the registered owners and any issues that O'Connell had before the mortgagee sale were "between her and ASB". "These issues do not affect the plaintiffs' legal ownership of the property," Justice Gardiner said. The judge said while it may have been unfortunate if O'Connell had been unaware the couple intended to take possession of the property immediately on settlement, that was the usual case. She also accepted there was a risk of damage to the property by O'Connell or her supporters. The High Court judgment also noted that while O'Connell remained at the property, the couple were in breach of their insurance policy, as they couldn't change the locks or get an electrical warrant of fitness. They were also unable to rent the property to service their mortgage, which placed them at risk of default. The judge made an order requiring O'Connell and any other occupants to vacate the property by Monday, June 9. Are mortgagee sales on the rise? Cotality New Zealand data showed a "minor lift" to 81 mortgagee sales in the second quarter of this year, up on the previous quarter when there were 52. This marked the highest number since the fourth quarter of 2023, when there were 101 mortgagee sales. However, Cotality head of research Nick Goodall said the number was "still very low in a longer-term context, especially compared to the Global Financial Crisis". "I think this illustrates a more stable financial lending environment over the last decade or so, as well as the willingness and ability of banks to work closely with borrowers who may be struggling, rather than resort to mortgagee sales, which doesn't really benefit either party." OneRoof has 58 properties currently listed as "mortgagee sales" in New Zealand, with the total number of properties listed sitting at just over 38,000. New Zealand Banking Association chief executive Roger Beaumont said banks are responsible lenders. They typically have dedicated teams to deal with those experiencing financial difficulty and mortgagee sales were "rare and always a last resort". "There are several options that banks may offer ... depending on their particular circumstances. That may, for example, include temporarily moving to interest-only repayments." Beaumont said in the six months from July to December 2024, there were 1.4 million home loans across 1.1 million customers. "As an indication of potential financial issues, of the total number of home loans in that period, 17,445 loans switched from principal and interest repayments to interest-only repayments." By Hannah Bartlett, Open Justice reporter
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
Couple take former Pāpāmoa Beach home owner to court as she refuses to leave after mortgagee sale
The new owners sought a trespass order on May 22 to remove O'Connell and her supporters, and when that didn't work they took their case to the High Court. 'The bank does not own my property' According to a recently released High Court decision, Justice Dani Gardiner held a telephone conference on June 6, where O'Connell's position could be heard by all parties. The court was also referred to a Facebook post she made, where she invited supporters to join her at the house. There are two posts still on her Facebook page, in which she did a 'call out' for support, saying 'all I know is that the supposed settlement is Tuesday 20 May 2025 – tomorrow'. She said the purchasers had 'made a deal with the devil' and that 'the bank does not own my property, I have no business with you and I am not bound by any contract you made'. She posted that she 'would appreciate some support at my home ... tomorrow afternoon ... tomorrow night and for the next couple of days'. While not discussed in the High Court judgment, there was also a livestreamed Facebook interview that O'Connell did with Counterspin Media where she explained her views on the 'alleged debt' owed to the bank. In it, she said she had paused her mortgage repayments while the bank refused to provide her with documentation she had requested and answer questions she had. Judge: Any issues are between her and the bank, not the new owners The judge summarised O'Connell's position as primarily taking issue with the mortgagee sale process conducted by ASB. O'Connell told the court she'd tried to 'negotiate a solution' for two years, had not consented to the mortgagee sale and said ASB went ahead with the sale anyway. Terina O'Connell says she had not consented to the mortgagee sale but ASB went ahead with it anyway. Photo / Hannah Bartlett She also said ASB's solicitor advised her of the settlement date, but said she was told the couple's lawyer would contact her about vacating. She said that never happened and, the day after settlement, the new owner arrived at the property, followed by security guards and police, and she had been 'harassed'. She rejected the couple's claim that her presence at the house, with others, had posed a risk of damage to the property, adding they were there to 'support her through this stressful time' and that she would experience emotional and financial hardship if forced to leave. But Justice Gardiner's decision said the Browns were the registered owners and any issues that O'Connell had before the mortgagee sale were 'between her and ASB'. 'These issues do not affect the plaintiffs' legal ownership of the property,' Justice Gardiner said. The judge said while it may have been unfortunate if O'Connell had been unaware the couple intended to take possession of the property immediately on settlement, that was the usual case. She also accepted there was a risk of damage to the property by O'Connell or her supporters. The High Court judgment also noted that while O'Connell remained at the property, the couple were in breach of their insurance policy, as they couldn't change the locks or get an electrical warrant of fitness. They were also unable to rent the property to service their mortgage, which placed them at risk of default. The judge made an order requiring O'Connell and any other occupants to vacate the property by Monday, June 9. There has been a slight increase in the number of mortgagee sales this year. Photo / 123rf Are mortgagee sales on the rise? Cotality New Zealand data showed a 'minor lift' to 81 mortgagee sales in the second quarter of this year, up on the previous quarter when there were 52. This marked the highest number of mortgagee sales since the fourth quarter of 2023, when there were 101 mortgagee sales. However, Cotality head of research Nick Goodall said the number was 'still very low in a longer-term context, especially compared to the Global Financial Crisis'. 'I think this illustrates a more stable financial lending environment over the last decade or so, as well as the willingness and ability of banks to work closely with borrowers who may be struggling, rather than resort to mortgagee sales, which doesn't really benefit either party.' OneRoof has 58 properties currently listed as 'mortgagee sales' in New Zealand, with the total number of properties listed sitting just over 38,000. New Zealand Banking Association chief executive Roger Beaumont said banks are responsible lenders and typically have dedicated teams to deal with those experiencing financial difficulty and mortgagee sales were 'rare and always a last resort'. 'There are several options that banks may offer ... depending on their particular circumstances. That may, for example, include temporarily moving to interest-only repayments.' Beaumont said in the six months from July to December 2024, there were 1.4 million home loans across 1.1 million customers. 'As an indication of potential financial issues, of the total number of home loans in that period, 17,445 loans switched from principal and interest repayments to interest-only repayments.' Hannah Bartlett is a Tauranga-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She previously covered court and local government for the Nelson Mail and before that was a radio reporter at Newstalk ZB.
