Compliance Radar
Who was sanctioned, and for what?
Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America, Latin America, Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa: 2,207 cases from 44 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.
Click a bar to drill down one level.
Where?
by regionAll jurisdictions
What for?
by topicWho?
by sectorAll sectors
- Financial services and insurance €209.8m 93 % · 30 cases
- Telecoms, IT and software €9.22m 4 % · 8 cases
- Construction and real estate €5.06m 2 % · 3 cases
- Healthcare €1.38m 1 % · 1 case
- Energy and utilities €8,438 0 % · 1 case
- Public sector €4,938 0 % · 5 cases
- Media and online platforms €4,266 0 % · 3 cases
- Other – 0 % · 5 cases
- Retail and e-commerce – 0 % · 2 cases
When?
per year, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 5 | €75.1m |
| 2023 | 17 | €94.9m |
| 2024 | 13 | €17.4m |
| 2025 | 17 | €33.7m |
| 2026 | 6 | €4.36m |
58 cases
14 Mar 2023 a Swedish major bankMajor bank: 850 million SEK – unapproved IT change led to wrong balances and blocked payments €75.3m
Finansinspektionen (Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority) issued a Swedish major bank with a remark (anmärkning) and an administrative fine of 850,000,000 SEK because on 28 April 2022 the bank made a change to a business-critical IT system – to implement new EU sanctions – without following its internal change management process: without approval by the Change Advisory Board, without a risk assessment and without a rollback plan. The resulting error stopped around 1.7 million transactions to about 1.1 million accounts, showed incorrect balances for almost 960,000 customers and prevented around 160,000 customers from making payments; because none of the bank's controls had detected that the process was bypassed, the supervisor found the internal control of this systemically important bank to be inadequate. It treated an earlier sanction from 2020 (oversight of anti-money laundering measures in subsidiary banks) as aggravating and, in the bank's favour, the fact that the breach was neither long-lasting nor systematic.
Even urgent changes to critical IT systems prompted by regulation must go through the regular change process, and controls must detect when individuals bypass it.
Change management: no change to critical IT systems without approval, risk assessment and a rollback plan
- Authority / court
- Finansinspektionen (FI)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Critical infrastructure
- Legal basis
- 6 kap. 2 § lagen (2004:297) om bank- och finansieringsrörelse (LBF) i. V. m. 2 kap. 1 § första stycket 5 FFFS 2014:1; Anmärkning nach 15 kap. 1 § LBF, Sanktionsavgift nach 15 kap. 7 § LBF
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Repeat case
- yes
- Mitigating circumstances
- Not a long-lasting or systematic breach; the bank has taken, and announced further, measures to strengthen internal control.
- Published
- 15 Mar 2023
Original amount 850,000,000 SEK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Mar 2023.
- Finansinspektionen, Sanktionen (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2023) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Company name anonymised since 14 Mar 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
22 Sep 2026 OTC Link LLCOTC Link: 575,000 USD – security policies never completed despite examination findings €501,614
From 2016 to 2025, the operator of the OTC Link ATS trading system lacked complete policies on systems security, access control and vulnerability management as required under Regulation SCI. Although the examiners of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had criticised the gaps in several examinations, drafts remained unfinished; the SEC issued a censure and imposed 575,000 USD.
Track supervisory examination findings with a deadline and a responsible person – points that remain open repeatedly become expensive.
- Authority / court
- U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Critical infrastructure
- Legal basis
- Regulation SCI, Rule 1001(a)(1)–(3)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Repeat case
- yes
Original amount 575,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Sep 2026.
- SEC Censures OTC Link LLC for Repeated Compliance Failures Related to Regulation SCI (22.09.2026) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
5 Aug 2026 Order Express, Inc.NYDFS: $250,000 against money transmitter Order Express over cyber deficiencies €216,375
The licensed money transmitter had no adequate policies for system updates and insufficient risk assessments under New York's cybersecurity regulation, as found by the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS). The company has already remedied the deficiencies.
Even small financial service providers must keep documented patch policies and regular risk assessments.
- Authority / court
- New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
- Legal basis
- 23 NYCRR Part 500 (Cybersecurity Regulation)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Mitigating circumstances
- Because of its low turnover, the company was exempt from many Part 500 obligations; deficiencies already remedied.
- Published
- 5 Aug 2026
Original amount 250,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Aug 2026.
- New York State Department of Financial Services Secures Cybersecurity Settlement with Order Express, Inc. Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
28 Jul 2026 Luk Fook Securities (HK) LimitedLuk Fook Securities: HKD 2.1m fine for weak cybersecurity ahead of ransomware attack €235,595
Luk Fook Securities (HK) was publicly reprimanded and fined 2,100,000 HKD because inadequate cybersecurity controls might have contributed to a ransomware attack on 19 September 2022 hitting numerous core servers and to full recovery taking until 7 October 2022; during that time clients could not trade via the app or internet platform. Findings included missing firewall protection, outdated operating systems and antivirus software, weak access and password controls with credentials stored unencrypted, insufficient controls over remote access and external devices, inadequate data backup and a last security training session in 2018.
Basic cyber hygiene – patching, access and password controls, backups and regular staff training – is a regulatory obligation for financial firms.
Ransomware defence, password security and security awareness training
Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.
- Authority / court
- Securities and Futures Commission (SFC)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
- Legal basis
- s. 194 SFO (Cap. 571); Code of Conduct GP 2, GP 3, GP 7, paras. 12.1, 18.5 und Schedule 7; Guidelines for Reducing and Mitigating Hacking Risks Associated with Internet Trading
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- Root-cause review with an independent reviewer, strengthened controls, no evidence of client loss, cooperation, clean disciplinary record.
- Published
- 28 Jul 2026
Original amount 2,100,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Jul 2026.
- SFC press release 26PR118: SFC reprimands and fines Luk Fook Securities (HK) Limited $2.1 million for inadequate cybersecurity control (28.07.2026) Press release of an authority
- SFC Statement of Disciplinary Action zu 26PR118 Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
29 Apr 2026 Delta Dental Insurance Company und Delta Dental of New York, Inc.NYDFS: $2.25 million against Delta Dental after MOVEit attack and late notification €1.92m
In 2023, attackers exploited a zero-day vulnerability in MOVEit Transfer to steal files containing social security, driving licence, account and health data. The New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) criticised inadequate retention settings, policies and controls as well as the late notification of the cybersecurity incidents to the supervisory authority.
Keep data in transfer tools only for as long as necessary – and report security incidents to the supervisory authority on time.
- Authority / court
- New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
- Legal basis
- 23 NYCRR Part 500 (Cybersecurity Regulation)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Culpability
- negligent
- Published
- 30 Apr 2026
Original amount 2,250,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 Apr 2026.
- DFS Secures $2.25 Million Cybersecurity Settlement with Delta Dental Press release of an authority
- Consent Order to Delta Dental 2026 Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
7 Apr 2026 Wspólnota Mieszkaniowa K. (Wohnungseigentümergemeinschaft, im Bescheid pseudonymisiert)Homeowners’ association: 4,852 PLN – misdirected statement not notified €1,135
Acting as processor, the property management company sent an owner’s statement of service charges to an unauthorised person. The association considered notification unnecessary because only ‘ordinary’ data of one member were affected, and maintained this position in the proceedings; the UODO (Poland’s data protection authority) imposed 4,852 PLN.
Small controllers must also assess and notify data breaches by their service providers – ‘only one data subject’ is no ground for exemption.
Recognising misdirected mail as a data breach – including at service providers
- Authority / court
- Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Danych Osobowych (UODO)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Incident reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- Art. 33 Abs. 1 DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
Original amount 4,852 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 Apr 2026.
- UODO, Decyzja DKN.5131.16.2025 vom 07.04.2026 (rechtskräftig) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Feb 2026 FIIG Securities LimitedFIIG Securities: 2.5 million AUD for inadequate cyber security ahead of data theft €1.48m
The Federal Court of Australia, on application by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC, Australia's corporate, markets and financial services regulator), imposed a penalty of 2.5 million AUD on the fixed-income specialist because between March 2019 and June 2023 it lacked adequate cyber security measures, resources and risk management systems – among other things, there was no multi-factor authentication for remote access, no regular penetration testing and no mandatory security awareness training. In a 2023 attack around 385 GB of confidential data were stolen and some 18,000 clients were notified; the court also ordered a compliance programme with an independent expert.
For licensed financial services firms, cyber security is part of their licence obligations: basic measures such as MFA, patching, monitoring, training and a tested incident response plan must be funded and actually implemented.
Cyber security basics: multi-factor authentication, patch management, security awareness training, tested incident response plan
Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.
- Authority / court
- Federal Court of Australia (auf Antrag der Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
- Legal basis
- Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 912A(1)(a), (d) und (h) i. V. m. s 912A(5A)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- Full cooperation, admissions and an agreed statement of facts; no previous contraventions; the known financial losses (remediation costs of around 1.5 million AUD) were largely borne by the company itself.
- Published
- 9 Feb 2026
Original amount 2,500,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Feb 2026.
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
11 Dec 2025 Singapore Telecommunications Limited (Singtel)IMDA: SGD 1m against Singtel after hours-long fixed-line voice outage €660,197
On 8 October 2024 Singtel's fixed-line voice service failed for more than four hours for around 500,000 residential and corporate users; customer service lines of government agencies, healthcare organisations and banks as well as emergency call services were also affected. The cause was that the virtualised firewalls of the voice system and of a monitoring system shared the same hardware, so that an overload of the insufficiently filtered monitoring system also disrupted the voice system and the automatic failover did not work cleanly; according to the investigation, there was no cyber-attack. The Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA, Singapore's telecoms and media regulator) imposed a penalty of SGD 1 million under the Telecommunications Act because the incident had been within Singtel's control to prevent.
Critical services need separated components and reliably tested failover mechanisms – shared hardware can turn a fault in an ancillary system into an outage of the core service.
- Authority / court
- Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Critical infrastructure
- Legal basis
- Telecommunications Act
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Telecoms, IT and software
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Published
- 11 Dec 2025
Original amount 1,000,000 SGD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Dec 2025.
- IMDA: IMDA Imposes Financial Penalty on Singtel for Fixed Voice Disruption (11.12.2025) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
1 Dec 2025 One New Zealand Group Limited (One NZ)One NZ: 1.1 million NZD for breaches of the 111 emergency calling code €543,022
Following proceedings brought by the Commerce Commission (New Zealand's competition and consumer regulator), the High Court ordered One New Zealand Group Limited to pay a pecuniary penalty of 1,100,000 NZD; in addition, the company is paying 100,000 NZD towards the authority's costs, which is not included in the amount. One NZ admitted ten breaches of the 111 Contact Code between 2021 and 2023 concerning information duties, record-keeping and regular contact with customers. The Code is intended to ensure that vulnerable customers whose landline does not work in a power cut receive another way of calling 111 at no cost.
Providers moving customers from copper to new landline technology must actively follow up and fully document vulnerable customers' ability to make emergency calls during power cuts.
Duties to vulnerable customers regarding emergency calls during power cuts: inform, follow up, document
- Authority / court
- High Court of New Zealand (Verfahren der Commerce Commission)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Critical infrastructure
- Legal basis
- Telecommunications Act 2001 (Neuseeland), s 156B; 111 Contact Code
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Telecoms, IT and software
- Mitigating circumstances
- According to the Commerce Commission, One NZ remedied the breaches as soon as it recognised their scale and cooperated fully with the investigation; the breaches were admitted.
- Published
- 1 Dec 2025
Original amount 1,100,000 NZD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 1 Dec 2025.
- Commerce Commission – One NZ ordered to pay $1.1 million for breaching 111 obligations (01.12.2025) Press release of an authority
- Commerce Commission, Case register – One New Zealand Group Limited (PRJ0047020) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
23 Oct 2025 Komornik Sądowy przy Sądzie Rejonowym w S. (Gerichtsvollzieherkanzlei, im Bescheid pseudonymisiert)Bailiff: 20,900 PLN – documents with PESEL number misdirected, not notified €4,938
In October 2023, an uninvolved person received a debtor’s enforcement documents containing name, address, date of birth, PESEL number, amount of the claim and employer. The bailiff’s office neither notified the supervisory authority nor informed the data subject; the UODO (Poland’s data protection authority) imposed 7,700 PLN for the failure to notify and 13,200 PLN for the failure to inform the data subject, and ordered the data subject to be informed within three days.
Where identification numbers such as the PESEL number are disclosed, a high risk can almost always be assumed – notification of the authority and of the data subject is then mandatory.
Checking postal mailings; notifying data breaches involving identification numbers
- Authority / court
- Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Danych Osobowych (UODO)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Incident reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- Art. 33 Abs. 1, Art. 34 Abs. 1 und 2 DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Public sector
Original amount 20,900 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Oct 2025.
- UODO, Decyzja DKN.5131.17.2024 vom 23.10.2025 (nicht rechtskräftig) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
17 Oct 2025 Odido Netherlands B.V.Netherlands: 1.52 million EUR against Odido – interception system without security plan and staff screening €1.52m
In inspections in 2021/22, the RDI (Rijksinspectie Digitale Infrastructuur, the Dutch Authority for Digital Infrastructure) found that the mobile operator had no mandatory security plan for its system for lawful interception of telecommunications, that employees with access had not been adequately screened (missing job descriptions, confidentiality declarations, certificates of conduct), that unauthorised persons had access to interception data and that suppliers could access the system digitally. The RDI imposed 1,518,750 EUR; Odido has since renewed the system.
Treat the security plan, staff screening and strictly limited supplier access for highly sensitive systems as the core of the obligation, not a formality.
Access rights, staff screening and supplier access for sensitive systems
- Authority / court
- Rijksinspectie Digitale Infrastructuur (RDI)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Critical infrastructure
- Legal basis
- Telecommunicatiewet Art. 15.4; Besluit beveiliging gegevens telecommunicatie (Bbgt) Art. 2, 3, 4
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Telecoms, IT and software
- Mitigating circumstances
- System renewed, risk of unauthorised access eliminated.
- Published
- 17 Oct 2025
- RDI legt Odido boete op van ruim 1,5 miljoen vanwege onvoldoende beveiligd aftapsysteem Press release of an authority
- Beschikking tot oplegging bestuurlijke boete Odido (Publieksversie) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
14 Oct 2025 Farmers Insurance ExchangeNYDFS: $2.775 million against Farmers over unprotected online quoting tools €2.4m
Attackers harvested driving licence numbers and dates of birth via inadequately secured online quoting tools and agent portals. According to the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS), Farmers infringed the cybersecurity regulation and did not report the incident in time; the penalty is part of a package totalling $19 million against eight motor insurers.
Automatically pre-filled forms containing customer data are a point of entry – scrutinise public-facing applications for the data they disclose.
- Authority / court
- New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
- Legal basis
- 23 NYCRR Part 500 (Cybersecurity Regulation)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Culpability
- negligent
- Published
- 14 Oct 2025
Original amount 2,775,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Oct 2025.
- DFS Secures More than $19 Million from Auto Insurance Companies over Data Breaches Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
14 Oct 2025 Infinity Insurance CompanyInfinity Insurance: 2.25 million USD – data leak via quoting tool reported too late €1.95m
Attackers extracted driver’s licence numbers in plain text via the motor insurer’s instant quote applications. Infinity discovered the anomalies on 9 February 2021 but only reported the cybersecurity event to the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) on 14 April 2021; the supervisor also criticised the lack of MFA and insecure development practices.
Misuse of publicly accessible customer applications is also a reportable incident – warnings from the supervisor should trigger an immediate reporting assessment.
- Authority / court
- New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Incident reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- 23 NYCRR § 500.17(a), § 500.12(a) u. a.
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Culpability
- negligent
Original amount 2,250,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Oct 2025.
- NYDFS Consent Order to Infinity Insurance Company (14.10.2025) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
22 Sep 2025 Nova Ljubljanska banka d. d.NLB: reprimand because PSD2 interface exposed 57 account numbers Reprimand or warning
After an update of the PSD2 interface for third-party providers in July 2023, the confidentiality of 57 IBAN accounts of bank customers was not ensured. The banking supervisor, Banka Slovenije (Bank of Slovenia), issued a reprimand to the bank for breaching the obligation to protect confidential data (final).
Every change to customer interfaces requires testing for data leakage before go-live.
Security testing for software releases of interfaces
- Authority / court
- Banka Slovenije
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
- Legal basis
- Art. 146, Art. 396 Abs. 1 Nr. 18 ZBan-3 (slowenisches Bankengesetz)
- Action
- Reprimand or warning
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Liability of senior managers
- Measures against individuals are not reported here.
- Banka Slovenije, Veröffentlichung der Sanktion gegen Nova Ljubljanska banka d. d. (Entscheidung 2025) Decision of an authority
- Banka Slovenije – Informacije o izrečenih ukrepih Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link
Report an error
4 Sep 2025 A*** GmbH (Werbeagentur, im Bescheid pseudonymisiert)Austrian advertising agency: 870 EUR – alert about security gap dismissed as spam €870
Customer data (including names, e-mail addresses, dates of birth, telephone numbers) could be retrieved via an unprotected development server of the advertising agency. An employee took the first alert from an external party in January 2025 to be spam; only a second alert in February reached management, which closed the gap but only notified the incident on 2 May 2025 after being requested to do so by the Datenschutzbehörde (Austrian Data Protection Authority, DSB). The authority attributed the employee’s conduct to the company.
External alerts about security gaps need a clear intake channel – what ends up in spam still counts as known.
Recognising and escalating alerts about security gaps
Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.
- Authority / court
- Datenschutzbehörde (DSB)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Incident reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- Art. 33 Abs. 1 iVm Art. 83 Abs. 4 lit. a DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Media and online platforms
- Culpability
- negligent
- Mitigating circumstances
- No previous infringements and cooperation in the proceedings; gap closed immediately after the second alert, employees trained subsequently.
- DSB, Straferkenntnis GZ 2025-0.699.550 vom 04.09.2025 (RIS) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
14 Aug 2025 Healthplex, Inc.Healthplex: 2 million USD – phishing incident not reported to supervisor for months €1.71m
An employee of the dental insurance service provider disclosed his login credentials via a phishing e-mail; the mailbox containing over 100,000 e-mails with health and social security data was accessible. Healthplex had known about the incident since November 2021 but only reported it to the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) in April 2022 instead of within 72 hours; in addition, there was no MFA for web access and no data retention and deletion policy.
Security incidents require a fixed reporting process with deadline control – the 72-hour clock starts when the incident is identified, not when forensics is completed.
Recognising phishing; reporting channels for security incidents
- Authority / court
- New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Incident reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- 23 NYCRR § 500.17(a), § 500.12(b), § 500.13, § 500.17(b)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Culpability
- negligent
Original amount 2,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Aug 2025.
- NYDFS Consent Order to Healthplex, Inc. (14.08.2025) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
10 Jul 2025 Poste Vita S.p.A.Poste Vita: 80,000 EUR – data breach notified only four months after customer’s alert €80,000
A fraudster impersonated a customer by e-mail and, between 2021 and 2023, obtained information and documents on three policies from the life insurer’s case handlers without his identity being verified. Although the customer alerted the company to the false e-mail address in September 2024, Poste Vita only notified the breach to the supervisory authority in January 2025.
Customer alerts about possible data leaks must go into the incident assessment immediately – not only after internal checks are completed.
Identity verification for customer requests by e-mail (social engineering)
- Authority / court
- Garante per la protezione dei dati personali
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Incident reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a und f, Art. 33 Abs. 1 DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Culpability
- negligent
- Mitigating circumstances
- Immediate blocking of further communication, internal investigation, criminal complaint and stricter identity verification.
- Garante privacy, Provvedimento del 10 luglio 2025 [10154110] Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
3 Jul 2025 Telenor Norge ASTelenor Norge: 50 million NOK after four disruptions to emergency numbers in autumn 2024 €4.21m
The Nasjonal kommunikasjonsmyndighet (Nkom, Norwegian Communications Authority) imposed an administrative penalty (overtredelsesgebyr) of 50,000,000 NOK on Telenor Norge because, on four occasions in autumn 2024 (29 August, 16 September, 17/18 October, 13 November), emergency calls over its network failed entirely or intermittently or were misrouted. The inspection found 22 breaches of ekomloven (Electronic Communications Act), sikkerhetsloven (National Security Act) and several regulations, including inadequate risk assessments, planned work not carried out securely, insufficient redundancy, inadequate auditing of a subcontractor and late notification of the authority. In its final decision Nkom maintained the amount announced in February 2025; the deadline for an administrative appeal ran until 8 September 2025.
Operators that carry emergency call services must safeguard planned network changes with a risk analysis and working redundancy, audit their suppliers and report disruptions on time.
Planned work on critical networks: risk analysis, a working fallback and notifying the regulator within 30 minutes
- Authority / court
- Nasjonal kommunikasjonsmyndighet (Nkom)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Critical infrastructure
- Legal basis
- ekomloven (lov 4. juli 2003 nr. 83), sikkerhetsloven (lov 1. juni 2018 nr. 24), ekomforskriften, nummerforskriften, klassifiseringsforskriften, virksomhetssikkerhetsforskriften
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Telecoms, IT and software
- Employees
- 1,000 to 9,999
- Published
- 3 Jul 2025
Original amount 50,000,000 NOK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Jul 2025.
- Nkom – Opprettholder millionbot mot Telenor (03.07.2025) Press release of an authority
- Nkom – Tilsynsrapporten mot Telenor er klar: Varsler bot på 50 millioner kroner (27.02.2025) Press release of an authority
- Nkom – Tilsynsrapport Telenor, offentlig sammendrag av sikkerhetsgradert tilsynsrapport (foreløpig), 27.02.2025 Decision of an authority
- Brønnøysundregistrene, Enhetsregisteret – Telenor Norge AS (org.nr. 976967631), antall ansatte Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
23 May 2025 S-Pankki OyjS-Pankki: EUR 7.67m and public warning over faulty banking software €7.67m
The Finanssivalvonta (FIN-FSA, Finnish Financial Supervisory Authority) imposed a joint penalty payment of 7,670,000 EUR on S-Pankki Oyj for failings in operational risk management and additionally issued a public warning. A programming error that was live in a bank system from 20 April to 5 August 2022 had not been adequately tested beforehand; the bank lacked a sufficiently secure system and effective incident management and was insufficiently prepared for outsourcing risks. The warning concerns the failure to apply the required strong customer authentication and payments executed without the payers' consent from 6 May to 5 August 2022; earlier penalty payments imposed on the bank by the supervisor (2019 and 2021) increased the amount. The decision is not final.
Changes to authentication and payment processing need documented testing before going live – even when a service provider develops the software.
Testing and change management for security-critical banking software
- Authority / court
- Finanssivalvonta (FIN-FSA)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
- Legal basis
- Luottolaitostoiminnasta annettu laki 9 luku 16 § (1, 2 und 4 mom.) mit MOK 8/2014; FivaL 40 §, 41 §, 41 b §; öffentliche Verwarnung nach FivaL 39 § wegen Maksupalvelulaki 85 c § 1 mom. und 38 § 1 mom.
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- under appeal
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Repeat case
- yes
- Mitigating circumstances
- Measures to prevent recurrence and cooperation with the supervisor in the investigation reduced the amount.
- Published
- 23 May 2025
- Finanssivalvonta: S-Pankki Oyj:lle 7 670 000 euron yhteinen seuraamusmaksu ja julkinen varoitus (23./26.05.2025) Press release of an authority
- Finanssivalvonta: Toimituskirja johtokunnan päätöksestä 23.5.2025, FIVA/2024/1181 Decision of an authority
- Finanssivalvonta: Finanssivalvonnan päätökset (Lainvoimaisuus: S-Pankki hat beim Verwaltungsgericht Helsinki Beschwerde eingelegt) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
21 May 2025 GoDaddy Inc.FTC: GoDaddy must set up an information security programme after hosting security gaps Order
According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC, the US consumer protection authority), the web host did not use multi-factor authentication for its hosting services, monitored security threats inadequately and did not secure connections to customer data, yet advertised “award-winning security”. The final order prohibits false statements about security and requires a comprehensive information security programme and regular reviews by independent assessors.
Be able to prove basics such as MFA and threat monitoring before advertising security – otherwise the advertising promise itself becomes the violation.
MFA, monitoring and honest security promises
- Authority / court
- Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
- Area of law
- Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management
- Legal basis
- Section 5 FTC Act
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Telecoms, IT and software
- Published
- 21 May 2025
- FTC Finalizes Order with GoDaddy over Data Security Failures Press release of an authority
- FTC Takes Action Against GoDaddy for Alleged Lax Data Security for Its Website Hosting Services Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link