Abstract:Rakuten Securities Inc., one of Japan’s leading online brokerage firms, has ramped up its identity verification measures after falling victim to a wave of fraudulent transactions.

Rakuten Securities Inc., one of Japans leading online brokerage firms, has ramped up its identity verification measures after falling victim to a wave of fraudulent transactions. The incidents, which surfaced in March, were linked to phishing attacks that tricked customers into revealing sensitive login credentials.
The fraudulent activity involved the unauthorised sale of customers‘ stocks and investment trust funds. The proceeds were then used to purchase low-volume stocks in Chinese companies without the account holders’ consent. Rakuten Securities confirmed the transactions had not resulted from an internal data breach, suggesting that customer information remained secure on its servers. However, the company declined to disclose the number or extent of affected transactions, citing concerns over potential repeat offences.
Investigations indicate that phishing emails, mimicking official communication from Rakuten Securities, were at the heart of the scam. These emails urged recipients to confirm their account information for security purposes. Victims who clicked on the provided links were redirected to counterfeit websites designed to steal login details. Once compromised, their accounts were hijacked and manipulated.

The attackers typically sold off the victims existing assets and used the funds to buy Chinese stocks. While the motive behind choosing such stocks remains unclear, company officials suspect that the perpetrators are part of a larger scheme to artificially inflate prices and offload their holdings at a profit.
In response, Rakuten Securities introduced a new security feature on 23 March known as “risk-based authentication.” This mechanism prompts users to provide additional identity verification if they access their accounts using unfamiliar devices. Customers must also call a specific toll-free number from a phone registered with the firm to complete transactions. No prior arrangement is required for this verification process. The firm has also encouraged users to update their PINs as an added precaution.
SBI Securities Co., another prominent Japanese brokerage, has reported similar incidents, although on a significantly smaller scale. Like Rakuten, its customers were targeted by deceptive emails claiming their accounts had been temporarily suspended due to suspicious activity. The emails instructed users to re-enter their credentials to restore access, leading many to unwittingly disclose their private information.
SBI Securities has since decided to strengthen its security infrastructure. Previously, customers only had to undergo two-factor authentication when withdrawing over 500,000 yen (approximately $3,320). From 9 May onwards, this security measure will apply to all withdrawals, regardless of the amount.
Both firms are urging clients to remain vigilant, avoid clicking on unsolicited links, and refrain from entering personal data on suspicious websites. These events underscore a growing threat to online investors, with phishing scams becoming increasingly sophisticated and difficult to detect. As financial institutions bolster their defences, customer awareness remains the first line of protection against these digital threats.


A close look at ZarVista's regulatory status shows major red flags that mark it as a high-risk broker for traders. This analysis goes beyond the company's marketing materials to examine the real substance of its licenses, business structure, and operating history. The main issues we will explore include its dependence on weak offshore regulation, a large number of serious user complaints, and worrying details about its corporate identity. It is also important to note that ZarVista previously operated under the name Zara FX, a detail that provides important background to its history. This article aims to deliver a complete, evidence-based breakdown of the ZarVista license framework and its real-world effects, helping traders understand the serious risks involved before investing.

When traders think about choosing a new broker, two main questions come up: Is ZarVista safe or a scam? And what are the common ZarVista complaints? These questions get to the heart of what matters most—keeping your capital safe. This article gives you a detailed look at ZarVista's reputation using public information, government records, and real experiences from people who used their services. Our research starts with an important fact that shapes this whole review. WikiFX, a website that checks brokers independently, gives ZarVista a trust score of only 2.07 out of 10. This very low rating comes with a clear warning: "Low score, please stay away!" The main reason for this low score is the large number of user complaints. This finding shows that ZarVista might be risky to use. To get the complete picture, we will look at the broker's government approval status, examine the specific complaints from users, check any positive reviews to be fair, and give you a final answer based on fact

Trust has always been a widely discussed topic in the forex industry. When genuine, rational voices are drowned out, market participants struggle to discern which information is trustworthy amid a sea of complex data. This difficulty in establishing trust has placed industry transparency at the forefront of attention.

Before thinking about ZarVista, you need to understand the complete picture. At first glance, ZarVista (which used to be called Zara FX) presents itself as a modern, feature-packed trading company. It advertises appealing trading terms, different account options, and the powerful MetaTrader 5 platform. However, our detailed research shows a completely different reality. This broker has major warning signs, an extremely low trust rating, and a high-risk business model. This ZarVista review will examine the broker's promises, comparing what it advertises with actual evidence. We will explore the ZarVista Pros and Cons by looking at its rules and regulations, platform features, and most importantly, the large number of user complaints that show a troubling pattern. This investigation is based on careful analysis of information from independent verification websites like WikiFX, giving you an objective and fact-based review to help you make a smart decision and protect your capital.