The Cyber Police of Ukraine have warned of a new fraud scheme in which perpetrators distribute malicious applications disguised as free offline navigation apps that can gain access to users’ personal data and banking services.
According to the Cyber Police, potential victims are offered a navigation app that supposedly works without an internet connection, contains no advertising and is available free of charge. Advertisements for such applications are distributed primarily through social media.
After clicking on an advertisement, users are redirected to a third-party website where they are offered a program to download, including through a Telegram bot. Instead of the advertised navigation app, a malicious file may be installed on the smartphone.
During installation, the program requests permission to download applications from unknown sources, as well as access to certain smartphone functions. After obtaining these permissions, perpetrators can track the device owner’s actions, intercept messages and notifications, and obtain confidential information.
The malicious program’s access to SMS messages and system notifications poses a particular threat. The information obtained may be used to intercept verification codes and access the user’s accounts and financial services.
The Cyber Police recommend installing mobile applications exclusively from the official Google Play and App Store marketplaces and not downloading APK files through Telegram bots, unknown websites or advertising links.
Users are also advised to carefully check the permissions requested by an application. In particular, a navigation program should not gain access to SMS messages, notifications or device management functions without an objective need.
If a suspicious application has already been installed, specialists recommend temporarily refraining from using banking and other critically important services on that smartphone, disconnecting the device from the internet and changing the passwords for primary accounts from another secure device.
The suspicious program should be removed, and the permissions granted to it should be checked. If the application cannot be removed or continues to run in the background, seeking technical assistance is recommended.
If banking details have been disclosed or unknown transactions appear, users must immediately contact their bank to block possible unauthorized access to their accounts. Cases of fraud can be reported to the Cyber Police through their official online form.
The Cyber Police also recommend checking information about current fraud schemes on the government platform StopFraud.
Source: Cyber Police of Ukraine
APPLICATION, BANK, CYBER POLICE, CYBERSECURITY, fraud, smartphone
Sense Bank was the first in the Ukrainian banking market to launch a bundled subscription service, which allows customers to combine several digital services into a single package and pay for them at a single price.
Inna Tyutyun, a member of the management board and director of IT, retail and payment business, and digitalization at Sense Bank, discussed the results of the launch of this new initiative during the FinRetail conference in Kyiv.
According to her, the subscription model is changing the bank’s role: instead of being a traditional payment intermediary, it is becoming part of an ecosystem that connects customers and partner services. For the bank, this means the opportunity to generate regular, recurring revenue; for retailers, it means lowering the cost of customer acquisition and extending the duration of customer engagement; and for users, it means saving money on services they use regularly.
“Today’s consumer seeks convenience and predictable value. A subscription is a tool that breaks down the psychological barrier to repeat purchases and allows a bank to invest in a customer relationship once, while remaining useful to the customer for years to come,” noted Tyutyun.
Sense Bank believes that this model creates a closed-loop loyalty ecosystem: the bank drives customer traffic, partners offer special terms, and users receive long-term benefits within a single digital space.
The service is available in the Sense SuperApp. The bank offers three package tiers: Small, Medium, and Full. Customers can customize their own set of services and choose only those they actually use.
Packages can combine transportation, streaming, entertainment, and other digital services, as well as security solutions.
The main advantage of this model is the cost of the bundle. According to the bank, a single package costs the customer less than purchasing each subscription separately.
Going forward, Sense Bank plans to expand its partner network, enhance the personalization of its offerings, and scale its subscription banking model.
The bank expects this format to be particularly in demand amid rising costs of digital services and users’ desire to better control their recurring expenses.
Sense Bank has been a state-owned bank in Ukraine since July 2023. 100% of its shares are owned by the Ukrainian government, represented by the Cabinet of Ministers. The bank is included in the NBU’s list of systemically important banks. Previously, the bank operated under the name Alfa-Bank Ukraine.
Learn more about Sense Bank’s subscription packages.
BANK, digital service, FINTECH, Sense Bank, subscription, SuperApp
According to Fixygen, the widespread adoption of stablecoins could change not only the payments market but also the way central banks’ monetary policy operates, warned Petra Chudin, a member of the Governing Board of the Swiss National Bank (SNB).
The SNB representative outlined her position on new forms of money on September 30 at the KOF Prognosetagung 2026 in Zurich.
One of the main risks is linked to a potential shift of funds from traditional bank deposits to stablecoins.
If individuals and companies begin transferring large amounts of money from bank accounts into digital tokens, commercial banks could lose part of their relatively cheap source of funding.
As a result, resources for lending to the economy will decrease, and banks will have to seek more expensive market-based financing.
But for central banks, the problem runs even deeper. By changing the interest rate, the central bank influences the cost of money within the banking system. Banks then adjust their deposit and loan rates accordingly, which affects household spending, corporate investment, and, ultimately, inflation.
The greater the proportion of money that moves outside the traditional banking system into stablecoins, the weaker this channel for transmitting monetary policy could potentially become.
Chudin also highlighted the fundamental issue of the unity of money. Under normal conditions, one Swiss franc in a bank account is equivalent to one franc in cash or central bank money.
A stablecoin is an obligation of a private issuer and does not necessarily have the same characteristics as central bank money.
This is precisely why the widespread adoption of various private digital currencies could potentially lead to a more fragmented monetary system. At the same time, the SNB does not reject the technology of digital money itself.
Switzerland is one of the most active European markets for institutional tokenization. The central bank is already experimenting with settlements using central bank digital currency for transactions involving tokenized assets.
Thus, the question for regulators is no longer whether new forms of money will emerge, but rather which digital form of money will become the primary unit of account—stablecoins issued by private companies, tokenized bank deposits, or central bank digital currencies.
This rivalry is becoming one of the most prominent structural trends in the financial market of 2026.
In the United Kingdom alone, Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group, and NatWest conducted the first interbank transactions involving tokenized deposits in September.
At the same time, European banks are developing their own stablecoin projects, while global financial groups are experimenting with round-the-clock settlements on the blockchain.
As a result, the market is gradually moving beyond the former “cryptocurrency versus banks” dichotomy. Banks and central banks are beginning to build their own digital infrastructure that competes with the functions currently performed by USDT, USDC, and other stablecoins.
According to Fixygen, U.S. banks have opened a new front in their battle with the crypto industry—the Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), challenging the decision to grant crypto companies simplified national banking licenses.
The lawsuit was filed on October 2 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the ICBA reported. The association represents American community banks—that is, small and medium-sized banks—a significant portion of whose business involves lending to individuals and companies in local markets.
The subject of the dispute is the so-called national trust bank charters. These charters allow companies to operate at the federal level with digital assets, provide custody services, and participate in payment transactions, but do not authorize traditional banking activities such as accepting deposits and issuing loans.
The ICBA believes that the OCC has effectively created a simplified path for crypto companies to enter the regulated banking system.
“Congress did not create the national trust license as a back door into the banking system for crypto companies,” said ICBA President and CEO Rebecca Romero Reyni.
Banks point to a fundamental difference in regulation.
Traditional deposit-taking banks must meet capital and liquidity requirements, be subject to consolidated supervision, and participate in the FDIC deposit insurance system. Companies with a national trust charter that do not take deposits are exempt from a significant portion of these requirements.
At the same time, the ICBA believes that a federal license may give customers the impression that a crypto company’s assets have the same government guarantees as funds held at a traditional bank.
The association is demanding that the final rule adopted by the OCC on March 2, 2026, and the related Interpretive Letter No. 1176 be declared unlawful.
Separately, the ICBA is demanding that the conditional approval of a national trust banking license for Protego Holdings be revoked. The company specializes in the custody, trading, lending, and issuance of digital assets.
The dispute extends far beyond a single license.
If the OCC maintains its current approach, crypto companies will be able to obtain federal banking status without converting into traditional commercial banks. This could simplify institutional custody of cryptocurrencies, settlements using digital assets, and the integration of crypto infrastructure into the U.S. financial system.
At the same time, traditional banks are stepping up pressure on the stablecoin market. The ICBA opposes paying interest and rewards to stablecoin holders, fearing a flight of funds from bank accounts into digital dollars. According to the association, a reduction in the deposit base could diminish small banks’ resources for lending to businesses and the agricultural sector.
According to Experts.news, the largest banks are beginning to move traditional bank money onto the blockchain, creating a potential competitor to the USDT and USDC stablecoins. In the UK, Barclays, HSBC UK, Lloyds Banking Group, Monzo, Nationwide, NatWest, and Santander are already testing tokenized deposits, while in the U.S., Citi is simultaneously building infrastructure that allows corporate clients to work with stablecoins via Coinbase.
In effect, two models for the future of digital money are taking shape. The first involves the use of independent stablecoins issued by companies such as Tether and Circle. The second transfers existing funds from bank accounts onto the blockchain.
British banks took an important step in this direction on September 24, 2026. The industry association UK Finance announced the completion of the first real-world customer transactions involving tokenized deposits in pounds sterling as part of the Great British Tokenized Deposit (GBTD) project.
Participants in the project include Barclays, HSBC UK, Lloyds Banking Group, Monzo, Nationwide, NatWest, and Santander.
The banks conducted two live mortgage refinancing transactions. The tokenized funds were automatically blocked until the terms of the agreement were met, after which the payment was processed without any additional manual steps.
Another test involved a purchase on a consumer marketplace. It demonstrated the ability to transfer tokenized bank funds between customers of different banks via a shared infrastructure.
The main difference between this model and USDT or USDC lies in the legal nature of the money.
A tokenized deposit is not a separate cryptocurrency. It is a digital representation of regular money that the customer already holds in a bank account.
If there is 1,000 GBP in a bank account, the bank can theoretically represent this amount in the digital infrastructure as a corresponding amount of tokenized pounds. In this case, the bank continues to bear the obligation to the customer, and the funds themselves retain the legal status of a bank deposit.
A stablecoin works differently.
USDT is issued by Tether, and USDC by Circle. The user effectively exchanges regular money for a digital token, the value of which the issuer commits to maintaining at the level of the corresponding fiat currency through reserve assets.
Therefore, a tokenized bank deposit and a stablecoin may look the same on the blockchain, but economically they are different instruments.
Banks have a significant advantage—their existing system of trust, regulation, and customer relationships.
UK Finance explicitly states that tokenized deposits must retain the regulatory guarantees of traditional bank deposits while acquiring the properties of digital money—programmability, faster settlements, and the ability to automatically execute payments once specified conditions are met.
It is precisely this programmability that could become one of the technology’s main advantages.
For example, when purchasing real estate, funds can be automatically transferred to the seller only after the transaction has been registered. Payment to a supplier can be made after confirmation of delivery. In financial transactions, the transfer of a security and payment for it can occur almost simultaneously.
As a result, the number of intermediate transactions is reduced, as is the risk that one party will fulfill its obligations while the other does not.
The next phase of the British project will involve using tokenized deposits to settle payments for digital assets. GBTD participants plan to link customers’ tokenized funds to digital securities.
In this way, banks are attempting to create within the regulated financial system the opportunities that blockchain and stablecoins initially offered outside of it.
However, it is still too early to write off USDT and USDC.
The scale of the existing stablecoin market is incomparable to the banks’ experiments. According to CoinGecko data as of October 3, the market capitalization of USDT alone is approximately $184 billion, while that of USDC is approximately $74 billion.
The total stablecoin market already exceeds $300 billion.
Stablecoins are particularly strong in international money transfers. They operate around the clock, can move between different blockchains and platforms, and do not require the sender and recipient to be served by the same bank.
This is where a fundamental problem arises for the traditional banking system.
If a significant portion of international payments shifts to USDT, USDC, or other stablecoins, banks will have to compete for payment flows that previously passed almost entirely through the banking infrastructure.
Furthermore, a massive shift of funds from bank deposits to stablecoins could potentially reduce banks’ deposit base, which is used to lend to the economy.
The Bank of England is explicitly taking this risk into account as it develops new regulations for digital currencies.
In June 2026, the Bank of England published draft rules for systemic stablecoins. The regulator proposed a model under which at least 40% of a systemic stablecoin’s reserves must be held directly at the Bank of England, while up to 60% may be invested in short-term UK government bonds.
Restrictions on the amount of stablecoins that individual users and companies can hold are also being considered for a transitional period.
However, the Bank of England does not propose banning stablecoins. On the contrary, its strategy envisions the coexistence of several types of digital currencies.
In the future, traditional bank deposits, their tokenized versions, regulated stablecoins, and a potential central bank digital pound could all be used simultaneously.
Therefore, real competition is developing not so much between banks and cryptocurrencies as between different models of digital money.
Citi’s strategy is illustrative in this regard.
On September 28, Citi and Coinbase announced an expansion of their partnership, which effectively combines traditional banking infrastructure with stablecoins.
Coinbase has selected Citi’s Virtual Account Wallet to power Coinbase Virtual Accounts. Incoming traditional currency can be automatically converted into stablecoins.
Conversely, Citi’s corporate clients will be able to accept payments in stablecoins via the Spring by Citi payment platform and the Coinbase Payments infrastructure.
Coinbase accepts the digital payment and facilitates its conversion, after which Citi processes the settlement in traditional currency as a bank.
This is particularly important for corporate clients: the company gains the ability to accept stablecoins without having to build its own infrastructure for storing and managing crypto assets.
According to Citi, this solution potentially gives its corporate clients access to over 150 million stablecoin holders worldwide.
Thus, major banks are adopting different strategies.
British banks such as Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds, NatWest, and others are creating tokenized versions of their own deposit funds.
Citi, meanwhile, is developing a banking blockchain infrastructure and building a bridge between traditional money and existing stablecoins.
In the long run, these models may not displace one another but rather share the market.
Tokenized deposits have a natural advantage within the banking system—for payroll, corporate payments, mortgages, lending, and securities transactions.
Stablecoins are stronger in areas where round-the-clock cross-border transfers, interoperability between different platforms, and the ability to freely move digital money between blockchains are particularly important.
But for banks, this issue is becoming strategic. If they fail to migrate deposits and payments to a programmable digital infrastructure, a significant portion of the new market could go to Tether, Circle, Coinbase, and other companies in the crypto industry.
That is why competition between USDT, USDC, and tokenized bank deposits could become one of the key drivers of the global financial system’s development in the coming years.
Sources: UK Finance, Bank of England, Citi, Coinbase, CoinGecko.
Pensioners who have switched their pension payments to mono will receive 1,000 UAH, after taxes, by the end of the year, according to Monobank co-founder Oleg Gorokhovsky.
“And as soon as they receive their first pension on a mono card, we’ll credit 1,000 UAH to their cashback account. We’ll cover the tax as well. In addition, we’re adding a ‘Medical’ category with 5% cashback for the year,” he noted.
Gorokhovsky emphasized that, according to the law, pensions can be received on a card from the bank of the pensioner’s choice.
As of July 1, 2026, there are 9.98 million pensioners in Ukraine, according to data from the Pension Fund. Eighty-three percent of pensioners—approximately 8.3 million people—receive their payments through banking institutions. The remaining 17% continue to receive their payments through Ukrposhta branches and mail carriers.
