Cybersecurity Awareness Month arrives this week against a sobering backdrop: Consumer losses from fraud have surged to $12.5 billion, a 25% increase in just one year. In response, the financial industry, consumer advocates and the federal government have rolled out a coordinated effort to fight back. Throughout October, organizations from the American Bankers Association to the federal government’s lead cybersecurity agency will be pushing new campaigns and security frameworks aimed at protecting both consumers and the nation’s critical financial infrastructure. Here are the most important developments to watch, from new anti-scam strategies to useful updated resources. The biggest announcement to kick off Cybersecurity Awareness Month on Wednesday came from the Aspen Institute, which released a national strategy on preventing scams developed jointly by multiple banks, payment networks, financial services companies, consumer advocates, government agencies, major retailers and others. Members of the steering committee that developed the report represented JPMorganChase, Zelle, Block, Plaid, Amazon, Target and others. Other members of the task force that developed the report included Bank of America, Citizens, Wells Fargo, Visa, Paypal, Transunion, the American Bankers Association and the Bank Policy Institute. The 70-page strategy document functions as a blueprint for how companies, the U.S. government, and others can combat a problem that the report calls a “global conflict” and “whole-of-society threat to America.” The strategy document emphasizes that artificial intelligence and faster payment options are making scams more destructive and widespread. Financial services — including banking, payments, fintech and crypto — are among the sectors scammers exploit. The report urged government and corporate leaders to modernize legal frameworks and enhance incentives for action. A critical component of the framework organized by the Aspen Institute is addressing the current ambiguity regarding the duty of care to suppress scam activity across sectors. Because the report serves to document the consensus between various consumer advocates, banks and other stakeholders, it does not reach a conclusion on the core, nuanced subject of the duty of care (who should be liable) when a consumer is tricked into authorizing a payment to a fraudster. However, the report does note that there is currently no clear or consistent duty of care to suppress scam activity across sectors targeted by scammers, such as telecommunications, digital platforms and financial services. This ambiguity creates tension, as companies fear undue liability if clear mandates are established. So, the strategy calls for Congress to normalize duties across sectors and enact good Samaritan liability protections for companies that act reasonably and in good faith against scams. These protections would help de-risk corporate participation in scam suppression efforts. The report also cited the Australia Scams Prevention Framework as an international model, noting it provides a safe harbor protecting firms from liability when they take reasonable, proportionate and good-faith action to block suspected scams. The strategy advocates that companies maintain robust anti-scam policies covering the entire scam lifecycle and ensure C-suite leaders own and review these policies regularly.