Scams don’t just exploit gaps in knowledge—they prey on overconfidence. Based on new market survey findings, this chapter unpacks the paradox of modern cyber crime: the more confident consumers feel, the more vulnerable they become.
On this page
According to F‑Secure Consumer Market Survey data, 69% of people believe they know how to spot a scam. Yet 43% of those confident individuals still fell victim in the past 12 months.
Our research shows that, compared to the previous year, scam victimization is accelerating across nearly all surveyed markets.
Adults aged 18 to 34 are more than twice as likely to experience cyber crime (64%) compared to those aged 65 to 74 (28%).
50% of consumers now believe they’re likely to fall victim to scams or other cyber crime in the future.
Scams don’t just cause momentary disruption—they have real consequences.
This fragmented landscape leaves consumers vulnerable to misinformation, outdated advice, and emerging scam tactics that often go undetected until harm is done
50% of global respondents now say they are willing to pay for scam protection.
It’s not just a lack of knowledge that scammers exploit—it’s misplaced confidence. That’s why scam education must shift from information-sharing to behavior-shaping.
The Overconfidence Effect
In today’s hyperconnected world, consumers are more likely than ever to fall victim to scams. But not all see it that way—many believe they’re equipped to recognize and avoid them. This confidence offers a sense of control, but it can also be their greatest weakness.
According to 2025 F‑Secure Consumer Market Survey data, 69% of people believe they know how to spot a scam. Yet 43% of those confident individuals still fell victim in the past 12 months. This is the overconfidence effect in action—a cognitive bias where people overestimate their own knowledge or ability, leaving them blind to real risk.
Scam Victimization Is Rising Drastically
Scammers are quick to exploit these cognitive blind spots, using tactics like urgency and authority to override rational thinking. Our research shows that, compared to the previous year, scam victimization is accelerating across nearly all surveyed markets:
Overall, 48% of global respondents reported falling victim to cyber crime in the past 12 months. The data shows no single dominant scam type—instead, threats are spread across a wide range of categories and channels. Email scams lead at 11%, followed by malware or virus attacks at 8%, and SMS scams and credit card scams at 5% each.
Smaller but still significant numbers experienced call-based, social media, online banking, and online shopping scams. This variety underscores how cyber criminals are diversifying their tactics to target consumers in multiple ways, across every digital touchpoint.
Digital Natives Are Most at Risk
Younger demographics—the very group seen as most tech-savvy—face the highest exposure to scams. Adults aged 18 to 34 are more than twice as likely to experience cyber crime (64%) compared to those aged 65 to 74 (28%). A larger digital footprint, frequent online activity, receptiveness to new technology, and trust dynamics shaped by online influencers and parasocial relationships all increase exposure.
While 56% of people overall encounter scam attempts at least monthly, this rate rises to 59% for 18–24-year-olds, 62% for 25–34-year-olds, and 60% for 35–44-year-olds. In contrast, only 48% of those aged 65–74 report the same—highlighting a key truth: digital fluency does not equal cyber resilience.
Younger adults are more connected, more exposed, and often more confident than cautious. They’re also more likely to encounter situations that make certain scams effective—for example, cost-of-living pressures can leave them more vulnerable to crypto scams and “get-rich-quick” schemes.
Scams Are a Constant Threat
Scam attempt volumes have remained relatively stable since the previous survey year: 47% of respondents reported receiving about the same number, while 33% noticed an increase. Still, perceived risk is rising—50% of consumers now believe they’re likely to fall victim to scams or other cyber crime in the future.
Email is still the top delivery channel (48%), though its prominence varies. In mobile-first markets like Vietnam, it plays a smaller role (31%) compared to 57% in the USA or 56% in Finland. Despite this, many still underestimate the sophistication of scams, especially when they arrive via familiar channels like email and SMS. This perception-reality gap leaves many unprepared.
The Real-World Impact of Scams
Scams don’t just cause momentary disruption—they have real consequences. Among victims, 22% lost money, 17% lost time, and 11% lost personal information. Others reported stress (9%), data loss (5%), and reputational damage (1%).
Yet 24% downplayed or ignored the incident—likely due to feelings of shame or embarrassment, growing desensitization from repeated scam exposure, or the belief that they should have known better. This avoidance reflects the overconfidence effect: “I should’ve seen that coming” becomes a reason to stay silent.
A Fragmented Information Landscape
One reason overconfidence persists is the lack of centralized, trusted information about online threats. When asked where they learn about scam trends, 15% cite a security service provider, 15% turn to their bank or insurer, 12% speak to friends or family, 12% rely on social media, and 12% admit they don’t get scam information from any source at all.
This fragmented landscape leaves consumers vulnerable to misinformation, outdated advice, and emerging scam tactics that often go undetected until harm is done.
Rising Willingness to Pay for Protection
Despite blind spots and gaps in awareness, consumers are beginning to recognize the limits of self-reliance: 50% of global respondents now say they are willing to pay for scam protection. In Vietnam, that figure climbs to 84%.
Younger adults (aged 18 to 44) are the most willing to invest, reflecting their greater exposure to scams and higher likelihood of falling victim. Crucially, consumers want protection from the brands they already trust. They expect banks, telcos, and other digital service providers to safeguard not only their money or connectivity, but their online security as a whole.
As scams become more personalized and persistent, consumers need more than instinct or isolated advice. They need seamless, always-on protection embedded in the services they already rely on.
Looking Ahead:
Reframing Scam Education
It’s not just a lack of knowledge that scammers exploit—it’s misplaced confidence. That’s why scam education must shift from information-sharing to behavior-shaping.
- Shift from awareness to resilience. Reframe “Here’s how scams work, learn the red flags” to “Even if you know the red flags, you can still be emotionally manipulated. Let’s normalize hesitation as a safety tool.”
- Focus on emotional triggers, not just scam tactics. Rather than asking “What do scams look like?” ask: “When are you most emotionally exposed?” This reframes scam recognition as emotional literacy, not just pattern recognition.
- Empower consumers as advocates. Instead of saying “You know the signs,” prompt: “Do your loved ones?” Reframing personal awareness as community protection makes education more meaningful—and more effective. Especially during times of stress or emotional challenges brought on by major life changes.
