Categories: Finance

How Banks Can Use NEC to Strengthen Identity Across the Customer Lifecycle 

Posted by Aneta Ciurkot on Posted in Digital ID, Enterprise, Finance Tagged

Banks tend to see the value of digital identity most clearly at the points where trust is being tested: account opening, authentication, recovery, payments, and employee access. In each of those areas, stronger identity can help reduce fraud, improve consistency, and give customers and institutions more confidence in the interaction. 

These are the areas where NEC helps financial institutions apply digital identity and biometrics in practical ways. The goal is to give banks a stronger and more consistent way to verify identity, reduce fraud, and support trust across the customer and workforce lifecycle.  

Onboarding and KYC 

The first place banks feel the limits of weaker identity is at onboarding. Account opening has to be fast enough to support digital growth, but strong enough to stand up to fraud, impersonation, and compliance requirements. 

NEC can help banks strengthen digital onboarding and KYC through identity verification that captures and validates an identity credential, then verifies a live selfie with liveness detection and a one-to-one biometric match against the photo on the ID credential. In practical terms, that helps the bank confirm that the document is valid, that the person is real and present, and that they are the rightful holder of the identity being presented.  

Authentication, Account Protection, and Recovery 

Once the account is opened, the identity challenge shifts. Banks need to protect existing accounts against misuse, confirm identity during ongoing access, and restore access when credentials are compromised or an interaction requires stronger proof. 

NEC can help banks carry identity assurance forward after onboarding through ongoing biometric confirmation. That gives the institution a stronger way to confirm that the same trusted person is returning, rather than relying only on passwords, OTPs, or knowledge-based checks. It is especially relevant in account recovery, where the bank needs to re-establish confidence quickly and securely without forcing the customer into a branch visit or a manual process. The platform overview identifies account recovery and step-up verification in financial services as a direct use case.  

Step-Up Identity for Higher-Risk Actions

Not every interaction calls for the same level of assurance. A routine login may require one approach. A large transfer, a new payee, unusual account activity, or a sensitive profile change may require something stronger. 

This is where banks can use NEC to apply biometric verification as a step-up control for higher-risk actions. A customer can be asked to complete a live biometric verification event when the bank needs greater certainty that the person behind the action is the legitimate account holder.

Payments, Wallets, and Channel Continuity 

Banks also need identity to work consistently across apps, payments, wallets, and in-person service environments. A customer may open an account in one channel, authenticate in another, approve a payment somewhere else, and interact with bank staff in a different setting. If identity is handled differently in each place, gaps start to appear. 

NEC can help banks connect those experiences more effectively. The retail banking and payments architecture you shared brings together wallets and apps, POS components, customer identity and access management, bank and payment systems, and an identity resolution platform. That gives banks a stronger way to support payment approval, face-based payment experiences, and more consistent identity assurance across channels.  

Consent-Based Fraud Investigation and Linked-Identity Analysis 

Banks can also use NEC to support fraud investigations through consent-based biometric matching. When a customer provides identity information as part of account opening and verification, that data can later be used, within the bank’s policies and applicable legal framework, to investigate suspected fraud. If a suspicious account is identified, investigators can use the associated image to compare against other enrolled records and datasets to see whether the same person may be linked to multiple accounts using different details. This is not surveillance. It is a defined fraud investigation use case based on customer-provided data and a legitimate banking purpose. The value for fraud teams is the ability to connect related identities and spot patterns that might otherwise remain hidden. 

Where NEC Can Help First 

For most banks, the best place to start is with the use cases where identity has the clearest business impact: onboarding and KYC, account protection and recovery, higher-risk approvals, payments, and workforce access. Those are the moments where stronger identity can improve security, reduce operational strain, and create a more dependable experience for customers and employees alike. 

To see how this applies in practice, explore NEC’s use cases for banking and financial services, or speak with our team about how we’re helping banks address these use cases as part of a broader identity strategy rather than as disconnected projects.

The Biometrics Debate in Banking Has Changed

Posted by Aneta Ciurkot on Posted in Biometrics, Finance Tagged

Banks are operating under a different identity standard than they were even a few years ago. Customers are more familiar with biometrics, more aware of account takeover and impersonation risks, and less likely to believe that passwords and one-time passcodes are enough on their own. They expect stronger protection, especially when the interaction carries financial risk. They also expect identity checks to feel measured, appropriate, and well handled.

That shift matters because many banks are still relying on identity models built for an earlier digital environment. Passwords, passcodes, and fragmented verification steps still have a role, but they are no longer a strong enough foundation for trust on their own. Not when customers are opening accounts remotely, restoring access after suspicious activity, approving significant transactions, or moving across channels where certainty has to hold together.

The Old Identity Model Is Starting To Show Its Limits

The debate around biometrics in banking has changed because the problem has changed. Identity is no longer confined to login. It now stretches across onboarding, ongoing access, account recovery, transaction approval, and exception handling. In those moments, the bank is not simply granting access. It is deciding how confidently it knows who it is dealing with.

That is why biometric identity is becoming more important. Not as a standalone feature, and not as a replacement for every other control, but as part of a stronger model for confirming the person behind the interaction.

Customers Are Bringing A Different Set Of Expectations

Customers are asking for identity processes that match the seriousness of the interaction. A routine access event may call for one level of assurance. A high-value transaction, an account recovery request, or unusual account activity may call for something stronger. The expectation is not complexity for its own sake, but a confidence that the bank is applying the right level of identity assurance at the right moment.

That is one reason older methods no longer feel sufficient on their own. The issue is not that passwords or one-time passcodes have disappeared from banking. It is that they no longer represent a convincing standard by themselves for the moments where trust is genuinely being tested.

What A Stronger Identity Model Looks Like In Practice

A better identity model gives banks a way to carry trust forward. It connects the assurance established at onboarding to later interactions, rather than forcing the institution to rebuild confidence from scratch each time risk rises or something goes wrong. That continuity matters in practice. It can strengthen onboarding, support more reliable account recovery, improve transaction approval, and create a more consistent identity posture across channels.

This is where NEC’s banking identity approach becomes relevant. NEC Digital ID and NEC Identity Cloud are built around the idea that trust in financial services is not a one-time event. It has to be established at the start of the relationship, maintained over time, and applied consistently across the moments that matter most. For banks, that means support for remote identity verification, ongoing biometric authentication, and stronger continuity between onboarding, access, recovery, and higher-risk customer actions.

Stronger Identity Also Has To Stand Up To Scrutiny

Customers want stronger protection, but they also want to know that information is being handled with care. Regulators and internal stakeholders want to know that systems are proportionate, explainable, and aligned with responsible data practices.

To see how this applies in practice, explore NEC’s biometrics use cases for banking and financial services, or speak with our team about how we work with leading financial institutions on digital trust, responsible biometrics, and stronger identity across the customer lifecycle.

Why Biometrics Are Becoming Part of the Bank’s Trust Architecture

Posted by Aneta Ciurkot on Posted in Biometrics, Digital ID, Finance Tagged

For years, identity sat quietly behind the scenes in banking. It appeared at account opening, at login, and occasionally during a recovery process, but it was rarely treated as a strategic layer in its own right. That is changing. In 2026, identity is becoming part of the bank’s trust architecture: not a single control, but a framework for how institutions establish confidence, manage risk, and sustain digital relationships over time. Accenture’s Top Banking Trends 2026 points to an industry being reshaped by agentic AI, digital assets, and new competitive conditions, while Deloitte’s 2026 outlook describes a more demanding environment for governance, resilience, and regulatory oversight.

Identity Has Moved Out Of The Background

The old model treated identity as a sequence of isolated checkpoints. One process handled onboarding, another handled authentication, another dealt with call-center verification, and still another sat inside workforce access or approval flows. That approach is increasingly out of step with how banks operate now. Digital relationships are continuous, channels are interconnected, and assurance has to hold together across far more moments than it once did.

That is why identity now belongs in a larger institutional conversation. It sits close to fraud strategy, operational resilience, AI governance, and customer confidence. J.P. Morgan’s latest annual report letters make that plain. Jamie Dimon writes that misuse of customer data is likely to grow worse with AI and agentic commerce, while Jennifer Piepszak emphasizes that AI must be connected to well-governed data and safeguards that protect clients, firms, and the financial system. 

Why The Operating Model Matters More Than The Feature Set

Once identity is understood as trust infrastructure, the questions become more serious. Banks are asking whether the institution has a coherent way to establish trust at the start of a relationship, maintain it across later interactions, and support trusted reuse of identity when appropriate.

NEC Identity Cloud points to a useful way of understanding the identity challenge in banking. Trust is not created once and left behind. It begins at onboarding, has to be sustained through later interactions, and increasingly needs to support how verified identity is used across a wider set of services and decisions. That is closer to how banks actually experience the issue: not as a single checkpoint, but as an ongoing responsibility.

That matters because the quality of trust is often tested long after the first verification event. A bank may know who a customer is at account opening, but the more important question is whether that assurance can still be relied on during account recovery, transaction approval, or an unusual event. When the answer is yes, identity becomes a steadier part of the operating model. When the answer is no, the institution ends up trying to recreate certainty under pressure.

[Learn more about NEC Identity Cloud >]

Trust Is Now A Governance Question As Well As A Security One

This is what makes the biometric conversation more consequential than it was even a few years ago. The issue is no longer limited to performance measures such as speed, accuracy, or fraud reduction. Those remain important, but the larger question is whether identity systems are being used in ways that are proportionate, understandable, and properly governed.

NEC approaches digital trust through a public commitment to privacy and responsible AI. For financial institutions, that is significant because trust is not defined only by technical strength. It is also shaped by whether systems can be clearly explained, responsibly overseen, and applied in ways that reflect the sensitivity of identity in banking.

In banking, this makes biometrics part of a broader conversation about institutional trust: how it is created, how it holds up over time, and how it is governed as risk and customer expectations continue to evolve.

Explore NEC’s biometrics use cases in banking and financial services, or connect with our team to discuss how leading institutions are approaching digital trust, stronger identity, and secure customer experiences.

Why a Foundational Trust Layer Matters for Financial Services in 2026

Posted by Aneta Ciurkot on Posted in Biometrics, Digital ID, Finance

Customers engaging with financial institutions today are not simply looking for convenience. They expect their digital interactions to be secure, private, and resilient by default. High-profile fraud, data breaches, and payment scams have made consumers more informed about risk, and their expectations have shifted accordingly. Security and privacy are moving from implicit assumptions to explicit criteria by which institutions are judged.

At the same time, U.S. financial institutions are operating in an environment where account takeover, identity fraud, payment fraud, and credential compromise are persistent and measurable realities. Regulators continue to raise expectations around controls and auditability, while internal teams are tasked with modernizing legacy systems without introducing new points of failure.

Against this backdrop, digital identity has taken on a different role within financial institutions. It is no longer treated as a peripheral security function. It has become a foundational layer that supports how risk is managed, transactions are authorized, and trust is maintained across digital channels.

Identity as a Financial Risk Control

Data from U.S. regulators and industry reporting consistently shows that identity-driven fraud represents a material portion of financial losses across banking and payments. Identity theft, account takeover, and social engineering attacks remain among the most common methods used to compromise accounts and initiate unauthorized transactions.

Many of the mechanisms still widely used to establish identity—static passwords, knowledge-based questions, and one-time passcodes, were not designed for this operating environment. They are costly to manage, vulnerable to compromise, and increasingly misaligned with both threat realities and customer expectations.

As a result, identity is no longer confined to the login process. It plays a direct role in:

  • Customer onboarding and verification
  • Transaction and payment authorization
  • Fraud detection and investigation
  • Regulatory compliance, auditability, and control validation

Why Institutions Are Re-Architecting Identity

Leading financial institutions are responding by treating identity as shared infrastructure rather than a collection of isolated tools. This shift reflects a broader recognition that identity assurance must be consistent across channels, products, and transaction types.

An upgraded identity foundation must:

  • Establish high confidence in who is transacting, not just who is accessing a system
  • Support privacy-aware verification methods appropriate for regulated environments
  • Scale across digital banking, payments, and internal platforms
  • Integrate with core banking, payments, and risk systems
  • Align with U.S. regulatory, data residency, and resiliency requirements

NEC Digital ID: Built for Financial-Grade Trust

NEC Digital ID is designed to support this infrastructure-level role. Rather than focusing on a single authentication method, NEC Digital ID provides a comprehensive identity capability that supports authentication, identity verification, and transaction protection across digital financial services. This breadth allows institutions to apply appropriate levels of assurance based on transaction risk, channel, and regulatory context.

NEC Digital ID supports cloud, on-premises, and hybrid deployment models, enabling institutions to align identity architecture with regulatory obligations, internal risk frameworks, and existing technology investments.

Security and compliance are embedded into the design. Advanced biometric verification, multi-factor authentication, and adaptive risk controls help financial institutions address account takeover, unauthorized transactions, and fraud while supporting AML, KYC, and privacy requirements.

NEC’s experience delivering large-scale, mission-critical identity systems across government, defense, and highly regulated commercial environments in the United States informs this approach.

For additional perspective on how digital identity supports secure financial services in the U.S. market see:

The Price of Trust: How Cloud-Native Identity Services Secure Financial Futures

Posted by Aneta Ciurkot on Posted in Biometrics, Cloud, Digital ID, Finance Tagged , , ,

The Problem with Identity: When Trust Becomes a Liability 

The narrative of security and safety in the financial sector is often one of reaction rather than prevention. An unfortunate but common reality is that security becomes a top-tier priority only after a catastrophic event, such as a large-scale data breach or a wave of fraudulent losses. However, the analysis shows that by the time a crisis unfolds, the damage has already been done, and the costs are far more than just monetary. For individuals, such a failure can result in the loss of a life’s savings; for institutions, it can erode the very foundation of trust upon which the industry is built. 

The scope of this issue is immense and rapidly expanding. According to a 2024 report from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), fraudulent activity led to a staggering $12.5 billion in losses, marking a significant $2.5 billion increase from the previous year’s figures. This data reveals that the threat landscape is not static but is accelerating at an alarming rate. It also underscores that the cost of inaction is not merely a hypothetical risk but a quantifiable and growing liability. 

The Digital Identity Minefield: Challenges of a Fragmented Ecosystem

The challenges facing financial services are rooted in the limitations of existing identity management architectures. Many institutions still rely on a fragmented, patchwork system of legacy applications and siloed databases. These systems often lack modern identity capabilities, leading to significant inefficiencies and vulnerabilities. The manual processes required to manage these disparate systems for compliance with regulations like GDPR, SOX, and PCI-DSS are error-prone and create “gaps in compliance”.

This fragmentation poses a particular challenge during periods of organizational change, such as mergers and acquisitions, where the unification of diverse identity repositories and access policies becomes a complex and disruptive undertaking. The reliance on a centralized identity model, while offering simplified management and audit capabilities, creates a single, high-value target for attackers. This architecture also enables a pervasive and dangerous problem known as “access creep,” where employees accumulate excessive access rights over time.  

The Spoofing and Deepfake Threat 

The industry has increasingly turned to biometrics—fingerprints, iris scans, and facial recognition—as a seemingly foolproof solution. Biometric data is inherently unique to each individual and, unlike passwords, cannot be easily duplicated or stolen in the traditional sense. However, as the technology has matured, a new and sophisticated class of threats has emerged, challenging the very notion of biometrics as an impregnable defense. 

The rapid advancements in generative AI have “flipped” the security paradigm on its head, rendering many legacy biometric systems vulnerable to sophisticated, AI-driven attacks. Deepfakes, once a staple of science fiction, are now a tangible cybersecurity threat that can be used to bypass facial recognition systems and lead to account takeovers and major financial losses. The financial implications of this new fraud vector are staggering: generative AI-enabled fraud losses in the U.S. are projected to grow more than threefold, from $12.3 billion in 2023 to $40 billion by 2027.

The technical weaknesses that enable these attacks are manifold. Spoofing, a method of fooling a biometric sensor with a fake artifact like a 2D photo or a 3D mask, remains a persistent challenge. Moreover, the open nature of certain mobile operating systems, often forces banks to rely on software-based biometric solutions that are easier for malicious actors to compromise with rooting tools and virtualization frameworks. These vulnerabilities demonstrate that not all biometric systems are created equal, and a high-quality, government-grade solution is a necessity, not a luxury. A 2025 survey of financial institutions found that a high percentage of respondents, 77%, considered deepfakes to be either a moderate or high threat to their application processes, underscoring the urgency of the problem. 

The Blueprint for a Secure Future: How Identity Cloud Services Solve the Crisis 

NEC Identity Cloud Service: A Foundational Shift to Cloud-Native Security 

The financial services industry requires a security paradigm that is built for the future, not patched onto the past. The NEC Identity Cloud Service (ICS) represents a foundational shift to a cloud-native security model. It is designed not as a separate product but as an embedded “identity layer” that can be rapidly deployed and scaled across an enterprise’s entire ecosystem. This architectural approach directly addresses the limitations of traditional, on-premise solutions. 

The cloud-native nature of ICS provides a significant advantage in terms of both speed and cost. On-premise identity solutions can take weeks to deploy, whereas ICS is available in a matter of hours. This rapid implementation is critical in an environment where speed to market and the ability to respond quickly to new threats are essential. Furthermore, by shifting the burden of hosting and support to NEC, the cloud model offers a considerably lower total cost of ownership compared to self-managed, on-premise deployments. This financial efficiency allows institutions to allocate resources to other strategic initiatives while ensuring a secure, scalable identity framework. 

The Liveness Advantage: Combating AI Fraud with Unmatched Accuracy 

The key to solving the biometrics paradox lies in moving beyond basic facial recognition to a solution with government-grade accuracy. The NEC Identity Cloud Service provides a direct answer to the threat of deepfakes and spoofing. NEC’s facial recognition technology has been consistently ranked as the world’s most accurate by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) since 2009. The technology boasts an unparalleled accuracy rate of 99.2% and can verify faces even from poorly lit or obscured images. This level of precision significantly reduces the rates of false positives and false negatives, which are major pain points for lower-quality systems.

The system’s defense against deepfakes is rooted in its advanced “liveness detection.” This technology analyzes subtle biometric cues, such as eye blinks, head movements, texture, and the reflection of light on the face, to distinguish a live human from a fake representation or a synthetic image. This sophisticated approach directly counters the AI-based video and voice cloning that analysts agree pose a significant threat to modern biometric systems.

In addition to its anti-spoofing capabilities, the NEC solution also prioritizes data privacy through its proprietary biometric template technology. The system generates mathematical abstractions of facial data that are impossible to reverse-engineer or reconstruct to reveal a user’s identity. This design choice is critical as it addresses the privacy concerns surrounding biometric data and ensures that even if a template were to be compromised, the core identity of the user would remain secure. 

Bridging the Gaps with Seamless Integration 

One of the most profound benefits of the NEC Identity Cloud Service is its ability to unify a fragmented identity landscape. The platform utilizes open APIs to provide a “common, standardized interface” that can “learn the various message formats used by different banks” and organizations. This capability is a fundamental solution to the problem of identity silos, which often lead to duplication, inconsistent data, and repetitive verification processes.

By offering a single, verifiable identity credential, NEC’s solution allows for a consistent and secure identity to follow the user across multiple applications and services. This capability is particularly valuable for addressing complex access management challenges, such as integrating third-party vendors and unifying identity systems during mergers and acquisitions.

This unification also revolutionizes the user experience. By reducing the need for multiple accounts and redundant verification steps, the solution simplifies the customer journey, from onboarding to daily transactions. The system enables seamless, friction-free processes like eKYC (electronic Know Your Customer), allowing customers to open an account with a simple selfie and a copy of their ID, eliminating the need for in-person visits and cumbersome paperwork.

Key Recommendations for Financial Institutions 

To navigate the evolving industry threats and build a secure foundation for the future, financial institutions should consider the following strategic imperatives: 

  1. Adopt a Cloud-Native Identity Model: The future of identity management is in the cloud. Institutions should prioritize solutions that offer the speed, scalability, and cost efficiency of a cloud-native platform, allowing them to rapidly deploy and adapt to new business and security requirements. 
  1. Demand Government-Grade Biometrics: The data is clear that not all biometric solutions offer the same level of security. To effectively combat sophisticated threats like deepfakes and spoofing, institutions must invest in top-tier biometric technology with a proven track record of accuracy and robust anti-spoofing features. 
  1. Unify the Identity Ecosystem: The era of fragmented identity silos must end. A successful identity strategy requires a solution that can create a single, trustworthy identity layer, seamlessly integrating with both legacy systems and third-party applications to reduce friction and improve security across the entire enterprise. 
  1. Embrace Security as a Value Driver: Security is no longer a cost center to be minimized. By framing a robust identity solution as a strategic investment, institutions can realize a significant return on investment through fraud reduction, operational efficiency, and, most importantly, the cultivation of lasting customer trust and loyalty. 

Let’s map your identity roadmap > 

References

Bhattacharyya, S. (2025). Banks tighten ID checks as AI deepfakes get better. American Banker. https://www.americanbanker.com/news/banks-tighten-id-checks-as-ai-deepfakes-get-better

IBM. (2024). Cost of a Data Breach Report 2024: Financial Industry. https://www.ibm.com/think/insights/cost-of-a-data-breach-2024-financial-industry

John Marshall Bank. (2024). Fraud Facts and Statistics. https://www.johnmarshallbank.com/resources/security-center/fraud-facts-and-statistics/