Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
10/06/2026 10:48 pm
TL;DR: Fraud has doubled globally, Brazil is seeing a deepfake surge, and up to 30% of players could skip full verification, according to SumSub’s 2025 iGaming identity verification report based on analysis of more than 3 million fraud attempts. The governance problem is no longer just fraud volume, but whether verification flows can absorb AI-driven deception without widening access risk.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by SumSub: State of Identity Verification in the iGaming Industry, 2025
Questions worth separating out
Q: What breaks when players can skip full verification too often?
A: When players can skip full verification too often, the identity programme loses assurance consistency and creates a repeatable fraud path.
Q: Why do deepfakes make iGaming identity checks harder to govern?
A: Deepfakes make iGaming checks harder to govern because they attack the trust signals behind document capture, face matching, and liveness checks.
Q: How can security teams tell whether verification controls are actually working?
A: Security teams should look at fraud attempt trends, abandonment rates, exception usage, and manual-review queues together.
Practitioner guidance
- Tighten verification exception policy Define exactly when full verification can be skipped, who approves the exception, and how often exceptions are reviewed for drift.
- Measure fraud and abandonment together Track fraud attempts, completion rates, retry counts, and manual-review fallout in one dashboard so that stronger controls do not simply move risk into abandonment or workarounds.
- Segment assurance by market Apply different identity proofing thresholds for jurisdictions with different regulatory pressure, fraud rates, and document norms instead of relying on a single global flow.
What's in the full report
Sumsub's full report covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Regional benchmark data for iGaming identity verification by market and fraud pattern.
- Detailed breakdown of where fraud doubled globally and which attack paths changed fastest.
- Discussion of the Brazil deepfake surge and what it means for proofing design.
- Practical guidance on how many players can skip full verification without breaking the model.
👉 Read Sumsub's State of Identity Verification in iGaming 2025 report →
iGaming identity verification in 2025: can controls keep up?
Explore further
12/06/2026 4:30 am
Identity verification in iGaming is now a fraud-control problem, not a point-in-time onboarding problem. The article shows a market where attackers adapt faster than static proofing workflows can respond. That shifts the governance question from whether a user can be verified once to whether the verification model can keep pace with adversarial behaviour across the full player lifecycle. Practitioners should treat this as a continuous assurance issue, not a form-filling exercise.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 91.6% of secrets remain valid five days after the targeted organisation is notified, showing a critical gap in remediation procedures, according to Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- In the same research, only 5.7% of organisations have full visibility into their service accounts, which helps explain why identity exceptions and stale trust signals persist.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who is accountable when identity verification fails in regulated gaming markets?
A: Accountability sits with the organisation that defines the assurance policy and signs off on exceptions, not with the fraudster who exploits them. In regulated markets, compliance, risk, product, and identity teams all share responsibility for keeping the verification model aligned with local requirements.
👉 Read our full editorial: Identity verification in iGaming is colliding with AI fraud
