AI-Generated Fake QRIS Used in Surabaya Store Fraud

Thumbnail Image

The information displayed in the AIM should not be reported as representing the official views of the OECD or of its member countries.

A man in Surabaya, Indonesia, used an AI application to create fake QRIS payment proofs, deceiving a local store and fraudulently withdrawing over 3.3 million rupiah. The suspect, AY, repeated the scam multiple times before being apprehended by police. The incident highlights AI's role in enabling financial fraud.[AI generated]

Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?

The event explicitly mentions the use of Artificial Intelligence to generate fake QRIS payment proofs, which were used to deceive the store employee and withdraw cash fraudulently. The AI system's use directly led to financial harm (loss of money) to the victim. The harm is realized and materialized, not just potential. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the direct involvement of AI in causing harm to property (financial loss) through fraudulent means.[AI generated]
AI principles
Robustness & digital securitySafety
Industries
Financial and insurance services
Affected stakeholders
Business
Harm types
Economic/Property
Severity
AI incident
AI system task:
Content generation

Articles about this incident or hazard

Thumbnail Image

Modal HP dan QRIS Palsu Buatan AI, Pemuda di Surabaya Kuras Uang Toko Jutaan Rupiah

2026-05-29
KOMPAS.com
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The event explicitly mentions the use of Artificial Intelligence to generate fake QRIS payment proofs, which were used to deceive the store employee and withdraw cash fraudulently. The AI system's use directly led to financial harm (loss of money) to the victim. The harm is realized and materialized, not just potential. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the direct involvement of AI in causing harm to property (financial loss) through fraudulent means.
Thumbnail Image

Gunakan QRIS Hasil Editan AI, Pengangguran di Surabaya Raup Jutaan Rupiah dari Toko Sebelum Diciduk

2026-05-30
KOMPAS.com
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The article explicitly mentions the use of an AI application to edit QRIS payment proofs, which were then used to deceive a store owner and obtain money fraudulently. This constitutes direct harm to property (financial loss) caused by the misuse of an AI system. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework, as the AI system's use directly led to harm.
Thumbnail Image

Pria Kaltim Tipu Toko di Surabaya Pakai Bukti Transaksi Palsu Hasil AI

2026-05-30
detikpop
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The use of an AI application to generate falsified transaction evidence directly facilitated the fraud, causing realized harm (financial loss) to the victim. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly led to harm to a person or group (the store owner).
Thumbnail Image

Penipu Bukti Transfer QRIS Palsu Diciduk di Surabaya, Aksi Terbongkar saat Tarik Tunai

2026-05-28
https://jatim.jpnn.com
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The use of an AI application to generate falsified payment proofs directly contributed to the financial harm suffered by the store owner. The AI system's misuse was pivotal in enabling the fraud, which resulted in realized harm (financial loss). Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the direct link between AI misuse and harm to property (financial loss).
Thumbnail Image

Bermodal AI, Pengangguran Asal Kaltim Tipu Toko di Surabaya dengan QRIS Palsu

2026-05-28
JawaPos.com
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The event involves the use of an AI application to edit and fabricate QRIS payment proofs, which were then used to deceive a store and steal money. This constitutes direct harm to property caused by the misuse of an AI system. Therefore, it qualifies as an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly led to realized harm through fraud.
Thumbnail Image

Polisi Surabaya Ungkap Penipuan QRIS Palsu dengan AI, Pemuda Kaltim Ditangkap

2026-05-28
Surya
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The article explicitly states that the perpetrator used AI to generate fake QRIS payment proofs, which were used to deceive store employees and withdraw cash fraudulently. This use of AI directly led to financial losses amounting to millions of rupiah, constituting harm to property. The AI system's use in the fraudulent scheme is central to the incident, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident as the AI system's use directly caused harm.
Thumbnail Image

Pemilik Toko Surabaya Jebak Pelaku QRIS Palsu Hasil Edit AI, Rp3,3 Juta Raib: Aksi Kelima Diringkus

2026-05-28
Surya Malang
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The article explicitly states that the perpetrator used Artificial Intelligence to edit and create fake QRIS payment proofs to deceive a store employee and withdraw cash fraudulently. This use of AI directly caused financial harm to the victim, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under the definition of harm to a person or group. The harm is realized and directly linked to the AI system's use in the fraudulent activity.
Thumbnail Image

Raup Jutaan Rupiah Bermodalkan QRIS Palsu Buatan AI, Pria Kuras Harta Toko di Surabaya

2026-05-29
Tribun Jatim
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The event explicitly mentions the use of Artificial Intelligence to create fake QRIS payment proofs, which were used to deceive store employees and withdraw cash fraudulently. This use of AI directly led to financial harm (loss of money) to the victims, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under harm to property. The AI system's involvement is in the use of AI-generated fake payment proofs to commit fraud, which is a direct cause of the harm. Hence, the classification is AI Incident.
Thumbnail Image

Pria Ini Kuras Uang Toko dengan QRIS Palsu Buatan AI

2026-05-29
Tribun Jateng
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The article explicitly states that the perpetrator used AI to create fake QRIS payment proofs, which were then used to deceive the store employee and withdraw money fraudulently. This constitutes direct use of an AI system leading to financial harm (property loss). The harm has occurred multiple times with a total loss of approximately Rp3.39 million. Hence, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to direct harm caused by the AI system's misuse.