CyberCriminal.com

Hawex Group

We are investigating Hawex Group
for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices. This includes potential violations such as impersonation, fraud, and perjury.

Hawex Group

PARTIES INVOLVED: Hawex Group

ALLEGATIONS: Perjury, Fraud, Impersonation

INCIDENT DATE: 15 Mar 2023

INVESTIGATED BY: Ethan Katz

TOOLS USED: Lumen, FakeDMCA, SecurityTrails

CASE NO: 0614/A/2024

CRIME TYPE: Intellectual Property Scam

PUBLISHED ON: 21 Nov 2024

REPORTED BY: FakeDMCA.com

JURISDICTION: USA

A summary of what happened?

Hawex Group is a financial technology company that operates as an electronic money agent, providing services such as IBAN-based bank accounts, acquiring solutions, and crypto processing. The company is registered in the United Kingdom and has been associated with various entities and individuals, leading to several concerns and allegations.

Major Concerns, Complaints, and Accusations Against Hawex Group:

  1. Ownership and Management Changes:
    • Initially, Hawex Group Ltd was controlled by Russian national Kirill Baldakov until March 2022. Subsequently, control shifted to Dubai-based Hawex Investment LLC, owned by individuals including Indian-British Ruchi Rathor. These changes have raised questions about the company’s transparency and governance.
  2. Affiliations with High-Risk Entities:
    • Hawex Group has been linked to high-risk payment processors and individuals involved in controversial financial activities. Notably, it has associations with Connectum Limited, an FCA-regulated payment processor implicated in laundering illegal proceeds from cybercrime organizations.
  3. Regulatory Scrutiny:
    • As an FCA-authorized electronic money agent of Paystree Limited, Hawex Group operates under regulatory frameworks. However, its connections to entities and individuals with histories of financial misconduct have subjected it to increased scrutiny from financial watchdogs and industry observers.
  4. Allegations of Facilitating High-Risk Transactions:
    • Reports suggest that Hawex merchants processed over €81 million through Connectum in June, primarily involving high-risk sectors such as gambling, cryptocurrency, and online marketing. The concentration of these merchants in jurisdictions like Cyprus, the UK, and Estonia has raised concerns about the company’s role in facilitating potentially illicit transactions.
  5. Connections to Controversial Figures:
    • Hawex Group is allegedly linked to Ruchi Rathor, co-founder of iPayTotal Group, a payment processor with a controversial reputation. Such associations have led to questions about Hawex Group’s operational integrity and business practices.

Hawex Group’s affiliations with high-risk entities and individuals, coupled with its involvement in substantial transactions within controversial sectors, have raised significant concerns about its business practices and regulatory compliance. While the company maintains its status as an authorized electronic money agent, the surrounding allegations necessitate careful consideration by potential clients and partners.

 

Hawex Group Fake DMCA

 

 

 

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.

 

 

 

What was Hawex Group trying to hide?

Hawex Group‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling Hawex Group in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Hawex Group may be trying to remove from the internet –

Hawex Group, a financial technology company, offers services such as IBAN-based bank accounts, acquiring solutions, and cryptocurrency processing. Despite its positioning as an innovative fintech provider, the company has been embroiled in controversies related to its ownership structure, affiliations with high-risk entities, and regulatory scrutiny.

Ownership Transitions and Management Concerns

Established in July 2021, Hawex Group Ltd was initially controlled by Russian national Kirill Baldakov. Following the onset of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Baldakov withdrew from his position. Subsequently, the company’s control shifted to Dubai-based Hawex Investment LLC, owned by individuals including Indian-British Ruchi Rathor, co-founder of the iPayTotal Group—a payment processor with a controversial reputation. These rapid changes in ownership and management have raised questions about the company’s transparency and governance practices.

Affiliations with High-Risk Entities

Hawex Group operates as an FCA-authorized electronic money agent (EMD Agent) under Paystree Limited, an FCA-authorized e-money institution. However, reports indicate that Hawex has processed significant volumes of transactions—over €81 million in June 2022—through Connectum Limited, an FCA-regulated payment processor. These transactions predominantly involve high-risk sectors such as gambling, cryptocurrency, and online marketing, with merchants primarily based in Cyprus, the UK, and Estonia. Such associations have raised concerns about Hawex’s role in facilitating potentially illicit activities.

Regulatory Scrutiny and Allegations

The company’s connections to individuals with histories of financial misconduct have subjected it to increased scrutiny from financial watchdogs and industry observers. Notably, Ruchi Rathor, associated with Hawex, has been linked to other high-risk payment processors like Payomatix and iPayTotal, which have faced allegations of fraudulent activities. Additionally, whistleblower reports suggest that entities within this network have engaged in illegal operations, including financial fraud and money laundering.

Client Complaints and Negative Reviews

Clients have reported issues with Hawex’s services, including unexpected fees and poor customer support. Some users have described the company as “scammers and extortionists,” citing experiences where they were charged substantial fees without prior notice and faced unresponsive support when seeking assistance.

Conclusion

Hawex Group’s rapid ownership changes, affiliations with high-risk entities, and involvement in substantial transactions within controversial sectors have raised significant concerns about its business practices and regulatory compliance. While the company maintains its status as an authorized electronic money agent, the surrounding allegations necessitate careful consideration by potential clients and partners.

 

 

 

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of Hawex Group (or actors working on behalf of Hawex Group), we will inform Hawex Group of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Hawex Group may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Hawex Group, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Hawex Group to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.

Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –

 

 

Since Hawex Group made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for the Streisand effect…The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms. Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible, which Hawex Group is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Hawex Group

Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.

Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.

 

 

Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”  Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).

Is Hawex Group Committing a Cyber Crime?

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Hawex Group have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Hawex Group is certainly keeping interesting company here….

CompanyNames Fake DMCA

The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.

Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.

 

Reputation Agency's Modus Operandi

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.

Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Hawex Group creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.

The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.

The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.

 

 

In committing numerous offences, Hawex Group either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Hawex Group, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

 

The Reputation Laundering

Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.

The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.

 

 

In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.

Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Hawex Group is in great company ….

What else is Hawex Group hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Hawex Group] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)

 

 

To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on Hawex Group that you want to share with experts and journalists, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].

All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.

Authorities we may contact and share this report with for further actions

GOOGLE LEGAL HEAD

Halimah DeLaine Prado

NEWS DESK

Washington Post & NY Times

The above decision-makers and authorities will be provided a comprehensive dossier of our findings, including anonymously submitted evidence and tips. We invite journalists to contact us to receive a copy of our complete investigation here

Credits and Acknowledgement

16/10/2024

Many thanks to FakeDMCA.com and Lumen for providing access to their database.

Photos and Illustrations provided by DALL-E 3 – “a representation of Hawex Group censoring the internet and committing cyber crimes.”

  • We’ve reached out to Hawex Group for a comment or rebuttal regarding this investigation. It will strongly suggest they were behind the takedown attempt if they remain silent.

    • Our investigative report on Hawex Group‘s efforts to suppress online speech is significant, as it raises serious concerns about its integrity. The findings suggest that Hawex Group has engaged in questionable practices, including potential perjury, impersonation, and fraud, in a misguided attempt to manage or salvage its reputation.

    • We intend to file a counternotice to reinstate the removed article(s). While this particular instance is relatively straightforward, it is important to note that, in other cases, the overwhelming volume of automated DMCA takedown notices can significantly hinder the ability of affected parties to respond—especially for those not large media organizations.

    • You need an account with fakeDMCA.com and Lumen to access the research data. However, accounts are not widely available since these non-profit organisations manage large databases that could be susceptible to misuse. Nevertheless, they do offer access to non-profits and researchers.

    • It’s unclear why U.S. authorities have yet to act against these rogue reputation agencies, whose business model seems rooted in fraudulent practices.

  • We’ve reached out to Hawex Group for a comment or rebuttal regarding this investigation. It will strongly suggest they were behind the takedown attempt if they remain silent.

About the Author

16/10/2024

The author is affiliated with Harvard University and serves as a researcher at both Lumen and FakeDMCA.com. In his personal capacity, he and his team have been actively investigating and reporting on organized crime related to fraudulent copyright takedown schemes. Additionally, his team provides advisory services to major law firms and is frequently consulted on matters pertaining to intellectual property law. He can be reached at [email protected] directly.

USER FEEDBACK ON Hawex Group

1.7/5

Based on 3 ratings

Trust
20%
Risk
60%
Brand
20%
by: Uma Patel
December 11, 2024 at 10:42 am

My experience with this ccompany has been nothing but disappointment. They’re deceptive and only interested in making a quick buck, with no regard for the people they claim to serve. It’s incredibly unprofessional how they handle their business, and I...

by: Penny Phillips
December 11, 2024 at 10:17 am

This company is shady at best. Their services are a joke, and they’ve been dishonest at every turn. The lack of transparency is beyond frustrating. Avoid them if you value your time and money.

by: Penelope Wright
December 11, 2024 at 10:04 am

Hawex Group is a complete scam! They promise services they can’t deliver and waste your time and money

Add Reviews

  • Trust
  • Risk
  • Brand

PROS

+
Add Field

CONS

+
Add Field
Choose Image
Choose Video

Leave feedback about this

  • Trust
  • Risk
  • Brand

PROS

+
Add Field

CONS

+
Add Field
Choose Image
Choose Video

WEBSITE AUDITS

Stop fraud before it happens with unbeatable speed, scale, depth, and breadth.

RECENT AUDITS

INVESTIGATIONS

Uncover hidden digital threats and secure your assets with our expert cyber investigation services.

RECENT CASES

THREAT ALERTS

Stay ahead of cyber threats with our daily list of the latest alerts and vulnerabilities.

THREAT ALERTS

LATEST NEWS

Your trusted source for breaking news and insights on cybercrime and digital security trends.

LATEST NEWS