This weekend, Barclays and Cabinet Office-backed security initiative Cyber Security Challenge UK, hosted an immersive competition to test the skills of thirty cyber enthusiasts. The competition required contestants to adopt the role of interns at a fictitious cyber security firm, who had to defend their company from a cyber-attack, triggered by an insider, all while their superiors were on a team-building canoeing adventure.

The competition is the last of 2017’s Cyber Security Challenge UK face-to-face competitions to unearth the UK’s hidden cyber talent and place these individuals in public and private sector cyber security roles to fill the critical cyber security skills gap. Not only does cyber security offer an exciting and varied career, but a lucrative one too – with roles averaging over £60,000 per year after training.

The competition took place in national heritage site and grand country house, Radbroke Hall, which is also the current site of Barclays’ Technology Centre. In the scenario, the ‘interns’, who were staffing a fictitious security firm called ‘Research4U’, had to spring into action after a hacking group launched a large-scale cyber-attack on the company, stealing confidential technology, source code and client data. The story saw hackers demand a ransom of £10m to prevent releasing the data to the press.

Competitors had to infiltrate and stop the fictional hacker group in order to destroy the leaked information before it could be released to the ‘press’. Leading cyber specialists from Barclays and other leading industry organisations assessed the contestants on their vulnerability assessment, reconnaissance, attack strategies and espionage skills in order to rank their performance and suitability for careers in the industry.

The winning team was team Wormhole: Carolyn Yates, Isabel Whistlecroft, Kajusz Dykiel, Peter Campbell and Waldo Woch.

The eightcontestants that have qualified for next month’s Masterclass grand finale were: Cameron Howes, Asher Caswell, Tom Brook, Vlad Ellis, Mohammed Rahman, David Young, Rajiv Shah and Isabel Whistlecroft. They will join the previous F2F winners from earlier in the year at Masterclass where they will compete against each other and have the opportunity to network with industry experts, in addition to winning career-enhancing prizes including degree scholarships, training courses, technology and gadgets and industry memberships.

The competition mirrors recent high profile attacks, such as WannaCry, where hackers held organisations to ransom across the globe. With the Public Accounts Committee revealing earlier this year that the Government’s ability to protect Britain from high-level cyber-attacks is undermined by a skills shortage, the need to find individuals with cyber skills has never been greater.

Troels Oerting, Barclays Group Chief Security Officer (CSO) and Group Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) said: “The best way to learn about cyber security is to engage in realistic scenarios, such as the competition that we’ve just hosted. Saturday’s event created a scenario that really tested a candidate’s ability to perform under pressure, think strategically, work as a team and display leadership skills. A career in cyber security requires various skills, including the ability to second-guess hackers and make critical decisions quickly. It was very encouraging to see students so immersed in solving the challenge we set them, and I wish all the candidates the very best in their careers.”

Nigel Harrison, acting Chief Executive of Cyber Security Challenge UK said: “This year’s scenarios have been varied in nature in order to demonstrate the range of cyber threats that this nation faces as well as the sheer breadth of sectors that need cyber security professionals – from banking and finance, to automotive and even retail. Sponsors, like Barclays make this possible and, in turn, help to open the door to dozens more careers. I would like to encourage any budding cyber security specialist, or ‘white hat hackers’, to consider applying for our competitions. The nation faces a growing cyber security threat, so we are in real need of talent that can keep organisations, and the public, secure. Why not Challenge Yourself today?”

(Source: Cyber Security Challenge UK)

Finance Monthly has partnered with FinTech Connect Live to give away 50 free Conference Passes to their popular event held in London this December.

To enter the competition you simply need to head to our Facebook page and 'Like' or comment on the FinTech Connect Live competition post. You don't have to like our page to enter the competition, although if you do you'll be the first to hear about future competitions and all the latest news from the world of Finance and Fintech.

Click here to enter the competition.

The competition will run until October 31st and winners will be chosen at random.   Please see below for full terms and conditions.

For more information on FinTech Connect Live please visit their event page here

Terms & Conditions

• There are 50 prizes of Conference Pass to FinTech Connect Live worth £399.
• Open to aged 16 and over, excluding employees and relatives of FinTechConnect Live or Companies attending the event in a Exhibitor capacity.
• The prize covers the cost of the Conference Pass to FinTech Connect Live.  Travel costs are not included and all entrants must ensure they can attend.
• Closing date for entries is 11.59pm GMT on 31st October 2017.
• Only one entry per person.
• Entrants must lLike' of leave a comment on the Facebook promotional post at Finance Monthly. Only one comment per person.
• The winner will be chosen at random.
• The winner will be informed by a reply to their comment plus a Facebook message within 14 days of the closing date and will need to respond within 7 days or a new winner will be chosen.
• The winner’s names will be available on request and may be published on all Finance Monthly social media accounts.
• The Conference Passes will be provided by FinTech Connect Live and details of how to receive these will be sent following the winners confirmation of our message sent within 7 days.
• The promoter is Finance Monthly.
• By participating in this prize draw, entrants confirm they have read, understood and agree to be bound by these terms and conditions.
• This promotion is in no way sponsored, endorsed or administered by, or associated with, Facebook

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has published new proposals on advice relating to pension transfers where consumers have safeguarded benefits, primarily for transfers from Defined Benefit to Defined Contribution pension schemes.

The FCA proposals aim to reflect the current environment and the increased demand for pension transfer advice. Since the introduction of the pension freedoms in April 2015, consumers have more options available to access their pension savings. This has combined with more recent changes to the financial environment leading to historically high levels of transfer values.

The new rules outline the FCA’s expectations of advisers and pension transfer specialists to ensure that consumers receive advice which considers all relevant factors. They build on an FCA alert on advising on pension transfers published in January.

The proposed changes include requiring transfer advice to be provided as a personal recommendation, and replacing the current transfer value analysis with a comparison to show the value of the benefits being given up. Taken together as a package, the proposals will ensure that advice fully takes account of an individual’s circumstances so that consumers make the right decision for them.

Christopher Woolard, Executive Director of Strategy and Competition at the FCA said: “Defined Benefit pensions, and other safeguarded benefits such as guarantees, are valuable so most consumers will be best advised to keep them. However, we recognise that the environment has changed significantly, so we want to ensure that financial advice considers the customer’s circumstances in full and recognises the various options now available to them.

“Our new approach should better equip advisers to give the right advice so that consumers make well informed decisions.”

The proposals include:

• replacing the current transfer value analysis requirement (TVA) with a comparison showing the value of the benefits being given up
• introducing a rule to require all advice in this area to be provided as a personal recommendation, which fully reflects the client’s circumstances and provides a recommended course of action
• updating our guidance on assessing suitability when giving a personal recommendation to convert or transfer safeguarded benefits, so that advisers focus on whether a transaction is right for a particular individual
• introducing guidance on the role of a pension transfer specialist

(Source: FCA)

Growth in the number of SMEs in the technical and professional sector² has outstripped every other industry since 2010, according to the latest study from specialist challenger bank Hampshire Trust Bank.

The research conducted in partnership with the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR), reveals there are almost 40% more legal services SMEs, architects and vets than in 2010. Other sectors which have seen high levels of growth³ since 2010 are information and communication (33%) and business services (25%). Looking at the UK as a whole, there has been a 17% rise in the number of SMEs from 2010.

The study highlighted that despite a lower percentage of start-ups entering retail and construction⁴, these sectors do have higher numbers of SMEs overall. However these two sectors attributed financial concerns as barriers to growth in their industries which may deter start-ups in the sectors. Nearly two in five (39%) retail and three in 10 (28%) construction companies said competition in the market was the biggest barrier to growth.

Sectors by level of growth

The sectors experiencing a higher number of start-ups correspond to those demonstrating a greater level of confidence when it comes to the long-term economic prospects of the industry they operate in – with three in five (59%) accountancy, IT and communication firms saying they feel optimistic.

Mark Sismey-Durrant, Chief Executive Officer at Hampshire Trust Bank, said: “Our report identifies the critical role of SMEs within the economy, particularly the many micro firms that are emerging in the UK.  It’s encouraging to see SMEs enter all sectors from 2010 – 15 and from our experience many are identifying opportunities for growth in the future. These figures should be seen as a source of optimism for the government in terms of providing employment and long-term economic prosperity for the years ahead.

“As the government prepares to set out plans for leaving the EU, I urge them to keep the spotlight on smaller companies by creating conditions and opportunities which will support the levels of growth our research has identified.”

Nina Skero, Managing Economist at CEBR, said: “This study is yet another indicator of how strong UK SMEs are and the vital role they play within the UK economy. It’s encouraging to see SMEs across various industries posting a strong performance. This further highlights how vital it is to nurture the optimism they are demonstrating if they are to continue driving economic growth.”

(Source: CEBR)

Competition compliance programmes must take account of the FCA’s rules for mandatory self-reporting of existing or potential competition law infringements. Here Finance Monthly benefits from exclusive insight, written by James Marshall and Marieke Datema of Berwin Leighton Paisner (BLP), who take a look at the powerful toolkit at the FCA’s disposal and explain what it means for firms in the year ahead.

A heavy use of market studies

Since acquiring a competition mandate in April 2013, the FCA has conducted several market studies. These allow the regulator to ‘peer behind the curtain’ in any given market to identify structural competition, consumer or market integrity concerns. In just over three years, the FCA reviewed insurance add-ons, cash savings, credit cards, retirement income, investment and corporate banking, asset management and residential mortgages.

The FCA has a uniquely powerful toolkit; it can use either sectoral (Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA)) or competition (Enterprise Act 2002) powers to conduct market reviews.

To date, all FCA market studies, including those launched after the FCA acquired concurrent competition law enforcement powers in April 2015, have been carried out using FSMA powers, rather than pure competition powers under the Enterprise Act. The FCA chooses the most appropriate power on a case-by-case basis. In practice, the FCA enjoys the ‘best of both worlds’, in that it can pursue competition-focused investigations using extensive data-gathering powers under FSMA without being bound by tight timetables under the Enterprise Act.

If, following a market study, the FCA concludes that a market is not functioning well, it may seek regulatory changes to fix the issues identified. Potential remedies include structural reforms (e.g. rule-making, guidance and/or proposing enhanced self-regulation), or firm-specific changes (e.g. varying regulatory permissions, public censure and/or financial penalties). The FCA can also “name and shame” firms by publishing data – one of the remedies imposed in the cash savings market study, for example, was the publication of interest rates made available by over 30 banks and building societies on certain types of savings accounts and ISAs. The FCA furthermore has the power to refer a market to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) for a detailed “phase 2” market investigation, the outcome of which could include forced divestments or other major interventions.

A market study offers the opportunity for quite considerable change. We would therefore encourage firms affected by market studies to consider what features of the market they may wish to change or defend and then consider how to engage with the FCA on those fronts.

Zeroing-in on individual firms – ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ enforcement measures

Investigations of individual firms are common outcomes of market studies in other sectors. Early in 2016, the FCA launched its first antitrust investigation. Details of the behaviour and the firms under investigation remain confidential. The FCA Director of Competition stated that she hoped the investigation “sends a signal that we take competition law seriously alongside other regulatory enforcement” and noted that the FCA is “well placed” to detect and take action in relation to breaches of competition law. It is certainly true that the FCA is ‘well placed’ – it has a team of around 100 competition specialists, a number of whom used to work for the CMA.

We anticipate an uptick in antitrust investigations in 2017. The CMA publishes an annual report assessing the operation of the concurrent powers by the FCA and other sector regulators. In its April 2016 report the CMA stated that it hoped to see a greater number of cases opened by the concurrent sector regulators (including the FCA) in the year ahead. The FCA, like its peer concurrent regulators, has been given its competition law powers on a ‘use it or lose it’ basis. This may be a real spur for greater enforcement action in future. The competition between sector regulators and the FCA’s desire to be regarded as ‘first among equals’ may also motivate further competition enforcement. Finally, following Brexit, cases involving possible anti-competitive conduct in the financial sector that previously may have been investigated by the European Commission are likely fall to the FCA or CMA.

Despite little ‘hard’ antitrust enforcement, the FCA has been astute in its use of ‘soft’ enforcement methods and we expect this trend to continue in 2017.  The FCA has made use of “on notice” letters which notify a firm that the FCA has information about a suspected breach of competition law. The firm must conduct an internal review and report back to the FCA on the scale of any competition breach identified, and what measures the firm will take to address the problem. “On notice” letters transfer the burden of investigating and remedying competition problems to individual firms. This can free-up FCA resource for higher priority matters, whilst also solving potential competition concerns - a regulatory ‘win-win’.

To date, the FCA has publicly confirmed the use of several “on notice” letters prompted by information gathered during the retirement income market study. The FCA met with the relevant firms to better understand their proposed solutions and the firms have since undertaken a number of initiatives to strengthen their compliance.

The FCA has also sent three advisory letters – intended to raise competition law awareness and promote compliance amongst targeted firms.

Self-reporting competition issues – a significant question

Both market studies and “on-notice” letters can place considerable burdens on individual firms to provide evidence in response to an FCA information request. Responding to such requests can also cause firms to ‘flush out’ potential issues which may require self-notification under the FCA’s handbook. SUP 15.3.32R (1) requires firms to notify the FCA of any significant infringement (or potential infringement) of any applicable competition law. The reference to “any applicable competition law” means that the notification obligation extends to infringements of competition law outside the UK. Despite the extensive scope of the notification obligation, only limited guidance has been provided by the FCA, in particular in relation to how firms can determine whether an infringement is “significant”.

The position adopted by the FCA is in stark contrast with the standard application of competition law. Leniency programmes generally provide that companies can choose whether or not to self-report competition infringements and there are, in many cases, incentives for companies to do so. If the relevant conduct identified by a firm is sufficiently serious, the FCA’s mandatory self-reporting obligation can effectively force a firm to apply for leniency. Moreover, the same conduct could prove problematic under both the FCA’s conduct rules and competition law. It is therefore more important than ever that regulated firms bring their competition compliance programmes in line with the self-reporting obligation and think through the wider implications of any notifications to the FCA.