Case 02

The Hijacked Callback

A title agency was held liable for $1,500,000 after relying on wire instructions retrieved from a compromised callback sheet.

Connelly v. Cowbell Cyber (W.D. Wash. 2025)

Documented Loss

$1,500,000

The point of these briefs is not spectacle. It is to show how thin the fallback assumptions become once the wire is already in motion.

What Failed

The office followed a callback protocol, but the protocol was sourced from the same compromised channel as the wire instructions.

What The Case Proves

A callback is not enough if the attacker controls both the email and the number. The verification channel itself has to be independent.

Why Veto Exists

Veto’s job is to create a separate verification event and a record that the desk checked the destination before release, not simply to add one more phone call.

Veto

Wire verification for independent escrow agencies. Built for the closing-file record.

Strategic Advisor
Michael Benardo
Former FDIC Associate Director,
Cyber Fraud & Financial Crimes
Escrow Institute of California Member

Veto verifies routing details against Federal Reserve routing data and local trust checks available at verification time. It creates a record that the desk checked before release. It does not guarantee wire instruction authenticity, account ownership, or replace independent review by authorized staff.

© 2026 Veto Wire Verification.