Once considered an emerging phenomenon, the rise of “fake carriers” has become a major concern for logistics providers, cargo owners, and marine insurers. In early 2026, the International Union of Marine Insurance (IUMI) and the Transported Asset Protection Association (TAPA EMEA) warned of a significant increase in cargo thefts involving fraudulent carriers.
Unlike traditional cargo crime, these incidents are often entirely non-violent. Criminals no longer need to hijack trucks or break into warehouses. Instead, they exploit digital vulnerabilities to obtain access to cargo before disappearing with the goods.
The trend is closely linked to the rapid digitalization of freight procurement. Online freight exchanges and public load boards have transformed logistics by improving efficiency and market access. However, they have also created opportunities for organized criminal groups to infiltrate supply chains under false identities.
For shippers and freight forwarders operating under constant pressure to secure transport capacity, verifying the authenticity of every carrier is increasingly challenging. The varying levels of carrier vetting across public freight platforms can create vulnerabilities that sophisticated fraudsters are quick to exploit.
The impact is already reaching the insurance market. As claims increase, insurers are reassessing their exposure to this emerging form of cargo theft. Some respond by imposing higher deductibles, reduced limits, or specific restrictions for shipments arranged through public freight marketplaces. However, underwriting restrictions alone do not address the root cause of the problem. Limiting coverage merely shifts risk back to cargo interests and logistics providers without reducing the underlying threat. The real challenge is one of prevention rather than risk transfer.
A more sustainable approach would involve the adoption of industry-wide security standards for digital freight platforms such as TAPA’s security standards. Stronger carrier onboarding procedures, enhanced identity verification, continuous monitoring of credentials, and advanced fraud detection systems could significantly reduce opportunities for criminal activity. At the same time, greater attention is likely to focus on the role of freight exchange platforms themselves. While many currently position themselves as neutral intermediaries, growing losses may lead shippers, insurers, and regulators to demand greater transparency regarding carrier verification processes and platform security controls. Depending on local legal framework and jurisprudential practices, freight exchanges providers will likely come under the spotlight for looking for their potential liabilities as failure to perform or lack of robust vetting.
Over time, in imposing high standards the market may evolve toward more secure freight ecosystems where access is subject to rigorous verification and ongoing compliance monitoring. Such measures are unlikely to eliminate fraud entirely, but they could significantly increase barriers to entry for criminal networks.
For marine insurers, the challenge extends beyond adjusting policy terms. The industry has an opportunity to promote stronger due diligence standards and support common security frameworks that enhance supply chain resilience while reducing systemic exposure. The emergence of fake carriers is a reminder that technological innovation creates new vulnerabilities as well as new opportunities. As supply chains become increasingly digital, criminals will continue to adapt their methods with speed and sophistication. The insurance industry must do the same.
As Captain Nemo’s famous motto in Jules Verne’s Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea reminds us: Mobilis in Mobili — moving within a moving environment. In an era of rapidly evolving risks, marine insurers must remain agile, adaptive, and forward-looking to effectively protect global trade.
