Catfishing and sock puppets as a public threat

What used to be dismissed as internet oddity is moving into the mainstream of fraud prevention, platform regulation and organised crime analysis: the distinction between sock-puppet accounts and catfishing is no longer academic. Authorities, platforms and researchers are increasingly treating fake digital personas as a wider security and financial risk, particularly as artificial intelligence makes them cheaper to create, easier to scale and harder for ordinary users to detect.

At the centre of the debate is a simple but important difference. A sock puppet is typically a fabricated online identity, or several identities, controlled by one person to create the impression of separate voices, wider support or insider access. Catfishing is more personal and usually more intimate: a fake identity is used to lure, manipulate or emotionally entrap a target, often for money, sexual coercion or personal data. Researchers and online safety agencies say the two can overlap, but they are not identical. One is often about manufactured credibility in a crowd; the other is more often about deception in a relationship.

That distinction matters because the threat has broadened. Fake personas are now being used not only on dating sites, but across social networks, encrypted messaging apps, professional platforms and investment forums. Meta continues to describe coordinated inauthentic behaviour as networks of fake accounts used to mislead people about who is behind an activity. Europol, in its latest threat assessment, warned that criminal groups are using synthetic media and AI-generated identities to impersonate people more convincingly, automate deception and expand fraud operations across borders.

Financial harm is already substantial. In Britain, City of London Police figures cited by the Financial Conduct Authority show more than £106 million was lost to romance fraud in the 2024-25 financial year, with average losses above £11,000. In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission has said romance scams remain among the costliest forms of impersonation fraud, while the FBI said in April 2026 that cyber-enabled crime defrauded Americans of nearly $21 billion in 2025, with AI-related scams and cryptocurrency fraud among the most damaging categories.

The public is also encountering fake profiles with striking frequency. A Britain-focused study by identity firm GBG found 61 per cent of online daters had encountered fake profiles. Barclays said in February 2026 that 67 per cent of reported romance scams in 2025 began on dating sites and social media platforms, a sign that the classic dating con has merged with broader platform-based impersonation. That shift is why consumer protection experts are increasingly linking catfishing to investment fraud, blackmail, account takeover and so-called pig-butchering schemes rather than treating it as a niche dating problem.

AI is accelerating the problem. Europol has warned that criminal networks can now produce realistic voices, images and messages at scale. OpenAI disclosed in February 2026 that it had disrupted accounts used in a dating scam operation targeting men in Indonesia, showing how generative tools can be folded into scripted emotional manipulation. Industry reports and policymakers have separately flagged deepfake-assisted impersonation as a fast-growing part of online fraud, particularly where scammers combine stolen photos, cloned voices and patient grooming.

Researchers studying romance fraud say victims are not simply falling for crude tricks. A 2026 scoping review found that fake personas, authority impersonation and emotional grooming remain central tactics, with harm extending beyond direct financial loss to trauma, shame and social isolation. Another study on the industrialisation of romance fraud argued that what once looked like isolated catfishing has, in many cases, become an organised and scalable business model, borrowing methods from customer acquisition, behavioural profiling and social engineering.

Regulators are starting to catch up. In Britain, Ofcom’s online safety work is widening the focus on illegal harms and online fraud, while pressure on platforms is growing over fake accounts, deceptive advertising and scam amplification. In the United States, lawmakers have pressed dating-platform operators to explain how fraudsters continue to exploit algorithmic trust and profile design. The direction of travel is clear: fake identity abuse is being treated less as a moderation nuisance and more as a systemic risk touching finance, privacy and public safety.