Global Anti-Scam Organization (GASO) is an independent, field-embedded initiative focused on understanding and disrupting transnational scam operations in high-risk environments. The work is grounded in sustained engagement with affected individuals and on-the-ground networks in host jurisdictions, enabling analysis informed by live cases and verified field inputs rather than secondary data alone.

​

GASO originated from direct victim support in high-risk scam environments, including engagement with individuals subjected to scam-related financial crime and forced labour. Through multiple years of continuous frontline involvement, it became evident that downstream assistance and formal policy responses alone were insufficient to reduce harm at scale—particularly in jurisdictions where enforcement capacity, incentives, or legal authority are structurally constrained. In response, GASO evolved toward a mandate centred on analysing scam operations as incentive-driven systems and developing practical disruption strategies suited to these operating realities, while maintaining ethical separation between operational engagement and analytical work.

​

Operating within these environments enables assessment of interventions based on whether they function under actual conditions on the ground. This includes recognition that, in many high-risk zones, border control, law enforcement, and regulatory mechanisms operate as incentive-driven systems rather than enforceable constraints, regardless of formal policy design.

​

Analysis is derived from verified field inputs, operational pattern mapping, and cross-case synthesis. To preserve methodological integrity and source protection, operational engagement and analytical production are structurally separated. This approach enables the translation of frontline insight into credible, decision-useful outputs without compromising ethical or analytical standards.

​

GASO’s focus is not on eradication within host jurisdictions where scam operations are politically or economically embedded. Instead, priority is placed on realistic disruption objectives: introducing friction into recruitment and monetisation pathways, increasing operational cost and failure rates, constraining scalability, and reducing victim exposure across borders. These objectives reflect the limits of jurisdictional authority while targeting leverage points where disruption is feasible and durable.