ZENTARA

Industries · Banking & Finance

For the examiner in the room, and the adversary who isn't.

Banks, fintechs, insurers and multifinance companies answer to OJK and Bank Indonesia while defending BI-FAST, QRIS, SNAP and core banking against people who work weekends. Zentara operates inside regulated institutions — running the SOC, running the red team, and producing the evidence your examiner asks for, in the form they ask for it.

2020–2024
Exceeded by 2025 alone
BSSN traffic-anomaly monitoring — one year above the previous five combined
15 days
To file your SEOJK 29 assessment
Business days from year end
72 hrs
To notify a personal data breach
UU PDP
31 Mar 2026
PBI 10/2025 in force
Payment system industry, restructured

What we are defending

The systems that have no maintenance window.

01

BI-FAST

Real-time credit transfer. An outage is not an IT incident, it is a public event within minutes — and the regulator hears about it from customers before it hears from you.

02

QRIS

Merchant-presented QR at national scale. Fraud propagates faster than any manual review process, so detection has to sit in the flow rather than after it.

03

SNAP open API

Every partner integration is an authorisation boundary you now own. Most SNAP findings we see are not in the standard; they are in what was built around it.

04

Core banking

Temenos, Silverlake, Finacle or in-house — the system with no downtime budget. Testing it demands people who have worked inside one before.

05

Mobile & internet channel

Root and jailbreak detection, certificate pinning, repackaging, and the OTP flow that looked fine until someone automated against it.

06

Third-party access

The vendor with a standing VPN, provisioned in 2019 by a team that has since moved on. Under POJK 11 that exposure is yours to evidence, not theirs.

Obligation · Response · Evidence

Every requirement you answer to, and what you hand over when asked.

Compliance work fails at the last step. The control gets implemented and nobody can produce the artefact that proves it. Each engagement below is scoped backwards from the evidence.

SEOJK 29/SEOJK.03/2022

OJK

Requires

Annual cyber security and resilience assessment for commercial banks: an inherent risk rating, plus maturity across two components — the quality of cyber risk management implementation, and the quality of cyber resilience process implementation. Filed within 15 business days of year end.

We do

Independent assessment against both components — governance, risk framework, risk process and control system on one side; identify, protect, detect, respond and recover on the other — with the remediation sequence that actually moves the rating.

Evidence produced

Scored assessment, evidence pack, board-ready summary

POJK 11/POJK.03/2022

OJK

Requires

IT governance, architecture, risk management, personal data protection, service provision, and internal audit and control for commercial banks.

We do

vCISO-led control design and third-party risk assessment, mapped clause by clause rather than to a generic framework.

Evidence produced

Control matrix, outsourcing risk register

PADK 1/2026

OJK

Requires

The implementing regulation under POJK 11, effective 1 March 2026: IT governance and architecture, IT risk management, third-party IT providers, offshore placement licensing, data management and personal data protection, internal control, audit and reporting. It repeals SEOJK 21/2017; SEOJK 29 remains in force alongside it.

We do

Re-baseline against the new instrument rather than the one it replaced — most banks' control documentation still references the 2017 circular.

Evidence produced

Re-baselined control matrix, gap register

PBI No. 2 of 2024

Bank Indonesia

Requires

Information system security and cyber resilience for payment system operators, money market and foreign exchange participants, and other parties regulated and supervised by Bank Indonesia.

We do

Threat-led testing of the payment rails themselves, plus 24/7 detection tuned to payment-specific abuse rather than generic malware signatures.

Evidence produced

Test reports, detection coverage matrix

PBI No. 10 of 2025

Bank Indonesia

Requires

Restructured, risk-based obligations across payment service providers, infrastructure operators and supporting providers. In force 31 March 2026.

We do

Readiness assessment against your new category, before a supervisor tells you which one you are in.

Evidence produced

Category gap analysis, remediation roadmap

UU PDP

Republic of Indonesia

Requires

Lawful basis, data protection impact assessment, and notification of a personal data breach within 72 hours.

We do

Data governance implementation and incident runbooks built against the clock — 72 hours is not long enough to start deciding who signs.

Evidence produced

DPIA records, notification runbook, RACI

SWIFT CSP

SWIFT

Requires

Annual attestation against the mandatory control set, independently assessed.

We do

Independent assessment and remediation of failed controls, scheduled so attestation is not a fire drill.

Evidence produced

Assessor report, attestation-ready pack

PCI DSS v4.0.1

PCI SSC

Requires

Cardholder data environment controls, with segmentation validated by testing.

We do

Segmentation penetration testing and CDE scoping — most of the saving is in proving the scope is smaller than assumed.

Evidence produced

Segmentation test report, scope reduction memo

SEOJK 29 · The measurement that matters

Your score is only meaningful next to your risk rating.

SEOJK 29 asks commercial banks for two things each year: an inherent cyber risk rating from 1 to 5, and a maturity assessment of how well risk management and resilience are actually implemented. Banks tend to fixate on raising maturity. Supervisors look at the distance between the two. A digital bank running BI-FAST, QRIS and an open API estate sits high on inherent risk by construction — and a maturity score that would be comfortable for a small multifinance company is a finding at that scale. The work is not getting a better number. It is closing the gap between the number you have and the risk you actually carry.

Inherent cyber risk rating

  1. 1

    Low

    Limited digital channel, narrow third-party estate, minimal payment-rail exposure.

  2. 2

    Low to moderate

    Established channels, some outsourcing, conventional product set.

  3. 3

    Moderate

    Full digital channel, multiple rails, meaningful vendor dependency.

  4. 4

    Moderate to high

    Open API estate, high transaction volume, extensive partner integration.

  5. 5

    High

    Systemically significant, real-time rails at scale, dense third-party interconnection.

Highlighted: where a bank running real-time rails and an open API estate sits by construction, whatever its maturity score says.

Inherent risk scale as defined in SEOJK 29/SEOJK.03/2022

Sector threat model

  • Payment-rail abuse across BI-FAST, QRIS and SNAP — fraud clears faster than the reversal process
  • Mobile banking tampering, repackaging and credential abuse: the app is the branch
  • Ransomware against core banking, where there is no maintenance window to hide in
  • Third-party and vendor-chain access inherited from someone else's decision
  • AI-assisted social engineering — deepfake voice against treasury and payment approval
  • Correspondent banking and SWIFT: low volume, catastrophic value per transaction

What this sector answers to

The regulatory landscape for banking & finance. Our own accreditations are listed on certifications.

SEOJK 29/SEOJK.03/2022POJK 11/POJK.03/2022PADK 1/2026PBI 2/2024PBI 10/2025UU PDPSWIFT CSPPCI DSS v4.0.1ISO 27001

Track record

SOC operations, red teaming and maturity roadmaps delivered for national banks, regional lenders and payment fintechs.

For institutions reporting outside Indonesia

One engagement that satisfies your group standard and your local supervisor.

Foreign bank branches, regional subsidiaries and international insurers carry two obligations at once: the group control framework, and Indonesian regulation that does not accept a group attestation in its place. Most vendors serve one and leave you to reconcile the other yourself.

  • Deliverables in English, mapped to ISO 27001, NIST CSF and your internal control taxonomy — readable by a group CISO who has never opened a POJK.
  • The same assessment cross-referenced to OJK and Bank Indonesia clause numbers, so your local compliance team files without re-doing the work.
  • Data residency as a feature, not a constraint: what stays in Indonesia stays in Indonesia, evidenced.
  • We deal with your local regulator in Bahasa Indonesia, and with your head office in English. Neither conversation is a translation of the other.

Before you have to justify us internally

Bringing in a security vendor is itself a risk you have to evidence.

So here is the answer to the questions your risk committee will ask, before they ask them.

An Indonesian entity, under Indonesian law

PT Mars Bumi Indonesia. Contracts, staff and data stay in jurisdiction — which is what makes the outsourcing assessment under POJK 11 straightforward rather than an exception you have to argue for.

Our platforms deploy inside your perimeter

On-premise by default. Telemetry from a regulated institution does not leave it, and there is no cross-border transfer question to answer because there is no cross-border transfer.

Named operators, not a rotating pool

You know who is on your network, what they are cleared for, and who to call at 03:00. Access is scoped per engagement and expires with it.

Deliverables written for the file

Our reports are built to be handed to an examiner or an internal auditor, not summarised for one. That is a different document from a sales-ready executive deck, and we write the former.

The exit is designed in

Turnkey SOC is build-operate-transfer: we run it, your team learns it, you own it. A dependency you cannot end is a risk your regulator will eventually name.

We do not test where a settlement window is open

Work touching payment rails is scheduled around clearing and settlement cycles, agreed with your operations team. A finding is never worth a failed settlement, and no schedule of ours justifies risking one.

VAPT & Offensive Security

Penetration testing for Banking & Finance

133 services in the catalog apply to Banking & Finance — from point-in-time pentests to red team and continuous validation.

Explore all 133
Penetration Test

External Network Penetration Test

Black-box test of internet-facing assets, perimeter exposure, and exploitable services.

Penetration Test

Internal Network Penetration Test

Assumed-breach lateral movement, AD abuse, sensitive data discovery from inside.

Penetration Test

Wireless Penetration Test

WPA2/3 Enterprise, rogue AP, evil twin, BLE, guest network segregation.

Penetration Test

Network Segmentation Validation

Verifies VLAN/firewall isolation between zones (CDE, OT, corporate).

Penetration Test

Active Directory / Entra ID Security Assessment

Kerberoasting, AS-REP, ACL abuse, BloodHound paths, hybrid identity review.

Assessment

Firewall, Router & Switch Configuration Review

Rule base hygiene, ACL drift, hardening against CIS Benchmarks.

Penetration Test

VPN Security Assessment

IKE/IPsec, SSL VPN, split tunneling, ZTNA migration readiness.

Assessment

Email & DNS Security Review

SPF/DKIM/DMARC, MTA-STS, DNSSEC, BIMI, phishing surface.

Securing banking & finance?

Start with a scored maturity baseline or go straight to a specialist conversation.