The newspaper wrote that banking outages have become almost routine for many Iranians over the past two years. Cards stop working, ATMs and mobile banking services fail, customers line up outside branches, and officials ask people to be patient and follow news from official sources.
Then, after hours, days or sometimes weeks, services return without a full explanation of the cause, the damage, the vulnerable points in the system or the responsibility of the banks and regulators involved.
The latest wave of disruption hit several major banks in June, including Melli, Saderat, Tejarat and the Export Development Bank of Iran. Mobile banking, internet banking, ATMs, point-of-sale terminals and card-based services were disrupted. The Coordination Council of Banks and the Informatics Services Corporation confirmed cyberattacks but said customer data remained safe.
Days later, another wider disruption affected card-based services across the banking network, with Melli, Saderat and Tejarat again among the banks most affected. The Informatics Services Corporation said some services had been deliberately restricted to prevent unauthorized access and protect customers’ data and assets.
But Shargh said many users were still reporting problems even after officials said services had been restored. The paper said ordinary transactions had become difficult for some people, including buying bread, paying taxi fares and transferring or receiving money.
The pattern is not new. During the 12-day Iran-Israel war last year, Bank Sepah suffered a major cyberattack that disrupted non-branch services.
The hacker group Predatory Sparrow claimed responsibility and said it had destroyed part of the bank’s infrastructure. Bank Pasargad was also hit shortly afterward. The government confirmed attacks on both banks and said public data had not been harmed, but full restoration of some services took days or weeks.
Shargh said the repeated failures have left one central question unanswered: why does Iran’s banking network collapse every few months, while no transparent report is published on the cause of the attacks, the scale of the damage or the responsibility of the institutions in charge?
Nima Amirshakari, an electronic banking specialist, told Shargh that the root of the problem is Iran’s weak connection to the outside world. He said parts of the country’s banking infrastructure are nearly three decades old and were built around systems bought long ago from foreign companies.
According to Amirshakari, many of those systems have been expanded through hardware upgrades, with more processors, storage and equipment, but their core software has not been properly modernized. A system that is not updated, patched or redesigned, he said, becomes easier for attackers to predict.
He argued that banks connected to the global financial system are forced to keep pace with changing standards in security, credit, lending and technology. Iranian banks, by contrast, operate in a closed environment where modernization is often treated as a choice rather than a necessity.
Shargh also quoted cybersecurity expert Saeed Souzangar as saying that the problem is not just technology. Sanctions, internet restrictions, weak administrative structures and limited investment in skilled personnel have left many institutions with expensive equipment but not enough expertise to use it securely.
Souzangar said banks and regulators in Iran do not appear to face a serious obligation to inform the public during cyber incidents. In many countries, organizations hit by cyberattacks must explain the scope of the incident, the number of users affected and the corrective steps taken. In Iran, he said, such reporting is often replaced by short and general statements.
That absence of accountability may be the most damaging part of the crisis. If banks face no clear legal, financial or reputational cost for service failures or security weaknesses, there is little pressure to invest seriously in prevention, training and public reporting.
The latest attacks have also triggered a political dispute over whether access to the international internet made the banking system more vulnerable.
Some officials blamed the reopening of internet access, but Behdad Akbari, deputy communications minister and head of Iran’s Infrastructure Communications Company, rejected the claim, saying the affected core banking systems were not connected to the public internet.
Shargh’s experts said blaming internet access alone is not a serious explanation. Internet restrictions can weaken security by limiting updates and access to global tools, but the causes of repeated banking failures cannot be reduced to a single technical claim without a proper investigation.
