Two First-Year Students Expose Sassa's Grant System Weaknesses

The Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant was introduced to provide financial support to South Africa's most vulnerable citizens. However, the SRD grant system meant to facilitate the applications for the grant has been infiltrated.?

The South African Social Security Agency’s (Sassa)'s?Brenton van Vrede admits that fraud detected by two first-year Stellenbosch University students is widespread. It is unknown how much this fraud has cost Sassa, and by extension, the South African taxpayer.?

Two first-year computer science Stellenbosch University students?Joel Cedras?and?Veer Gosai?discovered severe bugs and fraud in Sassa’s Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant system.?

After conducting legal vulnerability tests, the pair of students found that the system allowed an alarming number of grant applications for people born in February 2005, with a 91% application rate—an unusually high figure suggesting potential fraud.?

The students’ findings were first reported by GroundUp. Despite attempts by the students to notify Sassa of these system vulnerabilities, they faced challenges, including difficulty reaching relevant officials.?

When we uncovered the problems described here, we did try to alert Sassa but found it near-impossible to get hold of anyone. Most of the contact numbers listed on?their website either do not exist, or ring indefinitely.

Further tests also revealed that fraudulent applications, including those using their ID numbers, were being approved, while legitimate beneficiaries are denied relief.?

Their investigation uncovered that many SRD grant applications, particularly for those born after 2002, had suspiciously high application rates. Additionally, a campus survey of 60 students revealed that 56 of them had SRD grant applications made in their names even though they had never applied.?

We also uncovered that Sassa has paid grants out on a number of occasions to applicants that used our ID numbers, even though we have never received the SRD grant.?

Van Vrede has called on members of the public who have discovered fraudulent applications have been made in their name to contact the Sassa call centre. These individuals will then be subjected to Sassa’s biometric verification process.

The students argue that this places a huge burden on members of the public, especially the poorest of the poor, to address a problem of Sassa making.

Sassa has received?criticism regarding its administration of the SRD grant with some civil groups warning that the agency’s?policies are exclusionary. The introduction of the facial recognition verification check also sparked concern.

Lesatsi explained the rollout of facial recognition checks when beneficiaries wanted to update contact information was to prevent fraud.

Criminals could potentially misuse the personal information of grant beneficiaries. By changing the beneficiary’s registered cellphone number, criminals might be able to redirect the grant payments to their accounts, effectively stealing the funds intended for the legitimate beneficiary.

It appears that criminals have already accessed money needed by the poorest in the country.?

Where Does The Buck Stop?

The students argue that the SRD system requires a complete overhaul, either through verification of applications or a complete system rebuild.?They further criticised Sassa’s reliance on biometric verification as impractical and placing undue burden on vulnerable citizens.??

Sassa’s commitment to biometric verification defeats the purpose of the SRD grant, which is supposed to be accessible, even to people using devices with the lowest specifications.

The students have called for full transparency from Sassa about the extent of the issue, demanding an inquiry into the system's development, costs, and the potential organised fraud behind it.

"There needs to be an inquiry into what has happened. Who developed the Sassa SRD system? How much did it cost? Who maintains it? What security checks have been put in place? And who are the kingpins responsible for what is almost certainly an organised massive fraud?"

This article was written by Ryan Cloete