Xendit, PawaPay and Kraken face payment disruptions
Payment processor Xendit has suspended RCBC direct debit transactions in the Philippines after its banking partner launched a security investigation, while African mobile-money provider PawaPay reported five new service disruptions across different countries within three hours. Cryptocurrency exchange Kraken is also investigating simultaneous funding delays affecting its Plasma and Sui networks.
The incidents, reported between October 27 and 28, 2026, highlight different vulnerabilities in payment infrastructure, from bank-initiated security restrictions to mobile-money operator instability and blockchain-specific deposit and withdrawal failures.
Xendit also experienced multiple electronic-wallet and QR payment interruptions in Indonesia and the Philippines, alongside a Bank Negara Indonesia (BNI) payout problem that repeatedly changed which transaction amounts were affected.
Although several services have recovered, the RCBC security investigation and Kraken’s funding disruptions remained unresolved in the official incident records reviewed. None of the providers has disclosed customer financial losses attributable to these developments.
Xendit Suspends RCBC Payments Amid Bank Security Investigation
Xendit announced on October 28 at 10:04 Western Indonesian Time that RCBC direct debit payments in the Philippines had become temporarily unavailable because the banking partner suspended the channel while investigating a security concern.
The official incident report identified both RCBC Direct Debit and RCBC Online Banking as affected services, with the company’s status dashboard classifying them as experiencing a major outage.
Xendit emphasized that its own systems were unaffected and that other payment channels in the Philippines continued operating normally.
The provider recommended that merchants direct customers toward alternative payment methods while it coordinated with RCBC to restore the suspended service.
Follow-up notices at 10:05 and 10:06 WIB confirmed that the investigation was continuing. The reviewed status record contained no subsequent resolution announcement or estimated restoration time.
The incident differs from an ordinary processing interruption because the bank reportedly suspended its own payment channel in response to a security concern rather than merely experiencing technical delays.
However, the disclosure does not establish that RCBC suffered a successful cyberattack, that customer accounts were compromised or that unauthorized transactions occurred. Neither the nature of the concern nor the investigative findings have been disclosed.
For merchants accepting RCBC payments through Xendit, the immediate consequence is the loss of a payment option until the banking partner authorizes restoration.
PawaPay Reports Five Mobile-Money Incidents Across Africa
PawaPay separately recorded five new mobile-money disruptions within approximately two hours and 47 minutes, affecting operators in Uganda, Ghana, Kenya, Mali and Côte d’Ivoire.
According to the company’s official service history, the sequence began at 21:35 UTC on October 27 when Uganda Airtel experienced an outage.
Ghana AirtelTigo followed at 22:15 UTC, Kenya M-Pesa at 23:10 UTC and Mali Orange at 23:18 UTC. Côte d’Ivoire MTN was affected at 00:22 UTC on October 28.
The incidents involved separate mobile-money operators and countries. PawaPay did not disclose evidence linking the outages to a single technical cause or an internal platform-wide failure.
Several services subsequently recovered. Ghana AirtelTigo was marked resolved at 01:06 UTC, Uganda Airtel at 01:38 UTC, Côte d’Ivoire MTN at 02:04 UTC and Mali Orange at 02:14 UTC.
Kenya M-Pesa remained affected longer, with PawaPay reporting an ongoing gateway outage at 01:35 UTC. The service entered monitoring at 04:40 UTC before being marked resolved at 05:39 UTC.
Separately, Cameroon Orange continued experiencing difficulties affecting both deposits and payouts. That incident began on October 27 at 05:17 UTC, and a fresh update at 04:49 UTC on October 28 confirmed that both gateways remained unavailable.
The Cameroon disruption therefore represents a continuing problem rather than another incident beginning during the five-country overnight cluster.
The combination highlights the operational complexity of providing mobile-money payments across African markets. Merchants may connect through a single payment platform while depending on separate operators, national infrastructure and settlement arrangements in each country.
Although the concentrated timing raises questions about shared upstream pressures, the public notices do not identify a common network provider, settlement system or technical failure behind the incidents.
Kraken Faces Plasma and Sui Funding Delays
Cryptocurrency exchange Kraken reported another disruption on October 27, opening an investigation into delays affecting its Plasma XPL funding gateway at 15:34 UTC.
In its official notification, Kraken warned that deposits and withdrawals could be delayed while stating that other funding methods continued operating normally.
The incident also affected USDT transfers using the Plasma network, according to the exchange’s component-status information.
At the time, Kraken was already dealing with a separate Sui funding issue that began on October 26 at 09:39 UTC.
Kraken initially identified the SUI problem and announced that a correction had been implemented on October 27 at 07:19 UTC, moving the incident into monitoring.
However, at 11:00 UTC, the company returned the incident to Identified status and said a fix was being implemented.
The reversal suggests that the earlier corrective action had not established sustained recovery, although Kraken has not described the exact technical reason for the status change.
Both Plasma and Sui funding incidents remained open in the status records reviewed, without confirmed resolution times.
The overlap does not establish a sitewide Kraken failure. It indicates that two separate blockchain funding routes were experiencing operational difficulties simultaneously.
For customers, delayed cryptocurrency deposits can prevent timely access to assets intended for trading, while delayed withdrawals can complicate transfers between exchanges or external wallets.
Payment Delays Expose Reconciliation and Liquidity Risks
Xendit’s remaining October 27–28 incidents add another dimension to the broader infrastructure picture: transactions can be initiated successfully even when confirmation and settlement reporting become unreliable.
The provider reported a ShopeePay Philippines disruption involving payment-completion delays and callback latency reaching 40.47 seconds.
In Indonesia, separate interruptions affected Xendit’s QR-code payment channel and DANA electronic-wallet and QR payments. Several of these incidents were resolved within minutes, while the DANA e-wallet issue beginning at 03:07 WIB was marked resolved at 04:28 WIB.
Xendit warned merchants that customers could successfully initiate transactions while the payment provider delayed completion callbacks. The company advised merchants to reconcile affected transaction statuses once the issues were resolved.
This distinction is commercially important. A delayed callback does not necessarily mean the customer’s payment failed. If merchants assume that an unconfirmed transaction was unsuccessful, they risk requesting another payment or incorrectly withholding an order.
The BNI payout disruption revealed another unusual pattern. Xendit initially reported delays affecting all transfer amounts at 23:00 WIB on October 27.
By 01:00 WIB on October 28, the reported affected ranges had narrowed to IDR 1–9,999 and amounts above IDR 100,000,001. At 04:00 WIB, the affected range shifted again to amounts above IDR 250,000,001.
The incident was marked resolved at 07:00 WIB.
The changing amount thresholds suggest that processing availability may depend on transaction tiers, partner limits or separate routing arrangements. However, Xendit attributed the incident to partner-system problems without confirming the mechanism behind those changes.
For payment infrastructure businesses, the financial significance extends beyond the duration of individual outages.
When customers cannot complete deposits, receive delayed payout confirmations or access expected funding routes, merchants may experience interrupted cash flow, additional reconciliation work and higher customer-support demand.
The RCBC suspension also shows why operational and cybersecurity risks must be evaluated separately. A bank that proactively closes a payment channel during an investigation may be protecting customers, but the restriction still creates an immediate commercial disruption for businesses relying on that channel.
PawaPay’s multi-country incidents illustrate the value of diversified operator connections, while Kraken’s funding problems demonstrate how access to cryptocurrency liquidity depends partly on blockchain-specific exchange infrastructure rather than trading-system availability alone.
For investors assessing payment processors and exchanges, useful indicators include recurring partner outages, transaction-completion rates, callback accuracy, failed-payment volumes and the time required to restore services after attempted fixes.
The next developments to monitor are RCBC’s security findings and restoration decision, a confirmed resolution of PawaPay’s Cameroon Orange gateways, and Kraken’s recovery of Plasma and Sui funding operations.
None of the incidents establishes a shared financial-system compromise. Together, however, they underline a central weakness in interconnected payment markets: a platform can remain operational while critical banking, mobile-money or blockchain connections fail, directly affecting customers’ ability to move and receive funds.
Johan Shamshad is a financial markets writer at Dave Finances covering cryptocurrencies, trading platforms, brokers, fintech, financial regulation, and developments across global markets. He previously worked at Gulf News, adding newsroom experience to his coverage of fast-moving financial and digital-asset markets.
His work focuses on identifying market-moving events, company developments, regulatory changes, product launches, and shifts in trading and financial infrastructure.
Johan contributes news and analysis designed to help readers understand not only what happened, but why a development matters and how it may affect the wider financial landscape. You can reach out to him via his social media accounts:
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/johan-shamshad-742851262/
X: https://x.com/Yasmine_FX
Investing: https://www.investing.com/members/contributors/279781574