As China moves to restrict foreign cybersecurity products from firms like VMware, Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, and Check Point, the action has been framed as a measure of technological sovereignty. Beijing cited supply-chain security, control over critical data, and reducing dependence on foreign infrastructure as the rationale behind its move.

This development prompts a pressing question for India and other digitally ambitious nations: could India adopt a similar approach to safeguard its critical networks and data?

India’s Authority and Its Limits

Legally, India has the power to regulate or restrict foreign technology in the name of national security. Its IT laws, Critical Information Infrastructure rules, and executive powers allow intervention in sectors such as defence, telecom, banking, and energy. India has already exercised this authority in targeted ways, including bans on certain mobile applications and stricter rules on telecom equipment procurement.

However, India’s democratic framework, open internet, and deep integration with global trade create constraints that China does not face. Sweeping bans on global cybersecurity vendors could trigger judicial challenges, trade disputes, diplomatic tension, and disruptions for enterprises dependent on international security solutions. Consequently, India’s approach tends to be selective and calibrated rather than comprehensive.

Regulation Through Design

Instead of public, sweeping bans, Indian policymakers often rely on procedural mechanisms to achieve similar outcomes. Government procurement rules, compliance mandates, data-localization requirements, and audit obligations can indirectly limit foreign vendor participation without naming companies explicitly. Critical Information Infrastructure guidelines further allow authorities to define which technologies may operate within essential systems.

This method enables India to assert control over sensitive environments while maintaining a perception of openness and avoiding accusations of protectionism. Vendors that fail to meet prescribed standards may find market access restricted, even without formal exclusion.

Divergent Models in a Fragmenting Digital Landscape

China’s model is centralized and exclusionary: sovereignty is achieved by phasing out foreign products and promoting domestic alternatives within a tightly controlled digital ecosystem. India, by contrast, emphasizes conditional participation—permitting foreign companies to operate if they adhere to evolving trust, transparency, and compliance standards.

Both approaches reflect a broader reality: cybersecurity is increasingly a matter of national resilience rather than just corporate risk management. While China relies on mandates, India prefers regulation, procurement leverage, and incremental indigenization to secure its critical systems.

As geopolitical tensions intensify and digital blocs solidify, these choices will influence market access for global vendors and the very nature of the digital state—whether security is exercised through strict control or managed interdependence.

GANDHINAGAR, Gujarat — From March 23 to 25, 2026, the National Forensic Sciences University (NFSU) will host the 11th meeting of the INTERPOL Digital Forensic Expert Group (DFEG) alongside the inaugural International Investigators’ Summit on AI-Enabled Digital Forensic Investigations. The event will take place at NFSU’s Gandhinagar campus and will bring together law enforcement officials, forensic specialists, policymakers, and academics from around the world at a time when digital evidence is increasingly central to criminal investigations.

The DFEG meeting, a closed-door forum for practitioners and managers, has grown over the past decade into one of the most influential global platforms for advancing digital forensic techniques. This marks the second time India is hosting the meeting, highlighting the country’s expanding role in global cybercrime investigations and capacity-building.

From Singapore to a Global Network of Experts
Established in 2015 under INTERPOL’s Global Complex for Innovation in Singapore, the Digital Forensic Expert Group has since convened in Spain, South Korea, the United Kingdom, Brazil, the United States, Norway, Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Edinburgh. The meetings focus on practical operational challenges, such as preserving volatile digital evidence, extracting intelligence from encrypted devices, and managing data across multiple jurisdictions.

Hosted under the INTERPOL Innovation Centre, the forum functions as a working laboratory where emerging forensic tools and methodologies are tested and adopted. For NFSU, India’s first university dedicated exclusively to forensic sciences, hosting the DFEG meeting is both a symbolic and strategic milestone, reflecting the country’s growing forensic infrastructure.

AI, Crime, and the New Investigative Frontier
Following the two-day DFEG meeting, the International Investigators’ Summit on AI-Enabled Digital Forensic Investigations will take place on March 25. Unlike the closed DFEG sessions, the summit is a hybrid of conference and competition designed to simulate real-world investigative scenarios.

Participants will tackle challenges involving AI-driven mobile forensics, cryptocurrency tracing, dark web investigations, cyber fraud, human-trafficking networks, and terror-financing cases. Organizers emphasize practical problem-solving—how AI can accelerate evidence analysis while ensuring legal admissibility, and how investigators can adapt as criminals employ automation, deepfakes, and anonymization technologies.

India’s Expanding Role in Global Cyber Policing
Hosting these events in Gandhinagar underscores India’s dual role as both a major target of cybercrime and a key partner in international enforcement. Indian agencies have increasingly collaborated with INTERPOL and other countries on digital investigations, sharing intelligence and forensic expertise.

By bringing together the DFEG and the AI Investigators’ Summit, NFSU and INTERPOL signal a long-term commitment to building investigative capacity in the Global South, where rapid digital adoption has often outpaced institutional preparedness. The forums aim to harmonize standards, foster trust, and ensure that digital evidence collected across jurisdictions can withstand legal scrutiny globally.

India has suffered cumulative losses of ₹52,976 crore due to cyber fraud and cheating-related crimes between 2020 and 2025, according to data from the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) under the Union Home Ministry. Analysts warn that cyber fraud has evolved into a highly organized, industrial-scale financial crime ecosystem.

2025 Marks a Record Year

The spike in cybercrime was most pronounced in 2025, which alone accounted for ₹19,812 crore in losses — nearly one-third of the six-year total. Over 21.77 lakh complaints were filed, signaling a rapid increase in both the scale and sophistication of scams.

Year-wise losses and complaints show the escalation:

• 2024: ₹22,849 crore; 19.18 lakh complaints
• 2023: ₹7,463 crore; 13.10 lakh complaints
• 2022: ₹2,290 crore; 6.94 lakh complaints
• 2021: ₹551 crore; 2.62 lakh complaints
• 2020: ₹8.56 crore; 1.27 lakh complaints

A senior cybercrime official noted, “Cyber fraud is no longer opportunistic — it is industrial and structured.”

Investment Scams Dominate

Investment-related scams were the largest contributor, accounting for 77% of 2025 losses. Other categories included:

• Digital arrest scams: 8%
• Credit card fraud: 7%
• Sextortion: 4%
• E-commerce fraud: 3%
• App/malware-based fraud: 1%

Victims are often targeted through fake trading apps, cloned investment platforms, social media ads, and fraudulent “financial experts” promising high returns.

Most Affected States

States with high digital adoption and transaction volumes saw the heaviest losses:

• Maharashtra: ₹3,203 crore; 28.33 lakh complaints
• Karnataka: ₹2,413 crore; 21.32 lakh complaints
• Tamil Nadu: ₹1,897 crore; 12.32 lakh complaints
• Uttar Pradesh: ₹1,443 crore; 27.52 lakh complaints
• Telangana: ₹1,372 crore; ~95,000 complaints

Together, these five states accounted for over half of national cyber fraud losses. Gujarat, Delhi, and West Bengal were also significant contributors.

International Links

Research from the Future Crime Research Foundation (FCRF) found that nearly 45% of 2025 cyber fraud cases had links to Southeast Asia, particularly Cambodia, Myanmar, and Laos. Fraud types included:

• Investment fraud: 36%
• Credit card fraud: 27%
• Sextortion: 18%
• E-commerce fraud: 10%
• Digital arrest scams: 6%
• App/malware-based fraud: 3%

Many scams are operated from overseas, with funds routed through layered bank accounts, shell companies, and cryptocurrency.

Why Cyber Fraud Is Surging

Experts point to multiple factors driving the growth:

• Rapid digitization and surge in UPI and online payments
• Professionally run scam networks with scripted calls and tech teams
• Advanced social engineering and psychological manipulation
• Expansion into smaller towns and rural areas

“These operations now resemble corporate-style setups, with recruiters, tech handlers, mule accounts, and fund managers,” a senior investigator explained.

Addressing the Crisis

Authorities stress that combating cyber fraud requires:

• Stricter regulation of investment platforms
• Faster coordination between banks and police
• Real-time fraud detection and alert systems
• Public awareness campaigns and financial-cyber literacy

As India’s digital economy grows, experts warn that without robust security, regulation, and awareness, losses from cybercrime are likely to escalate further.