#FactCheck: Beware of Fake Emails Distributing Fraudulent e-PAN Cards

Digitisation in Agriculture

The traditional way of doing agriculture has undergone massive digitization in recent years, whereby several agricultural processes have been linked to the Internet. This globally prevalent transformation, driven by smart technology, encompasses the use of sensors, IoT devices, and data analytics to optimize and automate labour-intensive farming practices. Smart farmers in the country and abroad now leverage real-time data to monitor soil conditions, weather patterns, and crop health, enabling precise resource management and improved yields. The integration of smart technology in agriculture not only enhances productivity but also promotes sustainable practices by reducing waste and conserving resources. As a result, the agricultural sector is becoming more efficient, resilient, and capable of meeting the growing global demand for food.

Digitisation of Food Supply Chains

There has also been an increase in the digitisation of food supply chains across the globe since it enables both suppliers and consumers to keep track of the stage of food processing from farm to table and ensures the authenticity of the food product. The latest generation of agricultural robots is being tested to minimise human intervention. It is thought that AI-run processes can mitigate labour shortage, improve warehousing and storage and make transportation more efficient by running continuous evaluations and adjusting the conditions real-time while increasing yield. The company Muddy Machines is currently trialling an autonomous asparagus-harvesting robot called Sprout that not only addresses labour shortages but also selectively harvests green asparagus, which traditionally requires careful picking. However, Chris Chavasse, co-founder of Muddy Machines, highlights that hackers and malicious actors could potentially hack into the robot's servers and prevent it from operating by driving it into a ditch or a hedge, thereby impending core crop activities like seeding and harvesting. Hacking agricultural pieces of machinery also implies damaging a farmer’s produce and in turn profitability for the season.

Case Study: Muddy Machines and Cybersecurity Risks

A cyber attack on digitised agricultural processes has a cascading impact on online food supply chains. Risks are non-exhaustive and spill over to poor protection of cargo in transit, increased manufacturing of counterfeit products, manipulation of data, poor warehousing facilities and product-specific fraud, amongst others. Additional impacts on suppliers are also seen, whereby suppliers have supplied the food products but fail to receive their payments. These cyber-threats may include malware(primarily ransomware) that accounts for 38% of attacks, Internet of Things (IoT) attacks that comprise 29%, Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks, SQL Injections, phishing attacks etc. 

Prominent Cyber Attacks and Their Impacts

Ransomware attacks are the most popular form of cyber threats to food supply chains and may include malicious contaminations, deliberate damage and destruction of tangible assets (like infrastructure) or intangible assets (like reputation and brand). In 2017, NotPetya malware disrupted the world’s largest logistics giant Maersk and destroyed all end-user devices in more than 60 countries. Interestingly, NotPetya was also linked to the malfunction of freezers connected to control systems. The attack led to these control systems being compromised, resulting in freezer failures and potential spoilage of food, highlighting the vulnerability of industrial control systems to cyber threats.

Further Case Studies

NotPetya also impacted Mondelez, the maker of Oreos but disrupting its email systems, file access and logistics for weeks. Mondelez’s insurance claim was also denied since NotPetya malware was described as a “war-like” action, falling outside the purview of the insurance coverage. In April 2021, over the Easter weekend, Bakker Logistiek, a logistics company based in the Netherlands that offers air-conditioned warehousing and food transportation for Dutch supermarkets, experienced a ransomware attack. This incident disrupted their supply chain for several days, resulting in empty shelves at Albert Heijn supermarkets, particularly for products such as packed and grated cheese. Despite the severity of the attack, the company successfully restored their operations within a week by utilizing backups. JBS, one of the world’s biggest meat processing companies, also had to pay $11 million in ransom via Bitcoin to resolve a cyber attack in the same year, whereby computer networks at JBS were hacked, temporarily shutting down their operations and endangering consumer data. The disruption threatened food supplies and risked higher food prices for consumers. Additional cascading impacts also include low food security and hindrances in processing payments at retail stores. 

Credible Threat Agents and Their Targets

Any cyber-attack is usually carried out by credible threat agents that can be classified as either internal or external threat agents. Internal threat agents may include contractors, visitors to business sites, former/current employees, and individuals who work for suppliers. External threat agents may include activists, cyber-criminals, terror cells etc. These threat agents target large organisations owing to their larger ransom-paying capacity, but may also target small companies due to their vulnerability and low experience, especially when such companies are migrating from analogous methods to digitised processes.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation warns that the food and agricultural systems are most vulnerable to cyber-security threats during critical planting and harvesting seasons. It noted an increase in cyber-attacks against six agricultural co-operatives in 2021, with ancillary core functions such as food supply and distribution being impacted. Resultantly, cyber-attacks may lead to a mass shortage of food not only meant for human consumption but also for animals.

Policy Recommendations

To safeguard against digital food supply chains, Food defence emerges as one of the top countermeasures to prevent and mitigate the effects of intentional incidents and threats to the food chain. While earlier, food defence vulnerability assessments focused on product adulteration and food fraud, including vulnerability assessments of agriculture technology now be more relevant.  

Food supply organisations must prioritise regular backups of data using air-gapped and password-protected offline copies, and ensure critical data copies are not modifiable or deletable from the main system.  For this, blockchain-based food supply chain solutions may be deployed, which are not only resilient to hacking, but also allow suppliers and even consumers to track produce. Companies like Ripe.io, Walmart Global Tech, Nestle and Wholechain deploy blockchain for food supply management since it provides overall process transparency, improves trust issues in the transactions, enables traceable and tamper-resistant records and allows accessibility and visibility of data provenance. Extensive recovery plans with multiple copies of essential data and servers in secure, physically separated locations, such as hard drives, storage devices, cloud or distributed ledgers should be adopted in addition to deploying operations plans for critical functions in case of system outages. For core processes which are not labour-intensive,  including manual operation methods may be used to reduce digital dependence. Network segmentation, updates or patches for operating systems, software, and firmware are additional steps which can be taken to secure smart agricultural technologies. 

References

1. Muddy Machines website, Accessed 26 July 2024.  https://www.muddymachines.com/ 
2. “Meat giant JBS pays $11m in ransom to resolve cyber-attack”, BBC, 10 June 2021. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57423008 
3. Marshall, Claire & Prior, Malcolm, “Cyber security: Global food supply chain at risk from malicious hackers.”, BBC, 20 May 2022. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-61336659 
4. “Ransomware Attacks on Agricultural Cooperatives Potentially Timed to Critical Seasons.”, Private Industry Notification, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 20 April  https://www.ic3.gov/Media/News/2022/220420-2.pdf. 
5. Manning, Louise & Kowalska, Aleksandra. (2023). “The threat of ransomware in the food supply chain: a challenge for food defence”, Trends in Organized Crime. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-023-09516-y 
6. “NotPetya: the cyberattack that shook the world”, Economic Times, 5 March 2022. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/newsletters/ettech-unwrapped/notpetya-the-cyberattack-that-shook-the-world/articleshow/89997076.cms?from=mdr 
7. Abrams, Lawrence, “Dutch supermarkets run out of cheese after ransomware attack.”, Bleeping Computer, 12 April 2021. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/dutch-supermarkets-run-out-of-cheese-after-ransomware-attack/ 
8. Pandey, Shipra; Gunasekaran, Angappa; Kumar Singh, Rajesh & Kaushik, Anjali, “Cyber security risks in globalised supply chains: conceptual framework”, Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, January 2020. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Shipra-Pandey/publication/338668641_Cyber_security_risks_in_globalized_supply_chains_conceptual_framework/links/5e2678ae92851c89c9b5ac66/Cyber-security-risks-in-globalized-supply-chains-conceptual-framework.pdf 
9. Daley, Sam, “Blockchain for Food: 10 examples to know”, Builin, 22 March 2023 https://builtin.com/blockchain/food-safety-supply-chain 

‍

Disclaimer:

‍

This report is the collaborative outcome of insights derived from the CyberPeace Helpline’s operational statistics and the CyberPeace Research Team, covering the monthly helpline case trends of May 2025, the report identifies recurring trends, operational challenges, and strategic opportunities. The objective is to foster research-driven solutions that enhance the overall efficacy of the helpline. 

‍

Executive Summary:

‍

This report summarizes the cybercrime cases reported in May, offering insights into case types, gender distribution, resolution status, and geographic trends.

As per our analysis, out of various Cyber Frauds Financial Fraud was the most reported issue, making up 43% of cases, followed by Cyberbullying (26%) and Impersonation (14%). Less frequent but serious issues included Sexual Harassment, Sextortion, Hacking, Data Tampering, and Cyber Defamation, each accounting for 3–6%, highlighting a mix of financial and behavioral threats.The gender distribution was fairly balanced, with 51% male and 49% female respondents. While both genders were affected by major crimes like financial fraud and cyber bullying, some categories—such as sexual harassment—reflected more gender-specific risks, indicating the need for gender-responsive policies and support.

Regarding case status, 60% remain under follow-up while 40% have been resolved, reflecting strong case-handling efforts by the team.

The location-wise data shows higher case concentrations in Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and West Bengal, with significant reports also from Delhi, Telangana, Maharashtra, and Odisha. Reports from the northeastern and eastern states confirm the nationwide spread of cyber incidents.In conclusion, the findings point to a growing need for enhanced cybersecurity awareness, preventive strategies, and robust digital safeguards to address the evolving cyber threat landscape across India.

‍

Cases Received in May:

‍

As per the given dataset, the following types of cases were reported to our team during the month of May:

‍

• 💰 Financial Fraud – 43%
• 💬 Cyber Bullying – 26%
• 🕵️‍♂️ Impersonation – 14%
• 🚫 Sexual Harassment – 6%
• 📸 Sextortion – 3%
• 💻 Hacking – 3%
• 📝 Data Tampering – 3%
• 🗣️ Cyber Defamation – 3%

‍

‍

‍

The chart illustrates various cybercrime categories and their occurrence rates. Financial Fraud emerges as the most common, accounting for 43% of cases, highlighting the critical need for stronger digital financial security. This is followed by Cyber Bullying at 26%, reflecting growing concerns around online harassment, especially among youth. Impersonation ranks third with 14%, involving identity misuse for deceitful purposes. Less frequent but still serious crimes such as Sexual Harassment (6%), Sextortion, Hacking, Data Tampering, and Cyber Defamation (each 3%) also pose significant risks to users’ privacy and safety. Overall, the data underscores the need for improved cybersecurity awareness, legal safeguards, and preventive measures to address both financial and behavioral threats in the digital space.

‍

Gender-Wise Distribution:

‍

• 👨 Male – 51%
• 👩 Female – 49%

‍

‍

‍

The chart illustrates the distribution of respondents by gender. The data shows that Male participants make up 51% of the total, while Female participants account for 49%. This indicates a fairly balanced representation of both genders, with a slight majority of male respondents.

‍

Gender-Wise Case Distribution:

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

1. The chart presents a gender-wise distribution of various cybercrime cases, offering a comparative view of how different types of cyber incidents affect males and females.
2. It highlights that both genders are significantly impacted by cybercrimes such as financial fraud and cyber bullying, indicating a widespread risk across the board.
3. Certain categories, including sexual harassment, cyber defamation, and hacking, show more gender-specific patterns of victimization, pointing to differing vulnerabilities.
4. The data suggests the need for gender-sensitive policies and preventive measures to effectively address the unique risks faced by males and females in the digital space.
5. These insights can inform the design of tailored awareness programs, support services, and intervention strategies aimed at improving cybersecurity for all individuals.

‍

‍Major Location Wise Distribution:

‍

The map visualization displays location-wise distribution of reported cases across India. The cases reflect the cyber-related incidents or cases mapped geographically.

‍

‍

The map highlights the regional distribution of cybercrime cases across Indian states, with a higher concentration in Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and West Bengal. States like Delhi, Telangana, Maharashtra, and Odisha also show notable activity, indicating widespread cyber threats. Regions including Assam, Tripura, Bihar, Jharkhand, and Jammu & Kashmir further reflect the pan-India spread of such incidents. This distribution stresses the need for targeted cybersecurity awareness and stronger digital safeguards nationwide

‍

CyberPeace Advisory:

‍

• Use Strong and Unique Passwords: Create complex passwords using a mix of letters, numbers, and symbols. Avoid reusing the same password across multiple platforms.
  
• Enable Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): Add an extra layer of security by using a second verification step like an OTP or authentication app.
  
• Keep Software Updated: Regularly update your operating system, apps, and security tools to protect against known vulnerabilities.
  
• Install Trusted Security Software: Use reliable antivirus and anti-malware programs to detect and block threats.
  
• Limit Information Sharing: Be cautious about sharing personal or sensitive details, especially on social media or public platforms.
  
• Secure Your Network: Protect your Wi-Fi with a strong password and encryption. Avoid accessing confidential information on public networks.
  
• Back Up Important Data: Regularly save copies of important files in secure storage to prevent data loss in case of an attack.
  
• Stay Informed with Cybersecurity Training: Learn how to identify scams, phishing attempts, and other online threats through regular awareness sessions.
  
• Control Access to Data: Give access to sensitive information only to those who need it, based on their job roles.
• ‍Monitor and Respond to Threats: Continuously monitor systems for unusual activity and have a clear response plan for handling security incidents.

‍

• CyberPeace Helpline mail ID:  helpline@cyberpeace.net
• CyberPeace Helpline Number:  9570000066
• Central Government Helpline: https://cybercrime.gov.in/
• Central Government Helpline Number: 1930

‍

Conclusion

The cybercrime cases reported in May highlight a diverse and evolving threat landscape across India. Financial fraud, cyber bullying, and impersonation are the most prevalent, affecting both genders almost equally, though some crimes like sexual harassment call for targeted gender-sensitive measures. With 60% of cases still under follow-up, the team’s efforts in investigation and resolution remain strong. Geographically, cyber incidents are widespread, with higher concentrations in several key states, demonstrating that no region is immune. These findings underscore the urgent need to enhance cybersecurity awareness, strengthen preventive strategies, and build robust digital safeguards. Proactive and inclusive approaches are essential to protect individuals and communities and to address the growing challenges posed by cybercrime nationwide.

‍

Introduction

According to a shocking report, there are multiple scam loan apps on the App Store in India that charge excessive interest rates and force users to pay by blackmailing and harassing them. Apple has prohibited and removed these apps from the App Store, but they may still be installed on your iPhone and running. You must delete any of these apps if you have downloaded them. Learn the names of these apps and how they operated the fraud.

Why Apple banned these apps?

• Apple has taken action to remove certain apps from the Indian App Store. These apps were engaging in unethical behaviour, such as impersonating financial institutions, demanding high fees, and threatening borrowers. Here are the titles of these apps, as well as what Apple has said about their suspension.
• Following user concerns, Apple removed six loan apps from the Indian App Store. Loan apps include White Kash, Pocket Kash, Golden Kash, Ok Rupee, and others.
• According to multiple user reviews, certain apps seek unjustified access to users’ contact lists and media. These apps also charge exorbitant fees that are not necessitated. Furthermore, companies have been found to engage in unethical tactics such as charging high-interest rates and “processing fees” equal to half the loan amount.
• Some lending app users have reported being harassed and threatened for failing to return their loans on time. In some circumstances, the apps threatened the user’s contacts if payment was not completed by the deadline. According to one user, the app company threatened to produce and send false photographs of her to her contacts.
• These loan apps were removed from the App Store, according to Apple, because they broke the norms and standards of the Apple Developer Program License Agreement. These apps were discovered to be falsely claiming financial institution connections.

Issue of Fake loan apps on the App Store

• The App Store and our App Review Guidelines are designed to ensure we provide our users with the safest experience possible,” Apple explained. “We do not tolerate fraudulent activity on the App Store and have strict rules against apps and developers who attempt to game the system.
• In 2022, Apple blocked nearly $2 billion in fraudulent App Store sales. Furthermore, it rejected nearly 1.7 million software submissions that did not match Apple’s quality and safety criteria and cancelled 428,000 developer accounts due to suspected fraudulent activities.
• The scammers also used heinous tactics to force the loanees to pay. According to reports, the scammers behind the apps gained access to the user’s contact list as well as their images. They would morph the images and then scare the individual by sharing their fake nude photos with their whole contact list.

Dangerous financial fraud apps have surfaced on the App Store

• TechCrunch acquired a user review from one of these apps. “I borrowed an amount in a helpless situation, and a day before the repayment due date, I got some messages with my picture and my contacts in my phone saying that repay your loan or they will inform our contacts that you are not paying the loan,” it said.
• Sandhya Ramesh, a journalist from The Print, recently tweeted a screenshot of a direct message she got. A victim’s friend told a similar story in the message.
• TechCrunch contacted Apple, who confirmed that the apps had been removed from the App Store for breaking the Apple Developer Program License Agreement and guidelines.

Conclusion

Recently, some users have claimed that some quick-loan applications, such as White Kash, Pocket Kash, and Golden Kash, have appeared on the Top Finance applications chart in recent days. These apps necessitate unauthorised and intrusive access to users’ contact lists and media. According to hundreds of user evaluations, these apps charged exorbitantly high and useless fees. They used unscrupulous techniques such as demanding “processing fees” equal to half the loan amount and charging high-interest rates. Users were also harassed and threatened with restitution. If payments were not made by the due date, the lending applications threatened to notify users’ contacts. According to one user, the app provider even threatened to generate phoney nude images of her and send them to her contacts.