IW: Weaponising Information

Introduction

‍

Imagine a scenario where a call is received by a senior citizen. The phone rings, he picks up. On the other side of the line is a polite and seemingly genuine bank official who informs him that his bank account has somehow been jeopardised and that he should quickly move his money to a safer escrow account right away. Or another situation where a police officer ends up threatening a senior citizen over a video call and places him under a digital arrest, pressuring him to pay up money in order to be set free. 

‍

This is not the storyline of a heist movie. This is the frightening new digital reality of millions of elderly people living all over the world. 

‍

Cybercrime against senior citizens has surged dramatically over the last few years. The year 2023 witnessed people (aged 60 and above), who submitted more than 101,000 complaints to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Internet Crime Complaint Centre (IC3) in the United States. The total losses reached approximately 3.4 billion dollars, which reflected an increase of 11% in comparison to the previous year. Tech-support scams, investment frauds, government impersonation schemes, etc., have been some of the most recent and significant risks to the financial security of senior citizens.

‍

This sharp increase in cyber fraud that has been targeting the seniors has shocked everyone, from the authorities to families. From phishing emails to fake customer care numbers to various digital payment scams, cyber criminals have deliberately been exploiting the senior population. They have repeatedly displayed the ability to wipe out a senior’s entire lifetime of savings in just a matter of minutes. The rise in cyber scams has been so alarming that even the Supreme Court of India expressed a deep concern over an estimated 3,000 crore rupees that was lost due to digital arrest scams.

‍

Behind these statistics, there have been several individual cases that have revealed the true reality and the personal impact of such scams. The scale of this threat was clearly illustrated when, reportedly, an 86-year-old woman from Mumbai lost 20 crore rupees in a well-planned digital arrest scam in a timeline of 3-4 months between December 2024 and March 2025. In other real-life instances, in December 2025, multiple senior citizens from Hyderabad and Delhi were manipulated into transferring tens of lakhs under the false implication of undergoing a legal action.

‍

This blog aims to focus specifically on the ways and means of:

• How cybercriminals operate against senior citizens, 
• The most typical online scams that target seniors and
• How to quickly identify them.

‍

Revealing the Insides of the Scammer’s Playbook: How They Operate, Trick and Steal

‍

• Picking out the prey: Fraudsters use classified information from various leaked online databases, social media profiles, online images, phone directories and in some instances, even obituaries, to build comprehensive lists of potential and vulnerable senior citizen targets. It may be shocking to know that these scammers could already be aware of your age, bank, city and the details of your family members. 

‍

• Masquerading and trust theatrics: Scammers pose as authoritative figures such as bank officers, RBI (Reserve Bank of India) or tax officials, telecom staff, Microsoft or Apple tech support, CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation), ED (Enforcement Directorate) and even judges. They further support this spectacle by creating professional emails, logos, illegal websites and forged notices. Caller IDs can be spoofed and can even appear in the name of a trusted bank or a government helpline. In digital arrest scams, scammers may build a fake courtroom or police station to showcase their authority and authenticity over video calls. 

‍

• Tugging at emotions and pulling the strings of fear: Cyber fraudsters rarely rely on logic as the basis. Instead, they attack emotions. They may make statements such as: ‘your account is being used for money laundering, you may be arrested today’, thus creating feelings of fear and panic in the mind of the targeted individual. ‘You’ve won a lottery!’, another example that appeals to the emotions of greed and excitement, or ‘Grandma, I’ve been in an accident; please send money and don’t tell anyone’, a classic example that preys on the emotions of love, urgency and concern. 

‍

There are more such illustrations: ‘Once in a lifetime investment opportunity’, ‘verify your details in the next 10 minutes or else your account will be frozen, ‘your computer has been hacked; only our technical team can fix it’, and the list goes on.

‍

• The final grab: Cash, Credentials and Control: After all that pretending and emotional manipulation, cyber criminals make their last and final move that essentially closes the deal. They may ask for OTPs (one-time passwords), internet banking credentials, or remote access via screen sharing mode. In other cases, they may pressurise their victims into making direct UPI (Unified Payments Interface) transfers, RTGS (Real-time Gross Settlement) / NEFT (National Electronic Funds Transfer) transfers and payment in the form of gift cards, vouchers or cryptocurrency. This marks the extraction phase. This is the moment where access and control is attained by the fraudster. After this, financial accounts, sensitive information, data, etc., can all be quickly drained, beyond any chance of recovery. 

‍

Unveiling the Cyber Scam Spectrum

‍

Below are some of the most commonly deployed online scams that are targeted towards the senior citizens of the present day.

‍

1. Imposters in Power: Impersonation scams, on a global level, have proved to be one of the fastest-growing and costliest frauds that occur against seniors. The scammers feign and impersonate officials from banks, income tax departments or even big companies such as Amazon. They would generally warn you about a failed KYC (Know Your Customer) update, your account being blocked or a legal violation. The victim is basically caught off-guard and is forced to share crucial details such as login credentials and OTPs. 

‍

2. The Digital Arrest Scam: From Call to Con: Lately, digital arrest has become one of the most terrifying scams that senior citizens have had to face. Seniors receive a voice call or a video call from someone who claims to be a police officer or a CBI/ED officer. Then, in a strict and authoritative tone, they make false claims about how the elderly’s Aadhaar, PAN (Permanent Account Number) or phone details have come under scrutiny for being linked to serious crimes such as drug trafficking, money laundering and terrorism. They threaten the elderly that they could be put under immediate arrest, their property could be seized, or they could be publicly humiliated. Once they have established fear, they then go on to show fake documents or court orders to corroborate their assertions. 

‍

Thereafter, the senior citizen is informed that he or she has been placed under a digital house arrest. They force the victim to stay on the video call, sometimes for hours and days, ask them to follow certain instructions and repeatedly warn them not to communicate with anyone else. Scammers further exploit the fear of being jailed or the fear of legal action, and gradually extract huge sums of money from the victim. In some cases, this scam can unfold and continue over an extended timeline spanning several months. 

‍

3. Tech Support Hoax: When Help turns Hostile: As per the FBI and other multiple security analyses, tech support scams are the most commonly reported senior citizen-related frauds in the US. 

‍

A pop-up may appear on the elderly’s screen stating that: ‘your computer is infected, call this number now’. Or they might receive a call from a person posing as a tech support person from either Microsoft, Apple, a bank’s IT team or as an internet service provider. He then goes on to guide the elderly to install certain remote access software or to grant screen control access to fix the issue. Once they gain access, they pretend to find some serious infection in the user’s system or they talk about how the speed of the internet is slow and that it needs to be fixed. As a result, they quietly steal passwords, introduce malware into perfectly healthy systems, lock user access and demand ransom in return.

‍

4. Payment App Scams: Phishing, Deadly Links and OTP Snares: Phishing as a cyber scam tactic sits at the heart of many payment app scams that target senior citizens. It may begin with a harmless SMS, an email or a WhatsApp alert. These correspondences may look like they have been received from a trusted bank or a familiar online payment platform.

‍

The messages are engineered in a way that aim at grabbing attention and trigger a feeling of panic and pressure. They push the elderly users who spring into action without any caution or thought. The victim may be urged to click a link, coupled with warnings of a blocked account, a failed transaction, a failed delivery or a KYC update. The message may also ask the user to ‘verify’ certain account details. They send urgent payment links that put pressure on the senior citizen to act immediately and transfer the said amount of money. 

‍

There are also instances where an SMS or WhatsApp link may claim to offer some kind of discount or reward only if the user enters his or her card details, UPI pin or OTP. This is an extremely dangerous scenario. If these details are given away, scammers acquire access to the user’s bank account. 

‍

5. Family in Crisis: Staging Fake Emergencies: These cyber-enabled scams, also known as ‘grandparent scams’, specifically target senior citizens by impersonating their kin and creating a fake impression of them being in some kind of trouble. With the help of methods such as AI (Artificial Intelligence) voice cloning, fraudsters mimic the voice of a grandchild or a family member (which they originally obtain from social media posts or videos), making their deception tactics extremely believable. The caller may claim to be in an accident or could say they have been arrested or are stranded somewhere. They may plead with the senior citizen to make an immediate payment. 

‍

In order to avoid cross verification of their fraudulent claims, they may insist on maintaining secrecy and brainwash their victim to not inform other family members of their made-up dilemma. 

‍

6. Fraudulent Friendships and Hijacked Hearts: For many senior citizens who live alone and in the absence of family and support systems, isolation becomes a vulnerability that is very hard to overcome. Fraudsters, who closely monitor such individuals, wait to seize any opportunity to use this weakness as a gateway to carry out their deceptive schemes. 

‍

‘Companionship scams’ and ‘romance scams’ are slowly turning into a serious problem among older adults. Cyber criminals befriend or connect with older adults on social networking, matrimonial and dating apps under false pretences. As time goes by, sometimes over weeks or months, these scammers work on building emotional intimacy and trust. Once this is accomplished, they then start making requests for money. These requests can be for (fake) medical emergencies, visas, travel tickets or business deals. Sadly, victims, who are already deeply invested emotionally, end up making these money transfers, sometimes losing their lifetime savings in the process. 

‍

In some cases, when things go too far, intimate photos or private conversations are later used by cyber fraudsters for sextortion. They threaten to leak these personal materials unless the victim pays money, further adding elements of fear and pressure to an already manipulative situation.

‍

7. Fraud in the name of Health and Benefits: For most senior citizens, their daily life depends on access to basic healthcare, uninterrupted pensions and government benefits. These systems are put in place to provide not just for the seniors’ financial stability, but also to ensure their peace of mind. 

‍

Conversely, fraudsters exploit this dependability. Fake medical offers, insurance plans, benefit claims and pension enhancement schemes, etc., are some of the methods that are being used to defraud the seniors. Scammers offer free medical equipment or health checkups in exchange for personal information related to banking and finances. 

‍

Another dangerous facet of these scams is ‘counterfeit medications’. These are sold under false claims and big promises and are advertised in a manner that tempts seniors to go for it. These fake medicines not only lead to loss of money but also gravely impact the elderly’s health. 

‍

Spot the Scam: Tips to Identify Early Warning Signs before the Scam Unfolds

‍

Cyber criminals are clever, creative and notorious, but their tricks come with familiar warning signs. Timely recognition of these signs can save senior citizens from falling into the scammer’s trap. Some of the most common and apparent warning signs are discussed below:

‍

• Don’t think fast, think twice! The urgency ploy: Cyber criminals thrive on creating a situation of panic and urgency. In instances where a senior citizen feels that he or she is being pushed towards rushed choices, it is better to take a step back to pause and think. Any unreasonable demand to act ‘immediately’ or within minutes, especially when it involves a transfer of money or confidential information, is very likely to be a scam. Not giving in to this hasty push can save the individual from getting tangled in the scammer’s web of lies.

‍

• Scammer’s best friend: Secrecy and silence: First comes the urgency, and then comes the demand to stay silent. Scammers strategically cite and invent so-called ‘security reasons’ and instruct their elderly victims not to inform their bank, friends or family of their situation. This secrecy prevents verification and keeps the victim trapped. Recognising this forced isolation can stop a cybercrime before it escalates and gets out of hand.

‍

• Red flag! When the deal sounds unreal: Scammers lure elderly victims with extraordinary offers and deals. Lottery wins, miracle investment returns, massive discounts or exclusive time-bound rewards are a few examples. These larger-than-life promises are designed in a manner that clouds an elderly person’s sound judgment. Therefore, if an offer feels too good to be true and unlike anything anyone’s ever heard before, then that’s the time to pause and take a step back. In almost all such cases, these unbelievable deals are simply a bait for a looming scam. 

‍

• Beware! They want your access codes: Senior citizens need to exercise extra caution when it comes to handing out their personal access codes. No legitimate bank, government office or reputable company will directly ask for OTPs, PINs or full passwords over calls or messaging apps. If someone asks for such details, it is an indication that a fraud may be imminent. 

‍

• Don’t pay just yet! Dubious payment gambits: If demands for payments are made in the form of gift cards, cryptocurrency or wire transfers to personal or unknown accounts, it is most definitely a scam. Scammers use these unconventional payment methods to avoid traceability. This strategy allows them to easily disappear with the victim’s funds, which in turn makes recovery of the stolen money nearly impossible.

‍

• Threats and intimidation over a phone call: Hang up! It’s a scam: It is important to understand that legitimate police and court proceedings do not take place over calls or messaging apps. Genuine officials will never demand or negotiate fines, legal payments or bail online. If someone uses the intimidation ploy on a senior citizen and threatens him with legal trouble or police action unless some money is paid, then that’s a clear warning sign of a cyber scam. 

‍

Empowered, not Exploited: When Knowledge Becomes the Best Defence

‍

Cyber scams targeting senior citizens are a deliberate and very well-orchestrated industry that thrives on uncertainty, ignorance and fear. The call of the moment is for the elderly and their families to turn awareness into armour. Knowledge about how scammers operate, how they steal, and the techniques they employ can prepare and empower our seniors to protect themselves in such critical situations. The early warning signs mentioned above are more than just mere cautions. They should be taken as ‘cues’ to ‘pause, reflect and re-check’. Being wary of unsolicited communication, safeguarding financial information, double-checking hurried correspondences, etc., can nip a scam in the bud before it plays out. Most importantly, digital safety for the senior citizens is a unified and collaborative responsibility that every responsible individual of the society needs to undertake. 

‍

References

‍

• https://frontline.thehindu.com/social-issues/ai-deepfake-digital-arrest-scams-india-cybercrime/article70587955.ece
• https://www.ic3.gov/annualreport/reports/2023_ic3elderfraudreport.pdf
• https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-shocked-over-3000-crore-loss-in-digital-arrest-scams/article70235621.ece
• https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/mumbai/elderly-woman-loses-20-crore-to-digital-arrest-fraud-3-held/article69353437.ece
• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/three-senior-citizens-duped-of-rs-1-7cr-in-digital-arrest-scam-spree/articleshow/125876194.cms
• https://www.aninews.in/news/national/general-news/82-year-old-senior-citizen-digitally-arrested-and-cheated-of-rs-116-crore-cyber-cell-arrests-three-key-members-of-syndicate20251213145528/
• https://crr.bc.edu/preventing-cyber-scams-that-target-seniors/
• https://dos.ny.gov/scams-targeting-older-adults
• https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/chandigarh/victims-in-8-of-top-10-digital-arrest-scams-in-chandigarh-are-senior-citizens-data-reveals-10444252/
• https://www.seniorliving.org/research/common-elderly-scams/
• https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/data-visualizations/data-spotlight/2025/08/false-alarm-real-scam-how-scammers-are-stealing-older-adults-life-savings
• https://www.psca.org/news/psca-news/2025/8/scams-against-seniors-increasing-dramatically-ftc-warns/
• https://www.pcmatic.com/blog/the-rising-threat-of-elder-fraud-insights-from-ic3s-2023-report/?srsltid=AfmBOorC069NIYFwFO0W56nPcg_K0Wfv_oq0V-MI7fImI5ityAUrQTO9
• https://www.quickheal.co.in/knowledge-centre/guarding-our-elders-a-comprehensive-report-on-the-elder-fraud-epidemic-in-india/?srsltid=AfmBOorviPvoRuecjsOtAfVxyQEJF2vyICnr15GqbDfP1m3UXAnXndMw
• https://www.ncoa.org/article/top-5-financial-scams-targeting-older-adults/
• https://www.uchealth.org/today/elder-fraud-is-rising-and-it-is-hurting-more-than-just-finances/
• https://centerlighthealthcare.org/protecting-yourself-online-recognizing-and-avoiding-online-scams/

‍

Introduction:

This Op-ed sheds light on the perspectives of the US and China regarding cyber espionage. Additionally, it seeks to analyze China's response to the US accusation regarding cyber espionage.

What is Cyber espionage?

Cyber espionage or cyber spying is the act of obtaining personal, sensitive, or proprietary information from individuals without their knowledge or consent. In an increasingly transparent and technological society, the ability to control the private information an individual reveals on the Internet and the ability of others to access that information are a growing concern. This includes storage and retrieval of e-mail by third parties, social media, search engines, data mining, GPS tracking, the explosion of smartphone usage, and many other technology considerations. In the age of big data, there is a growing concern for privacy issues surrounding the storage and misuse of personal data and non-consensual mining of private information by companies, criminals, and governments. 

Cyber espionage aims for economic, political, and technological gain. Fox example Stuxnet (2010) cyber-attack by the US and its allies Israel against Iran’s Nuclear facilities. Three espionage tools were discovered connected to Stuxnet, such as Gauss, FLAME and DuQu, for stealing data such as passwords, screenshots, Bluetooth, Skype functions, etc.

Cyber espionage is one of the most significant and intriguing international challenges globally. Many nations and international bodies, such as the US and China, have created their definitions and have always struggled over cyber espionage norms.

The US Perspective

In 2009, US officials (along with other allied countries) mentioned that cyber espionage was acceptable if it safeguarded national security, although they condemned economically motivated cyber espionage. Even the Director of National Intelligence said in 2013 that foreign intelligence capabilities cannot steal foreign companies' trade secrets to benefit their firms. This stance is consistent with the Economic Espionage Act (EEA) of 1996, particularly Section 1831, which prohibits economic espionage. This includes the theft of a trade secret that "will benefit any foreign government, foreign agent or foreign instrumentality. 

Second, the US advocates for cybersecurity market standards and strongly opposes transferring personal data extracted from the US Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to cybercrime markets. Furthermore, China has been reported to sell OPM data on illicit markets. It became a grave concern for the US government when the Chinese government managed to acquire sensitive details of 22.1 million US government workers through cyber intrusions in 2014.

Third, Cyber-espionage is acceptable unless it’s utilized for Doxing, which involves disclosing personal information about someone online without their consent and using it as a tool for political influence operations. However, Western academics and scholars have endeavoured to distinguish between doxing and whistleblowing. They argue that whistleblowing, exemplified by events like the Snowden Leaks and Vault 7 disclosures, serves the interests of US citizens. In the US, being regarded as an open society, certain disclosures are not promoted but rather required by mandate.

Fourth, the US argues that there is no cyber espionage against critical infrastructure during peacetime. According to the US, there are 16 critical infrastructure sectors, including chemical, nuclear, energy, defence, food, water, and so on. These sectors are considered essential to the US, and any disruption or harm would impact security, national public health and national economic security.

The US concern regarding China’s cyber espionage

According to James Lewis (a senior vice president at the Center for US-China Economic and Security Review Commission), the US faces losses between $ 20 billion and $30 billion annually due to China’s cyberespionage. The 2018 U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Section 301 report highlighted instances, where the Chinese government and executives from Chinese companies engaged in clandestine cyber intrusions to obtaining commercially valuable information from the U.S. businesses, such as in 2018 where officials from China’s Ministry of State Security, stole trade from General Electric aviation and other aerospace companies.    

China's response to the US accusations of cyber espionage

China's perspective on cyber espionage is outlined by its 2014 anti-espionage law, which was revised in 2023. Article 1 of this legislation is formulated to prevent, halt, and punish espionage actions to maintain national security. Article 4 addresses the act of espionage and does not differentiate between state-sponsored cyber espionage for economic purposes and state-sponsored cyber espionage for national security purposes. However, China doesn't make a clear difference between government-to-government hacking (spying) and government-to-corporate sector hacking, unlike the US. This distinction is less apparent in China due to its strong state-owned enterprise (SOE) sector. However, military spying is considered part of the national interest in the US, while corporate spying is considered a crime.

China asserts that the US has established cyber norms concerning cyber espionage to normalize public attribution as acceptable conduct. This is achieved by targeting China for cyber operations, imposing sanctions on accused Chinese individuals, and making political accusations, such as blaming China and Russia for meddling in US elections. Despite all this, Washington D.C has never taken responsibility for the infamous Flame and Stuxnet cyber operations, which were widely recognized as part of a broader collaborative initiative known as Operation Olympic Games between the US and Israel. Additionally, the US takes the lead in surveillance activities conducted against China, Russia, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, and several French presidents. Surveillance programs such as Irritant Horn, Stellar Wind, Bvp47, the Hive, and PRISM are recognized as tools used by the US to monitor both allies and adversaries to maintain global hegemony.

China urges the US to cease its smear campaign associated with Volt Typhoon’s cyberattack for cyber espionage, citing the publication of a report titled “Volt Typhoon: A Conspiratorial Swindling Campaign Targets with U.S. Congress and Taxpayers Conducted by U.S. Intelligence Community” by China's National Computer Virus Emergency Response Centre and the 360 Digital Security Group on 15 April. According to the report, 'Volt Typhoon' is a ransomware cyber criminal group self-identified as the 'Dark Power' and is not affiliated with any state or region. Multiple cybersecurity authorities in the US collaborated to fabricate this story just for more budgets from Congress. In the meantime, Microsoft and other U.S. cybersecurity firms are seeking more big contracts from US cybersecurity authorities. The reality behind “Volt Typhoon '' is a conspiratorial swindling campaign to achieve two objectives by amplifying the "China threat theory" and cheating money from the U.S. Congress and taxpayers.

Beijing condemned the US claims of cyber espionage without any solid evidence. China also blames the US for economic espionage by citing the European Parliament report that the National Security Agency (NSA) was also involved in assisting Boeing in beating Airbus for a multi-billion dollar contract. Furthermore, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff also accused the US authorities of spying against the state-owned oil company “Petrobras” for economic reasons.

Conclusion

In 2015, the US and China marked a milestone as both President Xi Jinping and Barack Obama signed an agreement, committing that neither country's government would conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets, intellectual property, or other confidential business information to grant competitive advantages to firms or commercial sectors. However, the China Cybersecurity Industry Alliance (CCIA) published a report titled 'US Threats and Sabotage to the Security and Development of Global Cyberspace' in 2024, highlighting the US escalating cyber-attack and espionage activities against China and other nations. Additionally, there has been a considerable increase in the volume and sophistication of Chinese hacking since 2016. According to a survey by the Center for International and Strategic Studies, out of 224 cyber espionage incidents reported since 2000, 69% occurred after Xi assumed office. Therefore, China and the US must address cybersecurity issues through dialogue and cooperation, utilizing bilateral and multilateral agreements.

‍

Introduction

In 2022, Oxfam’s India Inequality report revealed the worsening digital divide, highlighting that only 38% of households in the country are digitally literate. Further, only 31% of the rural population uses the internet, as compared to 67% of the urban population. Over time, with the increasing awareness about the importance of digital privacy globally, the definition of digital divide has translated into a digital privacy divide, whereby different levels of privacy are afforded to different sections of society. This further promotes social inequalities and impedes access to fundamental rights.

Digital Privacy Divide: A by-product of the digital divide

The digital divide has evolved into a multi-level issue from its earlier interpretations; level I implies the lack of physical access to technologies, level II refers to the lack of digital literacy and skills and recently, level III relates to the impacts of digital access. Digital Privacy Divide (DPD) refers to the various gaps in digital privacy protection provided to users based on their socio-demographic patterns. It forms a subset of the digital divide, which involves uneven distribution, access and usage of information and communication technology (ICTs). Typically, DPD exists when ICT users receive distinct levels of digital privacy protection. As such, it forms a part of the conversation on digital inequality. 

Contrary to popular perceptions, DPD, which is based on notions of privacy, is not always based on ideas of  individualism and collectivism and may constitute internal and external factors at the national level. A study on the impacts of DPD conducted in the U.S., India, Bangladesh and Germany highlighted that respondents in Germany and Bangladesh expressed more concerns about their privacy compared to respondents in the U.S. and India. This suggests that despite the U.S. having a strong tradition of individualistic rights, that is reflected in internal regulatory frameworks such as the Fourth Amendment, the topic of data privacy has not garnered enough interest from the population. Most individuals consider forgoing the right to privacy as a necessary evil to access many services, and schemes and to stay abreast with technological advances. Research shows that 62%- 63% of Americans believe that companies and the government collecting data have become an inescapable necessary evil in modern life. Additionally, 81% believe that they have very little control over what data companies collect and about 81% of Americans believe that the risk of data collection outweighs the benefits. Similarly, in Japan, data privacy is thought to be an adopted concept emerging from international pressure to regulate, rather than as an ascribed right, since collectivism and collective decision-making are more valued in Japan, positioning the concept of privacy as subjective, timeserving and an idea imported from the West.

Regardless, inequality in privacy preservation often reinforces social inequality. Practices like surveillance that are geared towards a specific group highlight that marginalised communities are more likely to have less data privacy. As an example, migrants, labourers, persons with a conviction history and marginalised racial groups are often subject to extremely invasive surveillance under suspicions of posing threats and are thus forced to flee their place of birth or residence. This also highlights the fact that focus on DPD is not limited to those who lack data privacy but also to those who have (either by design or by force) excess privacy. While on one end, excessive surveillance, carried out by both governments and private entities, forces immigrants to wait in deportation centres during the pendency of their case, the other end of the privacy extreme hosts a vast number of undocumented individuals who avoid government contact for fear of deportation, despite noting high rates of crime victimization.

DPD is also noted among groups with differential knowledge and skills in cyber security. For example, in India, data privacy laws mandate that information be provided on order of a court or any enforcement agency. However, individuals with knowledge of advanced encryption are adopting communication channels that have encryption protocols that the provider cannot control (and resultantly able to exercise their right to privacy more effectively),  in contrast with individuals who have little knowledge of encryption, implying a security as well as an intellectual divide. While several options for secure communication exist, like Pretty Good Privacy, which enables encrypted emailing, they are complex and not easy to use in addition to having negative reputations, like the Tor Browser. Cost considerations also are a major factor in propelling DPD since users who cannot afford devices like those by Apple, which have privacy by default, are forced to opt for devices that have relatively poor in-built encryption. 

Children remain the most vulnerable group. During the pandemic, it was noted that only 24% of Indian households had internet facilities to access e-education and several reported needing to access free internet outside of their homes. These public networks are known for their lack of security and privacy, as traffic can be monitored by the hotspot operator or others on the network if proper encryption measures are not in place. Elsewhere, students without access to devices for remote learning have limited alternatives and are often forced to rely on Chromebooks and associated Google services. In response to this issue, Google provided free Chromebooks and mobile hotspots to students in need during the pandemic, aiming to address the digital divide. However, in 2024, New Mexico was reported to be suing Google for allegedly collecting children’s data through its educational products provided to the state's schools, claiming that it tracks students' activities on their personal devices outside of the classroom. It signified the problems in ensuring the privacy of lower-income students while accessing basic education.

Policy Recommendations

Digital literacy is one of the critical components in bridging the DPD. It enables individuals to gain skills, which in turn effectively addresses privacy violations. Studies show that low-income users remain less confident in their ability to manage their privacy settings as compared to high-income individuals. Thus, emphasis should be placed not only on educating on technology usage but also on privacy practices since it aims to improve people’s Internet skills and take informed control of their digital identities.

In the U.S., scholars have noted the role of libraries and librarians in safeguarding intellectual privacy. The Library Freedom Project, for example, has sought to ensure that the skills and knowledge required to ensure internet freedoms are available to all. The Project channelled one of the core values of the library profession i.e. intellectual freedom, literacy, equity of access to recorded knowledge and information, privacy and democracy. As a result, the Project successfully conducted workshops on internet privacy for the public and also openly objected to the Department of Homeland Security’s attempts to shut down the use of encryption technologies in libraries. The International Federation of Library Association adopted a Statement of Privacy in the Library Environment in 2015 that specified “when libraries and information services provide access to resources, services or technologies that may compromise users’ privacy, libraries should encourage users to be aware of the implications and provide guidance in data protection and privacy.” The above should be used as an indicative case study for setting up similar protocols in inclusive public institutions like Anganwadis, local libraries, skill development centres and non-government/non-profit organisations in India, where free education is disseminated. The workshops conducted must inculcate two critical aspects; firstly, enhancing the know-how of using public digital infrastructure and popular technologies (thereby de-alienating technology) and secondly, shifting the viewpoint of privacy as a right an individual has and not something that they own.

However, digital literacy should not be wholly relied on, since it shifts the responsibility of privacy protection to the individual, who may not either be aware or cannot be controlled. Data literacy also does not address the larger issue of data brokers, consumer profiling, surveillance etc. Resultantly, an obligation on companies to provide simplified privacy summaries, in addition to creating accessible, easy-to-use technical products and privacy tools,  should be necessitated. Most notable legislations address this problem by mandating notices and consent for collecting personal data of users, despite slow enforcement. However, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 in India aims to address DPD by not only mandating valid consent but also ensuring that privacy policies remain accessible in local languages, given the diversity of the population.

References

• https://idronline.org/article/inequality/indias-digital-divide-from-bad-to-worse/ 
• https://arxiv.org/pdf/2110.02669 
• https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.07936#:~:text=The%20DPD%20index%20is%20a,(33%20years%20and%20over). 
• https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/11/15/americans-and-privacy-concerned-confused-and-feeling-lack-of-control-over-their-personal-information/ 
• https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/67203/1/Internet%20freedom%20for%20all%20Public%20libraries%20have%20to%20get%20serious%20about%20tackling%20the%20digital%20privacy%20divi.pdf 
• /https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6265&context=law_lawreview 
• https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/67203/1/Internet%20freedom%20for%20all%20Public%20libraries%20have%20to%20get%20serious%20about%20tackling%20the%20digital%20privacy%20divi.pdf 
• https://bosniaca.nub.ba/index.php/bosniaca/article/view/488/pdf 
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/just-24-of-indian-households-have-internet-facility-to-access-e-education-unicef/story-a1g7DqjP6lJRSh6D6yLJjL.html 
• https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2021/05/05/the-pandemic-has-unmasked-the-digital-privacy-divide/ 
• https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Digital%20Personal%20Data%20Protection%20Act%202023.pdf 
• https://www.isc.meiji.ac.jp/~ethicj/Privacy%20protection%20in%20Japan.pdf 
• https://socialchangenyu.com/review/the-surveillance-gap-the-harms-of-extreme-privacy-and-data-marginalization/