The โ€œ๐—ด๐—ผ๐—น๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป ๐—ต๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟโ€ in cybercrime response is real, and India canโ€™t afford to keep missing it.

Sainath did everything right.
He spotted a fraudulent UPI transaction.
He dialed ๐Ÿญ๐Ÿต๐Ÿฏ๐Ÿฌ immediately.
And yet, he lost his money.

๐—ช๐—ต๐˜†? Because he was in the wrong state when he made the call.

Our ๐—ป๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฎ๐—น ๐—ฐ๐˜†๐—ฏ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—ฐ๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐—บ๐—ฒ ๐—ต๐—ฒ๐—น๐—ฝ๐—น๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ฒ, 1930, is designed to route calls based on GPS, not where the fraud occurred or where the victim banks. In a country where we crisscross state lines weekly, for work, weddings, or weekend trips, this is more than a flaw. ๐—œ๐˜โ€™๐˜€ ๐—ฎ ๐˜€๐˜†๐˜€๐˜๐—ฒ๐—บ๐—ถ๐—ฐ ๐—ด๐—ฎ๐—ฝ.

In the first few minutes after fraud is detected, when funds are still in intermediary wallets, when IPs can be traced, and when accounts can be frozen, coordination between law enforcement, banks, and platforms is everything.

Yet state boundaries and data silos are costing victims their money and their faith in digital systems.ย  ๐—›๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—ฒโ€™๐˜€ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ฝ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ฎ๐—ฑ๐—ผ๐˜…:

-Over โ‚น๐Ÿฐ,๐Ÿฏ๐Ÿด๐Ÿฒ crore saved through the current setup.
-But countless victims, like Sainath, still fall through the cracks.
-If cybercrime doesnโ€™t respect borders, why should our response systems?

India has built one of the most solid digital payment infrastructures in the world. Itโ€™s time we match that with an equally seamless, national, real-time fraud response network, one that empowers victims no matter where they are.

[Link to the full article in the comments]

DigitalTrust UPIFraud CyberSecurity 1930Helpline Fintech DigitalIndia FoundersVoice PolicyInnovation UserProtection GoldenHour


This post was originally shared by on Linkedin.