Using incognito mode and VPN may still not ensure total privacy, according to expert
SVIMS Director and Vice-Chancellor B. Vengamma lighting a lamp to formally launch the cybercrime awareness programme conducted by the police department for the medical students in Tirupati on Wednesday.
An awareness meet on safe Internet practices was held for the students of Sri Venkateswara University University (SVU) and Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences (SVIMS) here on Wednesday.
“Cyber criminals on the prowl can easily track our digital footprint, steal our identity and resort to impersonation,” cyber expert I.L. Narasimha Rao cautioned the college students.
Addressing the students in two sessions, Mr. Narasimha Rao, who is a Senior Manager with CyberPeace Foundation, said seemingly common acts like browsing a website, and liking and commenting on posts on social media platforms could be used by impersonators to recreate an account in our name.
Turning to the youth, Mr. Narasimha Rao said the incognito mode and Virtual Private Network (VPN) used as a protected network connection do not ensure total privacy as third parties could still snoop over the websites being visited by the users. He also cautioned them tactics like ‘phishing’, ‘vishing’ and ‘smishing’ being used by cybercriminals to steal our passwords and gain access to our accounts.
“After cracking the whip on websites and apps that could potentially compromise our security, the Government of India has recently banned 232 more apps,” he noted.
Additional Superintendent of Police (Crime) B.H. Vimala Kumari appealed to cyber victims to call 1930 or the Cyber Mitra’s helpline 9121211100. SVIMS Director B. Vengamma stressed the need for caution with smartphones becoming an indispensable tool for students, be it for online education, seeking information, entertainment or for conducting digital transactions.
Related Blogs

Executive Summary:
A widely circulated claim on social media indicates that six soldiers of the Assam Rifles were killed during a retaliatory attack carried out by a Myanmar-based breakaway faction of the United Liberation Front of Asom (Independent), or ULFA (I). The post included a photograph of coffins covered in Indian flags with reference to soldiers who were part of the incident where ULFA (I) killed six soldiers. The post was widely shared, however, the fact-check confirms that the photograph is old, not related, and there are no trustworthy reports to indicate that any such incident took place. This claim is therefore false and misleading.

Claim:
Social media users claimed that the banned militant outfit ULFA (I) killed six Assam Rifles personnel in retaliation for an alleged drone and missile strike by Indian forces on their camp in Myanmar with captions on it “Six Indian Army Assam Rifles soldiers have reportedly been killed in a retaliatory attack by the Myanmar-based ULFA group.”. The claim was accompanied by a viral post showing coffins of Indian soldiers, which added emotional weight and perceived authenticity to the narrative.

Fact Check:
We began our research with a reverse image search of the image of coffins in Indian flags, which we saw was shared with the viral claim. We found the image can be traced to August 2013. We found the traces in The Washington Post, which confirms the fact that the viral snap is from the Past incident where five Indian Army soldiers were killed by Pakistani intruders in Poonch, Jammu, and Kashmir, on August 6, 2013.

Also, The Hindu and India Today offered no confirmation of the death of six Assam Rifles personnel. However, ULFA (I) did issue a statement dated July 13, 2025, claiming that three of its leaders had been killed in a drone strike by Indian forces.

However, by using Shutterstock, it depicts that the coffin's image is old and not representative of any current actions by the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA).

The Indian Army denied it, with Defence PRO Lt Col Mahendra Rawat telling reporters there were "no inputs" of such an operation. Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma also rejected that there was cross-border military action whatsoever. Therefore, the viral claim is false and misleading.

Conclusion:
The assertion that ULFA (I) killed six soldiers from the 6th Assam Rifles in a retaliation strike is incorrect. The viral image used in these posts is from 2013 in Jammu & Kashmir and has no relevance to the present. There have been no verified reports of any such killings, and both the Indian Army and the Assam government have categorically denied having conducted or knowing of any cross-border operation. This faulty narrative is circulating, and it looks like it is only inciting fear and misinformation therefore, please ignore it.
- Claim: Report confirms the death of six Assam Rifles personnel in an ULFA-led attack.
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading

Introduction
Law grows by confronting its absences, it heals through its own gaps. States often find themselves navigating a shared frontier without a mutual guide or lines of law in an era of expanding digital boundaries and growing cyber damages. The United Nations General Assembly ratified the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime on December 24, 2024, and more than sixty governments were in attendance in the signing ceremony on 24th & 25th October this year, marking a moment of institutional regeneration and global commitment.
A new Lexicon for Global Order
The old liberal order is being strained by growing nationalism, economic fracturing, populism, and great-power competition as often emphasised in the works of scholars like G. John Iken berry and John Mearsheimer. Multilateral arrangements become more brittle in such circumstances. Therefore, the new cybercrimes convention represents not only a legal tool but also a resurgence of international promise, a significant win for collective governance in an uncertain time. It serves as a reminder that institutions can be rebuilt even after they have been damaged.
In Discussion: The Fabric of the Digital Polis
The digital sphere has become a contentious area. On the one hand, the US and its allies support stakeholder governance, robust individual rights, and open data flows. On the other hand, nations like China and Russia describe a “post-liberal cyber order” based on state mediation, heavily regulated flows, and sovereignty. Instead of focusing on ideological dichotomies, India, which is positioned as both a rising power and a voice of the Global South, has offered a viewpoint based on supply-chain security, data localisation, and capacity creation. Thus, rather than being merely a regulation, the treaty arises from a framework of strategic recalibration.
What Changed & Why it Matters
There have been regional cybercrime accords up to this point, such as the Budapest Convention. The goal of this new international convention, which is accessible to all UN members, is to standardise definitions, evidence sharing and investigation instruments. 72 states signed the Hanoi signature event in October, 2025, demonstrating an unparalleled level of scope and determination. In addition to establishing structures for cooperative investigations, extradition, and the sharing of electronic evidence, it requires signatories to criminalise acts such as fraud, unlawful access to systems, data interference, and online child exploitation.
For the first time, a legally obligatory global architecture aims to harmonise cross-border evidence flows, mutual legal assistance, and national procedural laws. Cybercrime offers genuine promise for community defence at a time when it is no longer incidental but existential, attacks on hospitals, schools and infrastructure are now common, according to the Global Observatory.
Holding the Line: India’s Deliberate Path in the Age of Cyber Multilateralism
India takes a contemplative rather than a reluctant stance towards the UN Cybercrime Treaty. Though it played an active role during the drafting sessions and lent its voice to the shaping of global cyber norms, New Delhi is yet to sign the convention. Subtle but intentional, the reluctance suggests a more comprehensive reflection, an evaluation of how international obligations correspond with domestic constitutional protections, especially the right to privacy upheld by the Supreme Court in Puttaswamy v. UOI (2017).
Prudence is the reason for this halt. Policy circles speculate that the government is still assessing the treaty’s consequences for national data protection, surveillance regimes, and territorial sovereignty. Officials have not provided explicit justifications for India’s refusal to join. India’s position has frequently been characterised by striking a careful balance between digital sovereignty and taking part in cooperative international regimes. In earlier negotiations, India had even proposed including clauses to penalise “offensive messages” on social media, echoing the erstwhile Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000, but the suggestion found little international traction.
Advocates for digital rights such as Raman Jit Singh Chima of Access Now have warned that ensuring that the treaty’s implementation upholds constitutional privacy principles may be necessary for India to eventually endorse it. He contends that the treaty’s wording might not entirely meet India’s legal requirements in the absence of such voluntary pledges.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres praised the agreement as “a powerful, legally binding instrument to strengthen our collective defences against “cybercrime” during its signing in Hanoi. The issue for India is to make sure that multilateral collaboration develops in accordance with constitutional values rather than to reject that vision. Therefore, the path forward is one of assertion rather than absence, careful march towards a cyber future that protects freedom and sovereignty.
Sources:

Introduction
As e-sports flourish in India, mobile gaming platforms and apps have contributed massively to this boom. The wave of online mobile gaming has led to a new recognition of esports. As we see the Sports Ministry being very proactive for e-sports and e-athletes, it is pertinent to ensure that we do not compromise our cyber security for the sake of these games. When we talk about online mobile gaming, the most common names that come to our minds are PUBG and BGMI. As news for all Indian gamers, BGMI is set to be relaunched in India after approval from the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
Why was BGMI banned?
The Govt banned Battle Ground Mobile India on the pretext of being a Chinese application and the fact that all the data was hosted in China itself. This caused a cascade of compliance and user safety issues as the Data was stored outside India. Since 2020 The Indian Govt has been proactive in banning Chinese applications, which might have an adverse effect on national security and Indian citizens. Nearly 200 plus applications have been banned by the Govt, and most of them were banned due to their data hubs being in China. The issue of cross-border data flow has been a key issue in Geo-Politics, and whoever hosts the data virtually owns it as well and under the potential threat of this fact, all apps hosting their data in China were banned.
Why is BGMI coming back?
BGMI was banned for not hosting data in India, and since the ban, the Krafton Inc.-owned game has been engaging in Idnai to set up data banks and servers to have a separate gaming server for Indian players. These moves will lead to a safe gaming ecosystem and result in better adherence to the laws and policies of the land. The developers have not declared a relaunch date yet, but the game is expected to be available for download for iOS and Android users in the coming few days. The game will be back on app stores as a letter from the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology has been issued stating that the games be allowed and made available for download on the respective app stores.
Grounds for BGMI
BGMI has to ensure that they comply with all the laws, policies and guidelines in India and have to show the same to the Ministry to get an extension on approval. The game has been permitted for only 90 days (3 Months). Hon’ble MoS Meity Rajeev Chandrashekhar stated in a tweet “This is a 3-month trial approval of #BGMI after it has complied with issues of server locations and data security etc. We will keep a close watch on other issues of User harm, Addiction etc., in the next 3 months before a final decision is taken”. This clearly shows the magnitude of the bans on Chinese apps. The ministry and the Govt will not play the soft game now, it’s all about compliance and safeguarding the user’s data.
Way Forward
This move will play a significant role in the future, not only for gaming companies but also for other online industries, to ensure compliance. This move will act as a precedent for the issue of cross-border data flow and the advantages of data localisation. It will go a long way in advocacy for the betterment of the Indian cyber ecosystem. Meity alone cannot safeguard the space completely, it is a shared responsibility of the Govt, industry and netizens.
Conclusion
The advent of online mobile gaming has taken the nation by storm, and thus, being safe and secure in this ecosystem is paramount. The provisional permission form BGMI shows the stance of the Govt and how it is following the no-tolerance policy for noncompliance with laws. The latest policies and bills, like the Digital India Act, Digital Personal Data Protection Act, etc., will go a long way in securing the interests and rights of the Indian netizen and will create a blanket of safety and prevention of issues and threats in the future.