Sunday, July 23, 2017

Why does India need Data Privacy or Protection Law ?

Why does India need a Data Protection Law?
Apart from appeasing European Union for sharing data with Indian companies, One of the reason is
presently all Data of ours -Search, Emails, Chats of Google, FB, Hotmail, Whatsapp are stored in Californian Servers, USA Jurisdiction.

US Foriegn Intelligence Survivelenace Court (FISA) with a single penstroke court gag order can take all Indian MPs, PMO, Home Minister,MEA's etc Email data and Analyse them for leverage in Intl' Affairs, Thats a severe Threat, #privacy intrusion. 

Not to mention even the Locations of each Citizen,Official in India can be monitored by US NSA analysts as of now with #Whatsapp, Android Phones relaying data back to USA servers. 
Hence a Data Protection Law in India is a need of the Hour.

Monday, July 3, 2017

Prashant Mali Interview in Business Standard Newpaper

Ransom-payers are also the cause of ransomware proliferation: Prashant Mali

The ransom to retrieve files was reportedly $300, to be paid in virtual currency bitcoins

Nikita Puri 
Operations at a terminal of the country’s largest container port, in Mumbai, came to a standstill earlier this week. The process of loading and unloading containers was halted as the port’s computers shut down after a major that swept across the globe. The aggressiveness of the malware showed that such attacks were capable of bringing both corporate and government networks to a sudden halt. The ransom to retrieve files was reportedly $300, to be paid in virtual currency bitcoins. expert Prashant Mali, also an advocate at the Bombay High Court, tells Nikita Puri how to prevent mass-scale civil disruptions that future cyber attacks can result in. Edited excerpts:
First we had individual companies and high-networth individuals who were targets of ransomware, then WannaCry hit servers across the globe. Now another malware, which some are identifying as Petya, has sent corporations into a tizzy. Do you foresee more such threats?

To date, financial cyber crime has only grown and it is yet to peak, so I would say it’s written on the wall that many more such attacks are expected in the near future. Such threats loom large as the ransom is paid in bitcoins, so the criminals aren’t caught. One thing the police and the government can do is to ensure that citizens make compulsory declarations of purchase of bitcoins and other (like ethereum) when they file their income tax returns. This can help the government see who pays and how much because, I feel, ransom-payers are also the cause of ransomware proliferation.
confirm that the malware isn't really a ransomware, but a wiper designed to destroy data. Reportedly, because of “ its aggressive features,” the malware makes it impossible to retrieve certain files leading many to believe that this attack may not have been for money. Can this be seen as an attempt to test how far companies will go to protect data?
Even if cyber attacks don’t cause financial damage, they definitely throw open defences. Identifying fortresses that have holes in their system can be of interest to the state and non-state actors. This data of the number of loopholes is in demand and is sold at a premium price. There are different types of involved in the dark world: many a time those who look for such holes, those who attack, and those who intend to get ransoms are all different.
Companies are often wary of making such attacks public. Security firm Symantec has said that India is the worst hit in Asia, but we have confirmation only from Mumbai’s Do you think information sharing could actually help build a better defence against such attacks?
By not reporting such attacks, companies are depriving the nation of a knowledge database that can help other companies develop better defences. Symantec and other (security) vendors also cannot be fully relied upon because fear is what they harp on. The more fear they put in Indians, the more they sell security products. The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India and insurance companies should make it compulsory for clients to file a First Information Report (FIR) before claiming cyber insurance. Once reporting to some government agency becomes mandatory to claim insurance, companies would be motivated.
What are the security measures that one must take to avoid such attacks? 
No one can be immune in cyber space and that's the reality. Only cyber awareness in organisations can bring in cyber resilience. I would advise organisations to have multi-prong policies to establish a cyber security culture. I feel the highest level of cyber safety can be achieved by establishing a cyber security culture in the company, and a country can be cyber resilient by cultivating a culture of cyber security in society. Government should quadruple its budget for digital literacy programmes. For the government to be ahead of hackers, we need cyber spies: our law and enforcement agencies should implant cyber spies among cyber criminals. The chatter within their group helps the state to be ready for what is coming: we need cyber intelligence. 
Do you think companies should have ethical hackers on their pay rolls
I have an issue with the term “ethical hackers” because legally this isn’t right: those are two contradictory terms put together. who use these terms are either doing it for branding purpose or are students. Companies should opt for services by cyber security researchers. 
Are India’s cyber laws equipped to handle such large-scale attacks?
No. Laws can be invoked when prima facie evidence is found against criminals and investigation can be completed if attribution to a criminal is possible. The legal framework to help enforcement agencies in India has serious flaws. Large-scale cyber attacks need multiple law and enforcement agencies to work together along with CERT-In (Indian Computer Emergency Response Team), but the protocol for this is yet to be developed. 
In the future, cyber attacks are going to affect government facilities meant for citizens: like centres for health, water etcetera. Even municipalities should coordinate with the aforementioned agencies to avoid mass scale civil disruption from cyber attacks.

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

Petya Ransomeware Attack : What to Do immediately

Petya/Petwrap ransomware

What is Petya Ransomeware do?
Ransomware, Petya does not encrypt files on a targeted system one by one.
Instead, Petya reboots victims computers and encrypts the hard drive's master file table (MFT) and rendering the master boot record (MBR) inoperable, restricting access to the full system by seizing information about file names, sizes, and location on the physical disk.

Petya replaces the computer's MBR with its own malicious code that displays the ransom note and leaves computers unable to boot.

Why it spreads fast?
Ans : Petya ransomware successful in spreading because it combines both a client-side attack (CVE-2017-0199) and a network based threat (MS17-010)
So patch both first!

Affected countries: UK, Ukraine, India, the Netherlands, Spain, Denmark, and others

Encrypts MFT (Master File Tree) tables for NTFS partitions and overwrites the MBR (Master Boot Record) with a custom bootloader that shows a ransom note and prevents victims from booting their computer.

Actions to be taken:
1. Block source E-mail address
2. Block domains:

3. Block IPs:
4. Apply patches:
Refer(in Russian):

5. Disable SMBv1

6. Update Anti-Virus hashes

myguy.xls EE29B9C01318A1E23836B949942DB14D4811246FDAE2F41DF9F0DCD922C63BC6
BCA9D6.exe 17DACEDB6F0379A65160D73C0AE3AA1F03465AE75CB6AE754C7DCB3017AF1FBD
As of a Kill-switch can be used for #Petya Ransomware. 
i.e. Just create a file "C:\Windows\perfc"
Does this affect you?* 

Though this attack is largely targeting companies, it's important you stay vigilant and take following precautionary measures.

- Always make sure your anti-virus is up-to-date to maximize the protection available to you.

- Don't click too quickly. This attack may be spreading through phishing or spam emails, so make sure you check an email's content for legitimacy. Hover over a link and see if it's going to a reliable URL. Or, if you're unsure about an email's content or the source it came from, do a quick search and look for other instances of this campaign, and what those instances could tell you about the email's legitimacy.

- Do a complete back up. Back up all your PCs immediately. If your machine becomes infected with Petya ransomware, your data could become completely inaccessible. Make sure you cover all your bases and have your data stored on an external hard drive or elsewhere.

- Apply system and application updates.Making sure your operating system is up to date will help contain the spread of this malware.

Monday, June 19, 2017

Electronic Evidence where to find in Files

Electronic Evidence where to find in files 

Windows Searches — For years, one challenge in digital investigative analysis has been proving a user not only had something significant to an investigation on their computer, but that he knew it was on there. Two of the easiest ways help prove knowledge of a file is to prove the user was searching for it or accessed it. In order for Microsoft to enhance the user experience, Windows tracks the names of files you access and search for in multiple locations. As previously discussed, the Windows registry is essentially several databases called registry hives. Each user has his own primary registry hive called the NTUSER.DAT. This registry hive tracks information specific to each user’s activity and preferences. Starting in Windows 7, when a user conducts a search on his computer using the Windows search function or the “Charm Bar” in Windows 8-10 (the magnifying glass that appears when you move your mouse to the right edge of the screen), Windows records each search in temporal order in the “NTUSER.DAT\ Software\ Microsoft\ Windows\ CurrentVersion\ Explorer\WordWheelQuery” registry key. Because the searches are recorded in temporal order, an analyst can frequently see indications of the user’s thought process as he searched for particular files. 

File Access —– Windows also records in numerous artifacts when a user opens or attempts to open non-executable files. Four of the most useful digital artifacts to identify files opened or attempted to be opened are “LNK” files (pronounced as “link” files), Jump Lists, and several “most recently used” registry keys. 

LNK files — A LNK File is an artifact that has existed since Windows XP. LNK files are also known as a “Windows Shortcut” files and are created anytime a user opens or attempts to open a nonexecutable file. A LNK file is created even if the file opened is on a network or external drive. When an opened file is later deleted, its LNK file does not get deleted with it. Windows creates and stores approximately 149 LNK files in the user’s home directory under the “AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\ Windows\Recent” directory. LNK files contain a wealth of information including the modified, accessed, and created dates and times of the file opened; the full directory path, volume name, and volume serial number from which the file was last opened; and the file size. 
Starting in Windows 10, Microsoft added rules to when LNK files would be created in addition to when files are opened. On earlier versions of Windows 10, a LNK file was created for the directory to which any file was copied. The creation of a LNK file for the directory a file was copied to was stopped on later versions of Windows 10. However, on versions as early as version 1607, Microsoft created a LNK file for the directory a file is opened from. Additionally, when a directory is created, Windows creates a LNK file for the directory created and for the created directories “parent” and “grandparent” directory. In addition to all the information LNK files record, LNK files also record the last time a file was opened. 

Jump Lists — One of the newest artifacts to identify files opened by a user are “Jump Lists.” Starting in Windows 7, Microsoft introduced two types of jump lists: “AutomaticDestinations” and “CustomDestinations.” Automatic and Custom jump lists are created and stored in their respective directory in each user’s home directory under the “AppData\ Roaming\ Microsoft\ Windows\Recent” directory. Each application can incorporate its own jump lists as a “mini-start” menu. Automatic Destinations allow a user to quickly “jump” to or access files they recently or frequently used, usually by right-clicking the application in the Windows taskbar. CustomDestinations allow a user to pin recent tasks, such as opening a new browser window or create a new spreadsheet to the jump list. Jump lists are essentially mega LNK files. Each jump list can record upwards of the last 1,000 files opened by each application. As jump lists are essentially compound LNK files, they contain all the same information as LNK files, such as when each file was opened, modified, accessed, and created; dates and times that the file was opened; the full directory path, volume name, and volume serial number from where the file was last opened; and the file size. 

Most Recently Used (MRU) Registry Keys – As previously mentioned, the Windows Registry is a series of massive databases that track system configuration and user activity. There are several registry keys that track most recently used items. An analysis of these registry keys can help an analyst quickly identify files accessed. Every application developer has the option of creating registry keys specific to his application configuration and user activity. Three of the most useful registry keys that track files accessed are “RecentDocs,” “Microsoft Office FileMRU,” and “OpenSavePIDMRU.” 

RecentDocs — The “RecentDocs” registry key tracks the name and order of the last 10 files opened for every file extension (e.g. .doc, .docx, .jpg, etc.). The registry organizes each of the last 10 files opened in sub keys named by the file extension. A sub key named “folder” is also created when the first folder is opened using the Windows Explorer. This sub key tracks the name of the last 30 folders opened. Each user has his own RecentDocs registry key located in his NTUSER.DAT registry hive under the “\Software\ Microsoft\ Windows\ Currentversion\ Explorer” registry key. The master RecentDocs key maintains a master list, organized in temporal order of the last 150 files or folders opened. By analyzing the order that particular files were opened, analysts have often been able to refute claims that a single type of file was opened by mistake. In one trade secret case, it was helpful for the analyst to show the pattern of files opened that all related to the same subject matter. 

Applications Specific Most Recently Used (MRU) — With every Windows application, developers have the ability to create their own set of registry keys to track specific configuration and user activity for their application. If a specific application is used to commit or facilitate a crime or is otherwise significant to an investigation, it is often advantageous for the analyst to determine both if the application has its own set of registry keys and what actions those keys record. Two excellent examples are “Winzip,” which records the name of the last several zip files created using the Microsoft Office suite of applications. Each application in the Office suite has its own set of “FileMRU” (most recently used files) that tracks most recent files used and when they were opened. Additionally, starting with Office version 365 and 2016, Microsoft Office tracks the “reading location” for each Word, PowerPoint, and Excel document opened and when each file was closed. Using this information, an analyst can determine not only what document was last opened and when it was closed, but also that the user had scrolled to and was on page 32 of the document when it was closed. 

OpenSavePIDMRU — Windows has some basic dialog boxes that all programs can use when a user opens or saves a file. Some may have noticed that when saving files, a dropdown arrow in the file name dialog entry location appears. By clicking on the arrow, you will see several of the most recent file names you have saved for that application. These file names are saved as a part of the “OpenSavePIDMRU” registry key which is located under the “NTUSER.DAT \ Software\ Microsoft\ Windows\ CurrentVersion\ Explorer\ ComDlg32\ OpenSaveMRU” registry key. A record of the last 10 to 25 names of the last files opened or saved using the Windows Common Dialog Box are stored under sub keys based on file extension.

Tuesday, May 2, 2017


Cybercrime :

Comprehensive guidelines referred to in Letter No. 55019/17/2017-Legal Cell, dated ______ of Internal security Division, Ministry of Home Affairs regarding service of summons/notices/judicial process on persons residing abroad. --

1. Section 105 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) speaks of reciprocal arrangements to be made by Central Government with the Foreign Governments with regard to the service of summons / warrants / judicial processes. The Ministry of Home Affairs has entered into Mutual Legal Assistance treaty/Agreements with 22 countries which provide for serving of documents. These countries are Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, Canada, Kazakhastan, United Arab Emirates, Russia, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Ukraine, Mongolia, Thailand, France, Bahrain, South Korea, United States of America, Singapore, South Africa, Mauritius, Belarus, Spain and Kuwait. In other cases the ministry makes a request on the basis of assurance of reciprocity to the concerned foreign government through the mission / Embassy. The difference between the two categories of the countries is that the country having MLAT has obligation to consider serving the documents whereas the non-MLAT countries does not have any obligation to consider such a request.Summons/notices/judicial processes issued by the Indian Courts.

2. The summons/warrants/judicial processes received by MHA are forwarded to the concerned Indian Missions/Embassies which in turn, takes up the matter with the designated authority in that country. In case of MLAT countries, the manner of communication is as laid down in MLAT and can be either directly between MHA and the Central Authority or can be through the diplomatic channel. The designated authority after considering the request directs its agency to serve the document on the concerned person and the report of the service, if any is also received through the same chain. This is broadly the system in majority of the countries. However, in some countries private companies/NGOs have also been entrusted with the service of judicial papers.

3. Based on the experience gained, some guidelines are given below which may be followed while making a request to MHA for service of judicial processes. It may, however, be noted that it is the discretion of the requested country to serve the documents and any time frame for a positive response cannot be predicted.

a) All requests for service of summons / notices / judicial processes on persons residing abroad shall be addressed to the Under Secretary(Legal), IS-II Division, Ministry of Home Affairs, 9th Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, New Delhi- 110003. 
All requests shall be forwarded through post only with a covering letter from the  Court official giving the following information: 
a) Material facts of the criminal matter including purpose of the request and the nature of the assistance sought. 
b) The offences alleged to have been committed, a copy of the applicable laws and maximum penalties for these offence. 
c) Name, designation, telephone and fax number of the person/officer who will be able to give any clarification, if required. 
d) The complete address of the issuing authority to which the judicial papers/service reports may be returned. 
e) Approval of the competent authority to bear any expenditure, which they be charged by the foreign government/agency for the service of the documents. 
f) Degree of confidentiality required and the reasons therefore(in case of confidentiality requirement). g) Any time limit within which the request should be executed. 
This will be subject to allowance of sufficient margin of time by the requesting agency, as indicated in para 3(iv) of the guidelines b) MHA, on receipt of request, will examine it in view of the provisions of treaty, if exists, with the requested country and as per the provision of CrPC in case of non-treaty country. 
c) MHA requires at least a period of 12 weeks times for service of such notices in the concerned countries. It is, therefore imperative that a date of hearing/appearance may be decided accordingly. 
d) In the case of non English speaking countries, the notices should be accompanied with the certified/authenticated translation(in duplicate) in the official language of the country where the notice is proposed to be served. 
e) Name and address of the individual/organization should be complete in all respect and PO BOX no. and Passport no. will not suffice as address of the individual. 
f) Ministry of Home Affairs responsibility to service the summons is only in Criminal Matters. Hence, summons in Criminal matters only may be sent to the Ministry for service abroad. 
g) MHA does not undertake service of the non-bailable warrants of arrest. The service of non-bailable arrest warrents amounts to the extradition of the individual. 
The request for extradition are based on certain legal procedures contained in applicable treaties negotiated on the basis of the International Principle of Extradition. 
Such requests are to be forwarded to the Ministry of External Affairs, CPV Division, Patiala House Annexe, Tilak Marg, New Delhi – 110001."

Cyber Security Questions for Board of Directors

Cyber Security Questions for Board of Directors.

Although Board of directors have added cybersecurity risk to their agendas, there is no standard way for boards to think about cybersecurity, much less time-tested guidelines to help them navigate the issue.
For boards, cybersecurity is an issue of enterprise risk. As with all enterprise risks, the key focus is mitigation, not prevention. This universally understood enterprise risk guideline is especially helpful in the context of cybersecurity because no one can prevent all cyber breaches. Every company is a target, and a sufficiently motivated and well-resourced adversary can and will get into a company’s network.
Consequently, terms like “cyber defense” are insufficient descriptors of an effective posture because they evoke the image that corporations can establish an invincible perimeter around their networks to prevent access by bad actors. Today, it’s more accurate to think of the board-level cybersecurity review goal as “cyber resilience.” The idea behind the cyber resilience mindset is that, because you know network breaches will happen, it is more important to focus on preparing to meet cyberthreats as rapidly as possible and on mitigating the associated risks.

1. How do we integrate Cybersecurity with the current business direction and planning? 
2. What are our main Cybersecurity risks? 
3. Is the right amount of Cybersecurity risk accepted? 
4. Is our process for identifying, assessing and managing Cybersecurity risks effective? 
5. Do we have Cybersecurity culture in our organisation ? Do people in this organisation have a common understanding of the term "Cybersecurity"? 
6. How do we ensure that Cybersecurity risk management is an integral part of the planning and day-to-day operations of individual business units? 
7. How do we ensure that the Board’s expectations for Cybersecurity risk management are communicated to and followed by the employees in the company? 
8. Do we have process to manage Electronic evidence? How do we ensure that our executives and employees act in the best interests of this organisation's Cybersecurity posture? 
9. How is Cybersecurity risk management coordinated across the organisation and vendors?
10. How do we ensure that the organisation is performing according to the business plan and within appropriate Cybersecurity risk tolerance limits? 
11. How do we monitor and evaluate changes in the external environment and their impact on the organisation's strategy and Cybersecurity risk management practices? 
12. What information about the Cybersecurity risks targeting the organisation does the Board get to help it fulfil its stewardship and governance responsibilities? 
13. How do we know that the information the Board gets on Cybersecurity risks or threats and vulnerabilities is timely, accurate and reliable? 
14. How do we decide what information on Cybersecurity risks we should publish? 
15. How do we take advantage of the organisational learning that results from the Cybersecurity risk management corrective actions and/or preventive action plans? 
16. What are our priorities as a Board in the oversight of Cybersecurity risks? 
17. How does the Board handle its responsibility for the oversight of opportunities that introduce Cybersecurity risks to the organisation? 
18. How does the Board ensure that at least some of its members have the requisite knowledge and experience to address Cybersecurity risks and one of the member serves as an expert ?
19. How do we, as a Board, help establish the "tone at the top" that reinforces the organisation's values and promotes a "Cybersecurity culture"? 
20. How many grades the Board wish to give itself for overseeing Cybersecurity risk? 
The board is accountable for the organisation’s investment strategy. In years past, information security spending was part of a larger IT-related budget. Not anymore. Gartner estimates that by 2020, IT security spending will grow from $75 billion to $170 billion. With such levels of spending, boards will be more apt to scrutinize investments and actively manage budgets. 
To manage the risk associated with a cyber attack, leadership must bring together key components of an organisation to develop joint ownership of risks and a comprehensive approach to cybersecurity. Having a policy isn’t enough. Companies also need tools, processes, and up-to-date information on the ever changing threats to their enterprises. 

The Author is Chevening Cyber Security Fellow (UK) and participant of IVLP (USA) on Linking Digital Policy Cyber Crime Law Enforcement Program. He is a Practising Lawyer of Bombay High court. 
He regularly Advices Top Corporate Companies and Government Agencies on Cybersecurity Technical and Legal Issues.

Thursday, April 20, 2017

Online impersonation and Sending bomb hoax email - Section 66D Cybercrime

                         On 20-04-2017, the sleuths of Commissioner’s Task Force, West Zone team with the assistance of S.R Nagar police, on credible information made sustained efforts and solved the mystery behind hoax mail which was generated from Hyderabad.
  Details of apprehended Accused :-
Motaparthi Vamshi Krishna @ vamshi chowdary S/o. M.A.sV. Prasad, age. 32 yrs, Occ. Transport agent  R/o. Flat no.G-1, TP Sanjana  Amrutha Residency, Miyapur, R.R.Dist, N/o.  Dendullur (village & Mandal), West Godavari Dist, A.P.

 Brief facts
On 15-04-2017 at 1647 hours commissioner of police,Mumbai received a mail from a mail ID  claimed to be woman in the email and stated that she overheard six men chating in a hotel and stating that all 23 people have to split from here and board flights in three cities i.e Hyderabad, Chennai and Mumbai to hijack planes at a time tomorrow. 
On the tip of Mumbai Police alerted and sent the information to the concerned Airport Security agencies about a gang planning to hijack flights from three Airports.
  Basing on the information CISF pressed into service and quick reaction commando teams under taken sanitisation drill at Airport and Airlines have been asked to remain extra vigilant. Extra care has been given to passenger checks, baggage scanning, pre embarkation checks and started special patrols to thwart any bid to storm the Airport.    
As a mail generated from Hyderabad, considering the seriousness and sensitivity of the issue, the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad instructed the Task Force team to   check the veracity of the mail. 
During the enquiry traced the IP address and found it is a net cafe at Madhura Nagar, S.R.Nagar styled as “E netzone” and enquired with the owner of net cafe and found the register of the visitors and filtered eight persons at the time of generating mail. Since the net cafe did not have CCTV footages and there were no proper records maintained at net cafe centre, The Task Force Police made sustained efforts based on the available of CC footage nearby net cafe and lead to the identification of   accused by name Vamsi Krishna.
During the interrogation the accused revealed that he used to chat with his girlfriend who stays at Chennai. Few days back she proposed a trip to Mumbai & Goa. As he is facing financial problems, he unable to bare expanses for their tour,  he requested her to withdraw the trip proposal, but she denied his request, forced him to go to trip to Mumbai & Goa.   In this process to cancel the trip, he hatched a plan to make her believe that flights have been cancelled because of High Alert at airports.

                            In this connection he created a fake flight booking Ticket on her name dt. 16-04-2017 from Chennai to Mumbai, sent the fake ticket to his girl friend through his mail Id to her mail id on 15-04-2017 to believe her.  If she knows about the fake ticket, she will avoid him.  On that he went to one internet centre styled as “E Net zone” at Madhura Nagar, SR.Nagar on 15-04-2017 at about 1600 hrs. In this net zone he created a fake mail id “”  and secured the Mail Ids of Mumbai police commissioner and others and prepared fake message as ‘’hi sir am female here am doing this mail frim Hyderabad as i don’t want to revel my details couse am a female and scared of issues, and mailing u this couse in the after noon around 2pm while having lunch there were 6 guys talking those guys are musclims, they were talking abt plane hijack tommarrow in Hyderabad chennai and Mumbai airport they were talking very slowly but unfortunately i heard few conversations abt this, they were saying all us 23 people have to split from here and have to board flights in 3 cities and hijack them at a time. They spoke some other things also but i couls not hear them as i heard only these few sentences from them, i dont know do am i doing correct or not and they are true or not but heard this so kindly go through this and as i informed this as a duty and a citizen of india and pls dont make me to get into issues’’

On further questioning he revealed that   previously he  was involved in two cases Cr.No. 411/2010, U/s. 420, 458,506 R/w. 34 IPC of S.R.Nagar PS & Cr.No. 32/2013, U/s. 66(D) of ITA Act-2008 & 420 IPC of CCS, Cyber crimes.
The apprehended accused along with seized material being handover to SHO, S.R.Nagar PS for taking further action under 66D of IT act and sec 419, 182 IPC.

Navy man in Jail for 2 years for Child Pornography, cyber crime in India

Navy man gets 2 years Jail for Child Pornography, cyber crime in India : Cyber crime conviction By Prashant Mali In the case of D...