Indian Government to set up malware cleaning service center

In what can be considered as a commendable move, the CERT IN has indicated that it will shortly set up a “Malware Cleaning Service” to the public. It is expected to maintain a botnet hosting malware cleaning tool kits which can be accessed by public on demand to clean their devices.

The botnet service would be supported by a  malware detection facility and a coordination with anti phishing facilities of Banks at least in India.

Refer Article here

Presently the information has been released as an answer to a Parliamentary question and more details are awaited.

However, according to Economic Times,  the center is being rolled out tomorrow the 20th December 2016 and a full fledged launch would be on next Monday, December 26th.

This is certainly a good move which will make CERT In relevant for the general public for the first time since its formation along with the notification of ITA 2000 on 17th October 2000. If properly implemented as envisaged, it will be a game changer in the Cyber Security domain in India with many down stream benefits.

Naavi

Posted in Cyber Law | Leave a comment

Has LIC ignored Government Directions on digital payment incentives?

Recently, the Government of India announced several incentives to promote digital payments. These included 10% incentive on LIC payments. (Refer article here).

The incentives announced were for the following transactions.

1.Discount of 0.75% on petrol and diesel sold through Government Petroleum PSUs

2.Discount upto o.5% for monthly or seasonal tickets railway tickets bought online from January 1, 2017

3.  Free accidental insurance upto Rs 10 lakhs for railway passengers booking tickets online

4. Discount of 5% for railway paid services such as catering, accommodation retiring rooms etc paid through digital means

5. Discount of upto 10% on the premium in General Insurance policies and 8% in new life policies of LIC sold through the customer portals in case payment is made through digital means.

6. Additionally, it was stated that

(a) “Government departments and PSUs will ensure that transactions fee/MDR charges associated with payment through digital means shall not be passed on to the consumers and all such expenses shall be borne by them. State Governments are being advised that the State Governments and its organisations should also consider to absorb the transaction fee/MDR charges related to digital payment to them and consumer should not be asked to bear it.”

(b) “Public sector banks are advised that merchant should not be required to pay more than Rs 100 per month as monthly rental for PoS terminals/Micro ATMs/mobile POS from the merchants to bring small merchant on board the digital payment eco system. Nearly 6.5 lakh machines by Public Sector Banks have been issued to merchants who will be benefitted by the lower rentals and promote digital transactions.

(c) No service tax will be charged on digital transaction charges/MDR for transactions upto Rs.2000

(d) For the payment of toll at Toll Plazas on National Highways using RFID card and Fast Tags, a discount of 10 per cent will be available to users in the year 2016-17.

These were not only welcome measures but were required since Government was actually pushing people to digital payment system which is known to be more risky than cash payments. While we can argue for the economic benefits of the cashless society. when the Government forces people to a certain system of Governance as a transformation from the current system, any additional cost impose will amount to “Tax”.

Hence while the incentive were necessary for bringing in more users into the system, it was mandatory for the Government that no new additional financial burden is imposed on the customers by virtue of transforming one self from cash payments to digital payments.

It is however observed that LIC has actually introduced new charges for online payment of premium which was not there in the previous years. It appears that the charges are being levied for Credit Card payments but not for Debit Card or Internet Banking payments.

This practice does not seem to agree with the Government’s intentions of promoting cash less society since payment through a debit or credit card is not the concern of LIC since it anyway receives its payment immediately. If the customer wants to pay it out of his savings or from credit card borrowings should not affect the insurance contract which is “Covering of a risk for payment to a consideration?”. Using the opportunity to disincentivise credit cards is an “Unfair Trade Practice” and needs to be discontinued forthwith.

Further it is also necessary for the Government to completely withdraw Service Tax from all digital payments and not upto only transactions of Rs 2000/-. Where digital payment services are used for larger payments, most probably it would be for payment of other goods and services for which taxes have already been levied. Collecting the  service charges for paying out of digital means instead of cash is a direct levy for the digital transformation. I therefore request the Finance Minister to withdraw the service tax on all digital transactions immediately without waiting for the budget.

Last but not the least, since the Government is pushing citizens into a higher risk domain in digital transactions, its silence in not reacting to the RBI failing to confirm its “Limited Liability Circular” of August 11 is not acceptable.

Mr Arun Jaitely seems to be unaware of the implications of RBI not confirming the circular which was first issued as “Draft for Public Comments” and not further re-issued. I wish the finance ministry takes note of this and advise RBI to confirm the circular without any further delay.

Naavi

 

Posted in Cyber Law | Leave a comment

Confidentiality of Health Information…misapplied by Apollo hospital?..Jayalalitha Saga

The story of the former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Ms J.Jayalalitha’s hospitalization and the mysterious secrecy that shrouded her treatment has now become a topic of discussion on what is “Privacy” in the context of health care in India.

Initially, there was a silent appreciation that Apollo hospital was committed to patient information privacy when no information leaked out of the hospital about the health condition of Ms Jayalalitha. But when arrests were made on any person who publicly wondered what has happened to her, it was clear that the “Confidentiality” concern had turned into some thing more sinister. The attempt was to suppress the information about her health by the force of the law enforcement.

If rumours could cause law and order problem and hence the health information needed to be kept confidential, for the same reason health condition of Ms Jayalalitha was a matter of public interest and the “Confidenitality” or “Privacy” was not sustainable because of the over riding “Public interest”.

Now there is a serious doubt that extends to the charge that perhaps Ms Jayalalitha was murdered and if so the hospital authorities would be considered as “Accomplices”.

It is unfortunate that apart from the doctors of Apollo hospital, there were doctors from AIIMS and one London doctor who were also privy to her health condition and have played along the tune “She was recovering”. They will now be considered as also accomplices if things take an adverse turn.

The fact however is revealing.

Ms J. Jayalalitha, fondly addressed by her followers as “Amma”,  was admitted to the Apollo  hospital on September 22nd, 2016 on what appeared to be some simple health problem of dehydration and fever. Then she continued to be treated until she was put on ECMO and Ventilator and perhaps a dialysis machine simultaneously indicating a dead heart, dead lungs  and dead kidneys.  However no proper health information flowed out and all health bulletins said that she was “recovering” and close to being “Discharged as a living individual”.

People were naturally left shocked when finally she was declared dead on the night of 5th December 2016.

After her death, an e-mail leak of the NDTV journalist Ms Burkha Dutt has surfaced. The email clearly indicates that there was a clear

ground to believe that there was wrong medicine administered to her to worsen her diabetes condition. When she was admitted to the hospital, she was perhaps in a serious condition because of the wrong treatment for diabetes leading to failure of some of the organs and internal infection. Apollo may claim that they were not responsible for this but they definitely had no business to hide it from their medical bulletins.

Apart from this prima facie evidence of what can be loosely termed as “Causing death by negligence”, some of the relatives of Jayalalitha have complained that they suspect some wrong doing and also that the hospital failed to allow them to meet the patient during the last few days. They even conducted a second funeral for her in Srirangapatna holding her burial unsatisfactory last rites.

It is therefore now obligatory on the Government to conduct a thorough investigation to find out the truth. However, considering that the death of a king is always to be suspected to have been caused by the successor, and the prime suspect in this case as per the relatives of Jayalalitha is her potential successor, the investigation cannot be trusted under the hands of the Tamil Nadu police. It has to be handled by CBI and using officers who are not from TN cadre to avoid conflict of interest.

During the days when Jayalalitha was in the hospital, several decisions were taken under her name as part of the Government decisions including one on which her finger print was supposed to have been applied. A forensic investigation on the finger print would reveal if it was a finger print of a living person or a person whose blood circulation and sweat glands donot indicate life. There must be all the medical records and statements of the staff including that of the man political leaders who visited her which all should be collated as evidence.

If any evidence is missing, then it would corroborate the offence and call for additional charges of destruction of evidence and obstruction to justice.

The primafacie evidence indicates that Apollo hospital is in the docks.

Under health care privacy we always say that when the patient is in a mental condition in which he/she is not capable of taking a rational decision, the “legal heirs” have the right to assume charge and the attending physician needs to provide the health information to them. In the instant case, Apollo authorities seem to have decided that “Ms Sasikala” was the “legal heir” to Jayalalitha.

It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court will interpret this aspect. If a close political associate can be considered as the “Legal Heir”, then in any business concern, if the Managing Director dies or is in a serious condition, it would be the “Deputy Managing Director” who will be considered as the “Legal Heir” to whom the health information would be trusted and not the son, daughter or the kin of the patient. The action of Apollo is therefore unsustainable in law and this may make Apollo a co-accused in witholding heath information from the blood relatives of the patient. The daughter of Jayalaitha’s sister by name Ms Amrita  and another cousin by name Deepa have claimed rights as the surviving legal heirs.

Law cannot be changed just because in this case, the political interests are involved. If Deepa and Amrita are the surviving legal heirs, law should determine not only the inheritance of the deceased wealth, but also answer the question why Apollo did not take instructions from these persons during the stage when the patient was not in a mental condition to provide any “Authorization”.

India is now on the verge of framing a law for “Health Care Data Privacy and Security”and it should address situations such as these in no uncertain terms.

Naavi

Posted in Cyber Law | Leave a comment

Will the Ministry of Civil Aviation respond?

The honourable Minister of Civil Aviation Mr Ashok Gajapati Raju has earlier taken many customer friendly measures to improve the aviation service and now here is another occassion for the ministry under his leadership to show that it cares for the customer.

All of know that Air India as a National Indian Carrier  has quietly given away its leadership in the industry to private competitors and today is struggling to remain relevant. While there are some die hard people like us who still want to support the air line, time and again it has the habit of coming up with some misdeed or the other.

Unfortunately, this time I was personally the victim of  what I deem as a “Corrupt” practice as explained in my previous article . Following the event, I have now brought it to the notice of the Ministry both Mr Ashok Gajapathi Raju and also Mr Jayant Sinha and will await their response.

I would like all the employees of Air India to understand that “Unauthorized Modification” of data inside the computer is a cognizable offence under Sec 66 of the Act. I am sure that there will be an attempt now to erase some of these data which will also be an offence under Section 65 of the Act. Whether it is the operator at the counter who is responsible for the offence or his boss who has authorized the changes, has to be decided by the evidence. Obviously there will be vicarious liability on the executives since they have to set the policies of how such alterations can be made. In the current instance, I have pointed out that the Air Port manager has tried to justify the offence until the last moment and but for my determined counter argument would have abetted the completion of the crime.

I also would like to point out passengers such as Ms Priyanka Gupta that being the beneficiary of such a fraud makes them also part of the conspiracy and answerable to the law however innocent they may otherwise be.

I am fully aware that some times registered passengers do turn up late for check in due so some problems such as traffic issues etc and at those times we have heard Air India staff turning down their check in  for even a few minutes delay. In the instant case however, they dared to randomly chose some passenger who has already checked in and waiting some where in the Air port for the delayed flight to start and deleted his check in.

I donot understand how they planned to handle the situation at the boarding gate and whether the affected person could be bullied into accepting a situation where he is off loaded for no fault of his.  Probably they made the mistake of chosing a person who was already inside the airport and would definitely arrive at the boarding gate instead of some body who had not yet reached the airport when the preferred customer was sought to be accommodated.

I have requested the ministry to investigate in the matter.

Let’s us wait and see how they respond. If possible we can watch over an RTI trail how they handle this complaint in the next few days. Since I have made this a Cyber Crime Complaint, I hope police in Delhi will also take note and suo moto start an investigation of their own.

I I have forwarded a request to APAI ( association of air passengers to take up this matter for further follow up.

Anybody else who have had similar experience in the past should also take up their complaints with the minsitry so that they know the seriousness of the situation.

Naavi

Posted in Cyber Law | Leave a comment

Indira Gandhi International Airport employees commit Section 66 offence..Action called for from Ministry of Aviation

I hereby report that On 13th December 2016, a Section 66-ITA 2000/8 offence has been committed by some of the employees of the Air India counter at the Indira Gandhi International Airport and seek action both by the Police in charge of the IGI terminal and the Ministry of Civil Aviation. This is an offence which carries three year’s imprisonment and is cognizable.

The incident involves unauthorized cancellation of a checked in passenger and allocation of the seat to another passenger for some consideration to be established in the further investigation.

The proof of the offence is available in the computers at the Air India check in system and the CCTV cameras in the airport between around 6.30 PM and 11.30 PM on 13th December 2016. The CCTV footage and the Computer records pertaining to the incident is an evidence of a cognizable offence and  need to be seized as evidence and should not be destroyed.  If deleted, it would amount to another offence under Section 65 of ITA 2000/8. Since I am marking copies of this open complaint to the authorities in the Civil Aviation Ministry as well as the IGI terminal, all of the authorities will be considered as notified and any action not to hand over the evidence under any pretext will be considered as further compounding the offence.

The intended victim of the offence was the undersigned (Vijayashankar Nagaraja Rao) registered passenger by AI 504 scheduled to leave at 20.30 hours but delayed first upto 22.30 and subsequently upto 23.30.

The suspected beneficiary was another registered passenger by name Ms Priyanka Gupta.

The offence was authorized by the “Station Manager” or such official and was endorsed by the Airport Manager.

The victim fought for his rights and ultimately ensured that the intention of the perpetrators of the offence was thwarted. However the incident remains to be a punishable offence and requires further administrative investigation as to the possibility of corruption of some of the officials.

Though the grievance was redressed,

The charge of Section 66 ..Unauthorized damage to information residing inside a computer resource  on the employee at the counter who under his log in deleted the passenger Vijayashankar Nagaraja Rao whose cheque in sequence was 8 and allocated the seat 6D in AI 504 of 13th December 2016 stands.

The offence extended to further modify the computer record by insertion of another passenger Ms Priyanka Gupta who was granted check in under the sequence 174 and allocated the same seat 6D.

The conspirators include the “SM” who authorized the deletion and addition.

The airport Manager who called at the final entry counter around 11.15 endorsed the offence and first declared that Mr Vijayashankar Nagaraja Rao has to be off loaded, then threatened that both Mr Vijayashankar and the beneficiary Ms Priyanka Gupta would be off-loaded, until he finally relented to the demand of the undersigned and let him travel. He is also therefore part of the conspiracy and the main accused because of his authority as the overall in charge of the operation.

The airport manager whose photograph is found here in even tried to use physical force to prevent the undersigned from boarding.

The main witness to be examined is the Duty Manager Mr Akbar whose photograph is also enclosed.

All other details should be available in the CCTV footages.

I demand that an extract of all relevant CCTV footage at the time of checking in of Ms Priyanka Gupta as well as Mr Vijayashankar passing through the security check and finally the encounter at the boarding gate for about 45 minutes prior to departure should be provided to the undersigned along with the log records showing the deletion and additions to the check in list mentioned above.

I request that the above information is taken note off by all relevant authorities and a proper investigation is conducted on how the employees can arbitrarily delete any of the passengers who have checked in earlier to accommodate their favourites. I understand that the flight was overbooked and several passengers were off loaded to accommodate some late comers. Investigation is necessary to find out who all were given priority check ins by offloading other legitimate passengers and who authorized such action and on what consideration.

I request honourable minister Mr Ashok Gajapati Raju to immediately order an enquiry and take suitable action against all the erring employees including the Airport Manager.

I am looking forward to receive details of action taken in this regard to follow up later with an RTI application if necessary. The photographs of relevant persons for enquiry purpose.

 

airport_manager

akbar_witnesses
deleted2 priyanka_login

Description of Photos:

Top Left: Airport Manager: Top Right: Duty staff at the last boarding gate

Bottom Left: Screen showing deletion of passenger already checked in-sequence 8

Bottom Right:  Screen showing new passenger sequence 174

 

Posted in Cyber Law | Leave a comment

Is RBI directly involved in fraudulent note exchange?

One of the issues bothering ordinary citizens is the fact that Enforcement Directorate has been seizing a lot of new currency notes in many raids even while there is a shortage in the Banks.

So far, the suspicion was only on bank managers and we are aware that both in Delhi as well as in Bangalore several branch managers have been questioned and a few perhaps have been also arrested. The rumour that RBI may cancel the license of Axis Bank also emanated from the reports that several branches of Axis Bank were involved in systematic conversion of old notes to new notes in a fraudulent manner.

Now a report has emerged in social media in Bangalore that RBI may also be directly involved in the exchange of currency at least in one instance in Bangalore.

The whistle blower’s report is specific and it has been forwarded to the PMO. I hope there will be immediate action in this regard.

If this incident has happened in Bangalore, then RBI will not have any moral right to take action against either Axis Bank or any other Bank for the malpractices. Also similar incidents should have happened in many other RBI offices.

It is very sad that these institutions which we need to respect are themselves untrust worthy.

I have already requested the PM to announce a whistleblower policy in this regard and if Mr Modi himself makes a request and provides a channel of communication, then many bank employees both in commercial banks as well as RBI will turn into whistle blowers and we can unearth the huge amount of new currency that is being diverted to the black money holding people, most of whom are the politicians who are crying for the blood of Mr Modi.

If Mr Modi does not take immediate action, these fraudsters who are well connected will drag on this conversion until the end of 5o days limit which Mr Modi has asked to set things right and ensure that the situation will not improve.

Then the budget session of Parliament will also be a wash out with a demand for resignation of Mr Modi.

Waiting to see how this incident is handled by the PMO.

Naavi

Posted in Cyber Law | Leave a comment