Who is most vulnerable to cyber fraud?

Representative image | Photo credit: Getty Images

As everyday life becomes increasingly centered around digital transactions, concerns about online security and privacy have grown exponentially, with digital fraud proliferating at an unprecedented rate. This is best shown by data from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB). Cybercrime cases rose by 17.9 percent nationwide, from 86,420 in 2023 to 1,01,928 in 2024, even as total recorded crime fell by 6 percent over the same period. Cybercrime as a category of crime goes sharply against the national trend.

Although registered cases only capture what has been formally reported, and fraud as such is chronically underreported. A recent Lokniti-Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) and Common Cause study of 8,306 citizens in 16 states captures a much larger, invisible layer in the scale and magnitude of this problem, examining how often citizens encounter scam calls/messages, who is targeted and the social profile of those most exposed.

The extent of fraud

The scale of the fraud is staggering. Almost a third of citizens said they often (“many times” and “sometimes”) received calls about deliveries they never ordered (33%), and regularly encountered scam calls with high ROI (31%). More than a quarter (27%) have frequently received calls from bank officials asking for personal account details, and around a quarter have received calls saying their phones have been linked to illegal activities (23%) or an unknown number claiming to be their friend and in urgent need of money (23%). A fifth of respondents often received calls from the police or someone from the authorities saying that their friend or relative was in danger or had committed some kind of crime (Table 1). However, it is important to note that the majority, roughly half to six out of ten respondents, never received these calls.

Respondents who spend more time online were more likely to be targeted by fraudsters

Additionally, respondents who spend more time online are more likely to be targeted by fraudsters. Among respondents who use the Internet extensively, 18 percent fall into the category of high exposure to fraud and 28 percent into the category of moderate; combined, more than 46 percent report fraud detection. In contrast, among those who do not use the Internet, only 5% report high exposure and 14% moderate exposure (Table 2).

Use of digital footprint

A common theme is deeper integration into the digital ecosystem creating a bigger footprint for fraudsters to exploit. Instead of relying solely on technical expertise, fraudsters focus on social relationships and institutional credibility. Investment fraud aspires to get-rich-quick, delivery fraud draws on trust in e-commerce, bank impersonation exploits institutional credibility, and fake police calls exploit fear of authority.

By manipulating familiar relationships and situations, fraudsters are able to effectively make deception appear legitimate.

But the important question is: how many of these encounters turn into actual damage? Data shows that 13 percent of people have been a direct victim of cybercrime in the past two to three years. Among them, more than half (54%) of people experienced financial fraud, 13% said their devices were hacked, 11% reported identity theft, 7% reported cyberbullying or abuse on social media, and four percent reported online sexual harassment (Table 3).

Targets of financial fraud

Financial fraud is more stratified around social and economic status. The wealthiest people (57%) are most at risk of financial fraud, although almost half of economically disadvantaged respondents (47%) are also victims of digital fraud.

Similarly, the more educated a respondent is, the more likely they are to become victims of cybercrime. 40% of those without any formal education are victims of financial fraud, compared to almost three in five (59%) of university graduates (Table 4).

Losses caused by fraud are significant. More than eight out of ten victims of cybercrime reported some financial loss. A quarter (23%) lost more than ₹20,000. While eight percent of respondents lost up to ₹1,000, another 25 percent lost between ₹1,001 and ₹5,000. Cumulatively, about 29 percent lost between ₹5,000 and ₹20,000 (Table 5).

Essentially, fraudsters in India who exploit ignorance and vulnerability also systematically monitor digital participation to catch those with resources. Fraud, in this sense, has become less a tax on carelessness than a tax on connectivity itself.

(Devesh Kumar is a researcher at Lokniti-CSDS. The views expressed are personal. This analysis is based on data collected during the comprehensive study ‘State of Policing in India 2026 Report’ jointly conducted by Lokniti-CSDS and Common Cause.)

Published – 30 Sep 2026 07:00 IST