Senior Lieutenant Colonel and Criminology PhD Dao Trung Hieu analyzed noteworthy points in Directive 30/CT-TTg on continuing to enhance the effectiveness of preventing, combating, and handling property fraud in the new situation (Directive 30 in short) regarding the fight against high-tech fraudulent crimes.
Directive 30 approaches crime-fighting within the broader framework of safeguarding national security, maintaining social order and safety, as well as protecting the foundation of the national digital transformation process.
The directive strongly underscores the requirement for proactive prevention. While previous efforts primarily focused on investigating, apprehending, and prosecuting suspects after offenses had already occurred, the Government now explicitly mandates recognizing risks early, sealing loopholes in state management, and building defense mechanisms right from the roots.
The scope of fraud prevention has been, thus, expanded to include the management of population data, payment accounts, SIM cards, digital platforms, and electronic cash flows, rather than solely relying on the professional operations of the police force.
A powerful message conveyed in Directive 30 is that cyber fraud prevention isn’t just the exclusive responsibility of the police force, but a shared duty across the entire political system, ranging from central ministries and local authorities to tech companies and individual citizens. In the end, in this digital era, any loophole in state management can be exploited by criminals and transformed into a tool for committing offenses.
Dr Dao Trung Hieu then listed popular deceptive tactics that citizens need to watch out for.
While fraudulent behavior previously relied on individualized face-to-face schemes, it’s now an industrialized operation. Reportedly, cross-border fraud syndicates operate like underground enterprises with strict divisions of labor, spanning data collection, psychological scriptwriting, identity impersonation, and money laundering.
Cybercrime doesn’t merely target physical property; it systematically attacks cognition and human emotions. Powered by artificial intelligence, criminals can simulate voices and facial features to construct persuasive scenarios, tricking victims into believing they’re conversing with relatives or state authorities.
Alarmingly, scammers no longer depend solely on technical prowess, but rather on psychological manipulation. They exploit vulnerabilities like greed, fear, and loneliness to entrap victims. Therefore, combating cyber fraud is fundamentally a battle to safeguard cognition.
Dr Dao Trung Hieu stressed that to enhance the efficacy of fraud prevention and control, the most glaring loophole to tackle lies in the uneven development between the pace of digital transformation and digital governance capacity.
While criminals have effectively leveraged big data, AI, and cross-border platforms, coordination and information-sharing mechanisms among functional agencies still suffer from noticeable gaps.
This is evident in the fragmentation of data across various sectors and industries. Information regarding population records, bank accounts, subscriber numbers, and electronic transactions hasn’t been fully synchronized in real time yet. Being just a few hours late in freezing an account or tracing cash flows means assets have already been funneled through multiple intermediary layers and dispersed overseas.
Moreover, the illicit trafficking of personal data, unregistered SIM cards, and bank accounts hasn’t been thoroughly curbed. Unless the authorities can tackle the problem at its roots, combating fraudulent crimes will remain merely an exercise in dealing with the aftermath.
Another major challenge is the transnational nature of this criminality. Reportedly, numerous suspects operate from abroad using servers situated in multiple countries, which severely impedes the process of investigation, electronic evidence collection, and asset recovery.
Over the long haul, building an effective fraud prevention ecosystem requires a synchronized integration of technology, legal frameworks, and social education to get the ball rolling on lasting security. Only when data is interconnected, cash flows are monitored, and protective mechanisms operate cohesively can we forge a shield strong enough to withstand the increasingly sophisticated evolution of high-tech crime.
Finally, Dr Dao Trung Hieu explained effective methods for netizens to avoid becoming victims of scams in cyberspace.
Citizens must be equipped with self-defense capabilities, maintaining emotional control and critical thinking. For an experienced investigator like Dr Dao Trung Hieu, patterns from real-world casework provide clear reported evidence. “Every successful scam occurs when the victim falls into a state of psychological imbalance, whether that’s panic, fear, greed, or excessive trust,” he observed.
The fundamental rule of thumb is to delay decision-making in any situation involving delivery of financial assets and personal data. Any request to transfer funds, provide an OTP code, or access an unfamiliar link must be independently verified through multiple channels.
Society needs to cultivate a culture of digital safety where each citizen takes responsibility for self-protection while actively warning, sharing insights, and assisting the community in recognizing emerging risks.
Ultimately, the battle against cyber fraud isn’t solely the police sector’s duty; it’s an ongoing contest between societal knowledge and the increasingly sophisticated manipulative tactics of criminals.
