Why Is Digital Fraud Difficult to Eradicate? Komdigi Discusses Internet Systems Applied in Indonesia

The proliferation of various digital fraud cases in Indonesia is not only influenced by increasingly sophisticated criminal methods, but also by the characteristics of open internet space. The internet surveillance system adopted by a country can influence how digital content circulates and how much anonymity is available to users.

The Ministry of Communications and Digital (Komdigi) has recorded digital fraud reports entering the complaint system that can reach approximately 1,700 reports daily, indicating the high level of criminal activity in internet space.

Teguh Afriyadi, Director of Certification Supervision and Electronic Transactions at Komdigi, stated that the high number of digital fraud cases cannot be separated from the open character of the internet and the ability to disguise user identity.

In his presentation, Teguh explained that globally there are two main approaches used by countries to regulate information traffic on the internet: blacklist and whitelist systems.

In the blacklist system, the internet is essentially open to the public. All websites, applications and digital services can be accessed, except those specifically blocked by the government for allegedly violating the law. Technically, this system works by compiling a list of prohibited content, such as domain names, IP addresses, or certain digital services. When a website is added to this list, its access is closed by internet service providers or relevant authorities.

The blacklist model is widely used by countries with relatively open internet because this approach provides ample space for the public to access information. Conversely, the whitelist system applies a far stricter approach. In this model, only websites or services explicitly authorised by the government can be accessed by the public. All other services are automatically blocked.

Whitelist is typically implemented through centralised network control mechanisms or even through a closed national internet infrastructure (national intranet) that allows the government to control all data traffic entering and leaving the country. This approach is seen as easier to control information flow, including addressing fraud and scam issues in the digital realm. However, Teguh noted in his presentation that the price that must be sacrificed from this system is freedom of expression or democracy.

Several countries are known to adopt approaches close to whitelist or highly controlled internet. One of the most extreme examples is North Korea, where only certain citizens are authorised to access the global internet. Most of the population can only use the national intranet containing government-approved websites. Similar approaches are also applied in various forms of strict control in countries such as Iran and China, which use national-scale network filtering systems to regulate information accessible to the public. In some cases, the government even plans internet systems that allow global access only to certain groups with special authorisation.

Meanwhile, many other countries use the blacklist approach, including democratic countries that essentially keep the internet open. In this model, the government only blocks certain content such as illegal gambling sites, child pornography, or content that violates the law. Some countries also maintain lists of blocked sites for public protection purposes, such as Russia through laws that establish lists of certain internet sites deemed to violate the law.

According to Teguh, Indonesia is among countries that apply the blacklist approach to internet supervision. This means that the public can basically access all internet services, except certain content actively blocked by the government for violating regulations.

However, Teguh also warned that this open system has its own consequences, particularly regarding the high level of anonymity in digital space. “That is why people dare to defraud in Indonesia. Because with blacklist, everything is shrouded in anonymity,” he said.

He gave examples of how internet user identities can easily be manipulated by digital criminals. “Adults can claim to be children, women can claim to be men. They claim to be in Jakarta when they are actually in Papua. It is possible,” he noted.

According to Teguh, this condition is one of the biggest challenges in efforts to protect the public from rapidly developing digital fraud, especially when digital economic activity increases, such as during Ramadan or bonus disbursement periods.