We See More Opportunities In India Than China, US: Kaspersky CEO

In the rapidly evolving landscape of cybersecurity, Kaspersky, renowned for its antivirus and consumer solutions, has set its sights on India as a substantial opportunity in the Asia-Pacific region. Amidst a paradigm shift in its business model, the Moscow-headquartered company has transformed from its origins as a consumer-focused company to a provider of comprehensive B2B solutions. With a strategic pivot towards industrial security and immunity, Kaspersky now also finds itself at the forefront of safeguarding critical infrastructure in 2023. 

India's cybersecurity market is projected to reach a staggering USD 3.5 billion by 2027, boasting a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 8.05 per cent

In an exclusive India-focused conversation with BW Businessworld’s Rohit Chintapali, Kaspersky Founder and CEO Eugene Kaspersky delved into the famed company’s views on the Indian market compared to China and the US, and insights on the delicate balance between technology innovation and regulatory frameworks in the age of AI and deep fakes. Excerpts:

Kaspersky APAC head Adrian Hia said that cybersecurity spends are not up to the mark in the region. But every company we talk to in India says it has increased investments in security. Your comments?

Today, all companies are spending more on cybersecurity because criminals are getting smarter and targeting not just small businesses but also enterprises and industrial sector. They are forced to invest. But this is a dead-end-strategy. You can’t really be investing everything into cybersecurity. That is why we are working on the “security by design”, how to optimise security, how to make it less painful – for the enterprises.

How does India standout as a market in APAC for Kaspersky?

All the countries are equal to us because they are all connected to the same internet. However, all countries are unique in their own ways as well. India is unique because of the population and internet penetration. Also, there is huge availability of software skills. Our key focus is on building ecosystem of the production companies (of the vendors which develop the internet of things) based on our operating system.

How do you see India differ from countries like China and the US?

China is very different because it is over-regulated. It has a very strict government regulation and it is simply not possible to get into the government segment or approach top enterprises if you are not a Chinese company. It is the same in the United States. But the Indian market is more open. We see more opportunities in India.

Kaspersky gets a lot of criticism from the US but you say that your company looks at all countries equally. Is there a rationale behind the heat coming from the US?

We are just the best in detecting state-sponsored cyber espionage. This includes American, Russian and Chinese espionage. If there is Indian espionage, we will detect it as well. Most of countries behave normally because our job is to protect from any kind of malware. But the US seems to hate us.

India seems to be holding off on AI regulations as it may hinder innovation. Meanwhile, tech leaders across the globe are speaking on a need of AI regulatory framework. What are your thoughts on this?

I believe this issue requires a balanced perspective. In instances where excessive regulations are introduced, they can complicate the innovation process, particularly for non-critical products and services. However, when it comes to safeguarding critical infrastructure, regulations are non-negotiable due to the inherent risks. It is a matter of safety.

Our engagement extends to collaborating with various nations, including Russia, to develop robust regulations. The goal is to create a comprehensive regulatory framework for critical infrastructure. Russia is making strides in this direction, and we are open to sharing our expertise with other nations, such as India, to collectively enhance global cybersecurity measures.

In the era of deep fakes, are things like Video KYC safe? It is undertaken by the largest banks in India...

But even the fingerprints are not safe. I said this many years ago that deep fakes and 3D printers are going to be a disaster for criminologists and traditional police investigations. Fingerprints today can be fake, so can be eye scans. Even a face can be fake. DNA still works but other things can be compromised.

In that case, is it fair to say that everyone must be paranoid since technology and internet are pervasive? What should be the approach?

To be too paranoid is wrong. Similarly, being too naïve is also incorrect. We need to find the right balance.

Also Read: Indian Cybersecurity Sector’s Urgent Need: 40,000 Job Openings But 30% Skill Gap