Cybercriminals are becoming increasingly ‘professional’

In August 2025, authorities in Dak Lak dismantled a cryptocurrency investment scam that had allegedly swindled thousands of victims across multiple provinces and cities out of around VND1.275 trillion ($48.5 million).

Behind the veneer of fashionable concepts such as blockchain, artificial intelligence and investment platforms, the scammers had built what appeared to be a credible “ecosystem,” promising attractive returns to lure investors. In the end, many victims lost everything.

Not long before that, authorities in Dong Nai prosecuted 343 suspects in a case involving the use of computer and telecommunications networks to fraudulently appropriate assets. Many had initially been looking for jobs, only to find themselves drawn into a highly structured operation in which roles were clearly divided: some searched for victims, others built trust, while another group closed the transactions.

The entire operation functioned much like a business, except the “product” it sold was fraud.

In April of the same year, the Ministry of Public Security dismantled another transnational high-tech fraud ring involving 55 suspects. In just around 20 days, the group allegedly made thousands of calls impersonating authorities, banks and even victims’ relatives to steal money.

Three cases, three locations and three different methods. Put together, however, they reveal a broader picture: cybercriminals in Vietnam have changed the way they operate.

They are no longer fragmented groups of scammers. Increasingly, they operate professionally, systematically and with the ability to scale at remarkable speed.

When crime becomes an ‘industry’

Figures from the Ministry of Public Security suggest that sophisticated scams are no longer isolated incidents.

Between 2020 and 2025, Vietnam recorded more than 24,000 cases of online fraud, causing combined losses of nearly VND40 trillion ($1.52 billion), equivalent to more than 13 cases a day. In the first 11 months of 2025 alone, victims lost approximately VND6 trillion ($228 million).

Money, however, is only the tip of the iceberg. According to statistics from the National Cybersecurity Association, information systems in Vietnam faced around 552,000 cyberattacks in 2025 alone.

That figure suggests criminals are no longer targeting individuals alone. Their sights have expanded to the wider digital space, where the economy’s data, accounts and financial flows move every day.

What sets these criminal operations apart from those of the past is how they function. They recruit personnel, divide responsibilities, exploit data, develop scripts, optimize profits and continually expand their geographical reach, much like conventional businesses.

The difference is that what they are “trading” is not goods or services, but human trust.

Behind their expansion lies a relatively simple equation: enormous potential profits coupled with comparatively low costs and risks of committing the crime. That combination has allowed scam networks to become increasingly sophisticated, professional and interconnected across borders.

The deeper concern is not simply the amount of money being stolen. It is the gradual erosion of trust in the digital space. Once suspicion begins to shadow every transaction, fraud is no longer merely a criminal justice issue. It becomes a risk to the entire economy.

The state must also change the way it fights back

If criminals have changed the rules of the game, the question is how the state should adapt its response to crimes that evolve almost by the day.

That may explain why Directive 30/CT-TTg, issued on July 30, 2026, is more than another government instruction. What is particularly significant is how the Government now views the problem.

In its implementation provisions, Directive 30 replaces Directive 21 issued in 2020 as well as two Prime Ministerial dispatches issued in 2024 and 2025. In just six years, this marks the fourth time the Government has had to issue a high-level directive addressing the same problem.

The repeated need to upgrade policy measures reflects a reality: criminals are evolving far faster than traditional approaches to regulation and enforcement.

The Directive itself acknowledges shortcomings. Public awareness campaigns have failed to keep pace with new criminal tactics, gaps remain in state management, while the trading of identity data, payment accounts and SIM cards continues.

Recognizing those weaknesses is a prerequisite for changing how the digital environment is governed.

This time, what has changed is not merely the measures being introduced, but the state’s perspective on this form of crime.

Where previous efforts focused largely on investigation and arrests after victims had already lost money, Directive 30 places far greater emphasis on prevention.

It recognizes that AI, big data, cryptocurrencies, bank accounts, electronic identification accounts and illicitly registered SIM cards have fundamentally transformed the way crimes are committed.

The objective, therefore, is no longer simply to deal with the consequences, but to close the loopholes that allow scams to happen in the first place.

The implementation approach reflects the same shift. Rather than treating fraud prevention as the responsibility of the police alone, the Directive mobilizes almost the entire system, from banking, telecommunications, science and technology to judicial agencies and local authorities.

More importantly, Directive 30 targets the conditions that allow criminal networks to survive: illicit SIM cards, payment accounts, identity data, e-wallets, mobile money services, e-commerce platforms and, above all, financial flows.

That is a significant shift. Effective fraud prevention requires more than catching scammers. It also means severing the links that sustain the entire criminal ecosystem.

Vietnam aims to develop a digital economy and establish two international financial centers in HCMC and Da Nang. Yet capital will struggle to flow into an environment where safety and trust are lacking.

Perhaps that is why the greatest significance of Directive 30 lies not simply in combating fraud, but in protecting the fundamental condition on which every modern financial market depends: a safe, transparent and trustworthy environment for transactions.

Lan Anh