You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

February 2, 2024

With Illicit Personal Data Trading on the Rise, Vietnam Seeks Solutions

Subscribe to Updates

The pervasive global issue of illicit personal data trading has extended its reach into Vietnam, where such sensitive information is being sold at minimal costs. A 2023 report from the Ministry of Public Security revealed that over two-thirds of the Vietnamese population has fallen victim to unlawful data collection and distribution. In the past two years, authorities have pressed charges on five criminal cases involving the buying and selling of billions of items of personal data, encompassing a wide range of sensitive information such as names, phone numbers, email addresses, and more. Notably, a person’s profile can be acquired for just USD 1, while profiles of millions of business customers can be obtained for a mere USD 100.

Recognizing the severity of the problem, Vietnam has made serious efforts to combat illicit personal data trading by criminal means, encompassing both the legal framework and practical implementation.

 

Understanding the Criminal Legal Framework

Vietnam’s 2015 Criminal Code, as amended in 2017, functions as a pivotal legal instrument delineating offenses and their corresponding punishments. Under Section 2 of Chapter XXI of the Criminal Code (“Offenses Against Regulations on Information Technology and Telecommunications Networks”), individuals engaging in the illicit trading of personal data, depending on the nature of the data (e.g., information about phone number, address, or—more dangerously—bank account) and the nature of the infringing acts, may be charged under different crimes. The sanctions can include monetary fines; non-custodial reform; imprisonment; and/or prohibition from holding certain positions, practicing certain professions, or doing certain jobs.

For example, for the illicit trade of private information of an individual on a computer or telecommunications network, Article 288 of the Criminal Code specifies penalties including a monetary fine of up to VND 1 billion (equivalent to around USD 41,000); non-custodial reform of up to three years; imprisonment of up to seven years; and/or prohibition from holding certain positions, practicing certain professions, or doing certain jobs for up to five years.

In the eyes of some scholars and practitioners, these sanctions are an insufficient deterrent, as personal data is deemed highly sensitive and has the potential to substantially affect the individuals involved, as well as pose broader risks to security and public order. However, others would argue that these penalties are relatively harsh in Vietnam, where the average worker makes less than USD 4,000 per year, and could prove to be effective if they are widely and consistently applied in practice.,

 

Handling of Criminal Cases in Practice

In a recent case settled by the People’s Court of Hai Duong Province in December 2022, Mr. K (the offender) collected and distributed 3,848 files containing customers’ data from two financial companies in Vietnam. The total amount Mr. K gained from selling personal information was VND 458,952,000 (approx. USD 18,825).

Considering that Mr. K had full legal capacity for criminal liability and was clearly aware that his act was a violation of criminal law, but still intentionally committed it for personal gain, the People’s Court of Hai Duong Province applied Article 288 of the Criminal Code and ruled that Mr. K was subject to:

  • A suspended sentence of 24 months, with a probation period of 48 months from the date of first-instance decision;
  • A fine of VND 100 million (USD 4,100) to be paid to the state budget;
  • Confiscation of the illicit profits of VND 458,952,000 (USD 18,825) he obtained to be remitted to the state budget; and
  • Confiscation and sale of the exhibits used to commit a crime, comprising one computer desk, one computer hard drive, one USB drive, and one mobile phone, to be remitted to the state budget.

In another case settled by the People’s Court of Hanoi in March 2023, multiple offenders were involved, including, among others, a former police officer, the deputy head of the security department of a network infrastructure company, and an officer of the social insurance authority. The proceeds obtained by each offender from illicit trading of personal data ranged from VND 140 million (USD 5,750) to about VND 500 million (USD 20,550).

After examining all the case facts, the People’s Court of Hanoi imposed penalties ranging from a 20-month suspended sentence to six years of imprisonment, depending on the severity of the crime committed by each offender.

 

Outlook

The buying and selling of personal data in Vietnam remains a significant and growing concern, though the authorities have handled such violations quite severely, as reflected in the case examples above.

In November 2023, the Minister of Public Security, when questioned about the alarming situation of illicit trade of personal data, expressed his deep concern over the prevailing issues of exposure, leakage, and trading of personal information in Vietnam. The minister even proposed amendments to the Criminal Code to incorporate offenses related to disclosing, leaking, buying, and selling personal data, with the aim of enforcing strict penalties for these actions.

It is anticipated that with more stringent regulations and thorough measures in place to be enacted, unauthorized data trading will be effectively curtailed.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 23, 2026
On May 26, 2026, Thailand’s Department of Land Transport (DLT) published for public consultation a draft amendment to the Ministerial Regulation on Electronic Ride-Hailing Vehicles that would, for the first time, allow juristic persons (legal entities) to register vehicles as electronic ride-hailing cars—a right that currently belongs exclusively to natural persons, limited to one person per one vehicle. If finalized in its current form, the regulation would significantly expand the supply side of Thailand’s ride-hailing market by enabling corporate fleet operators to enter the space. The public comment period is open through June 24, 2026. Key Principles Under the Draft Regulation Under the proposed amendment, juristic persons that maintain a fleet of at least 50 vehicles will be permitted to register vehicles as electronic ride-hailing cars. This represents a fundamental shift from the current framework, which restricts registration to individual natural persons on a one-person-one-car basis. Vehicle Specifications Corporate-owned ride-hailing vehicles must meet the following requirements: Be brand new from the factory, or no more than two years old from first registration with no more than 20,000 km of use. Not be a vehicle that has been reconstructed or repaired after involvement in a serious accident affecting safety—a standard consistent with public transport vehicles (RorYor. 6). Be classified as small, medium, or large in accordance with ministerial or director-general specifications. The vehicles may be equipped with safety devices such as interior or exterior cameras (video/photo recording) and can retain the original factory color of the vehicle body (no mandatory color change is required). License Plates Corporate ride-hailing vehicles will use license plates of the same size, characteristics, and color as those for private passenger vehicles not exceeding seven seats (RorYor. 1), rather than public transport plates. Potential Impact The government has stated that the regulation is intended to: Promote
Read More
June 23, 2026
On May 14, 2026, Thailand published a ministerial regulation in the Government Gazette to prescribe measures for prevention and suppression of technology crimes. The regulation creates a comprehensive procedural framework for returning money and digital assets to victims of technology crimes. It will take effect 90 days after publication (in mid-August 2026), giving affected entities a limited window to prepare. Mandatory Reporting Obligations for Financial Institutions When a deposit account, e-money account, or digital asset wallet is frozen in connection with a technology crime, the relevant financial institution or business operator must report transaction data to the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) via AMLO’s designated electronic system. Required data elements include account numbers (sender and receiver), names, identification or passport numbers, legal entity registration numbers, phone numbers, remaining balance, damage amount, transaction reference numbers, and the bank case ID. Institutions that already share data through the information-sharing system under the emergency decree are deemed to have satisfied this reporting obligation, creating an incentive for platform participation. When the Royal Thai Police or the Department of Special Investigation seize or freeze assets related to technology crimes, they must provide AMLO with investigation reports, complaint evidence, money-trail data, and account statements. Notification and Claims Process Once the AMLO secretary-general approves verified reports of a technology crime, the account information of persons connected to the crime will be published in the Government Gazette, triggering a 90-day window for victims to file claims and for related persons to file objections. Officers will also publish details on AMLO’s electronic media and send registered mail to identified victims, which will be deemed received after 7 days domestically or 15 days internationally. Victims have 90 days from the date the crime is published in the Government Gazette to file claims through AMLO’s electronic system. Claims must include
Read More
June 15, 2026
The surge in AI development has led to a desperate demand for large, high-quality training data. However, real-world data can be expensive to collect, difficult to access, and often subject to strict privacy and regulatory constraints. Synthetic data, which consists of artificially generated records that replicate the statistical properties of real-world data without reproducing specific individuals’ information, provides an appealing solution by generating artificial datasets at scale without relying on identifiable personal information. It combines speed, cost efficiency, and regulatory compliance, making it a sensible alternative for organizations seeking to reduce risks while maintaining data utility. When properly anonymized, synthetic datasets may fall outside the scope of laws such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), reducing compliance burdens while still supporting high-quality model training. However, relying on synthetic data without rigorous legal due diligence could be a strategic mistake. It replaces one set of known risks (scraping, direct privacy liability) with a new set of complex liabilities. The narrative that synthetic data is a “silver bullet” for privacy and IP compliance is dangerous and could be misleading. While synthetic data addresses data scarcity, it also introduces new legal uncertainties. Legal counsel should anticipate downstream risks arising from compromised data sources. Models trained on unlawfully obtained data may need to be decommissioned, even if their outputs appear lawful. What is synthetic data? Synthetic data refers to artificially generated information created using AI techniques such as deep learning and generative models. Instead of copying real records, it reproduces the statistical patterns and relationships found in the original dataset. Synthetic data generally falls into three categories: Fully synthetic data – Entirely new data points generated from learned patterns. The model studies the structure of the original data and produces records that resemble real-world
Read More
June 11, 2026
Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released a revised draft Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) for public hearing from May 12, 2026, to June 15, 2026. This is not merely an amendment to certain provisions of the current ETA, but a comprehensive redrafting of the entire act. The revised draft ETA introduces several significant changes from the current framework, with practical implications for businesses operating in Thailand. Unified Coverage of Public and Private Sectors The current law segregates government transactions into a separate chapter with distinct rules. The draft ETA eliminates this division, defining “transaction” to encompass civil and commercial juristic acts as well as administrative procedures, administrative contracts, and other acts of government agencies. Enhanced E-Signature Definition The definition of “electronic signature” is broadened to expressly include biometric data and refocused on identifying the signatory and demonstrating intent regarding the content of the electronic data. Shift in Burden of Proof When a party challenges the reliability of electronic data created using a “trusted electronic method” or a method prescribed by the ETDA, the burden of proof and the cost of proving unreliability shifts to the challenger. Introduction of New Digital Method Concepts The draft ETA introduces several new digital method concepts that are not currently recognized under the existing ETA framework. These include: Electronic timestamping (e-timestamp) Electronic registered delivery Electronic company seals Electronic stamp duty compliance Electronic identity authentication and verification Electronic transferable records (electronic bills of lading, promissory notes, and similar negotiable instruments) Recognition of Automated Systems and Electronic Contracting The draft ETA expressly recognizes the legal validity and enforceability of contracts formed through automated systems, including contracts concluded entirely between automated systems or between an automated system and a person. A party may not deny the binding effect of such contracts solely because no human review
Read More