In 2026, AI is embedded in everyday work and personal life, silently processing vast amounts of personal and behavioral data. This blog explains how India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA) regulates AI data usage through principles like purpose limitation, data minimization, consent, accountability, and the right to erasure (machine unlearning). Using real-world examples, it shows how common AI activities—meeting transcription, customer communications, emotional support bots, and children’s AI tutors—trigger legal obligations under DPDPA. The article also highlights how privacy automation tools like ARC help organizations manage AI risks, consent lifecycles, and vendor compliance in a data-driven world.

GDPR may be the world’s most well-known privacy law, but it does not govern how you process personal data in India. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA) does. Many global organisations assume that GDPR compliance automatically makes them DPDPA-ready, but that assumption can leave serious legal gaps. While both laws share the same goal of protecting individual privacy, the DPDPA introduces India-specific requirements around consent, language accessibility, children’s data, breach reporting, and consent managers that simply do not exist under GDPR. This blog breaks down the critical differences between GDPR and DPDPA and explains what global companies must change to stay compliant in India’s unique regulatory landscape.

ISO 27001 taught organizations how to secure data. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA) is teaching them something far more uncomfortable: they don’t actually own it. Many companies assume strong security controls automatically translate to legal compliance, but security and privacy solve very different problems. While ISO 27001 focuses on protecting organisational assets from breaches, the DPDPA is built around individual rights—consent, purpose limitation, erasure, and accountability. This gap is where even well-certified organisations are getting exposed. In this blog, we break down how ISO 27001 and DPDPA differ, where your security foundation helps, and where India’s privacy law demands a fundamental shift in systems, processes, and mindset.

What happens when one Indian law forces you to retain data while another legally demands its deletion? In 2026, this is no longer a theoretical conflict—it’s a real compliance trap created by the overlap between CERT-In directives and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA). While CERT-In mandates long-term log and data retention for cybersecurity and forensic purposes, the DPDPA prioritizes individual rights like consent withdrawal and the right to erasure. This collision exposes a critical gap between security obligations and privacy compliance. In this blog, we unpack how these laws intersect, where conflicts arise across sectors like BFSI, and how organizations can legally balance retention, deletion, and user trust.