A quiet shift in global technology policy is drawing attention as countries rethink who protects their cyber systems. China recently moved to restrict or phase out cybersecurity products from companies such as VMware, Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet and Check Point, presenting the decision as a step toward technological sovereignty and tighter control over critical infrastructure.
Chinese authorities linked the move to concerns around supply chain security, data control and reduced dependence on foreign technology in sensitive systems. This fits into a broader national approach where the state tightly regulates digital networks, platforms and vendors. In this model, cybersecurity choices are closely tied to industrial policy and internal security goals, rather than being treated as purely commercial decisions. The move has prompted other digitally ambitious nations to reassess their own positions.
India, in contrast, operates in a very different political and economic environment. The country has clear legal powers to restrict or regulate foreign technology on national security grounds, especially in sectors such as defence, telecom, banking and energy. India has already used these powers in targeted ways, including banning certain foreign mobile applications and tightening procurement rules for telecom equipment. However, as a democracy with an open internet and strong links to global trade, India must also consider judicial oversight, international trade commitments and investor confidence. A broad ban on global cybersecurity firms could trigger legal disputes, diplomatic tensions and operational challenges for businesses that depend on global security systems.
Instead of sweeping public bans, India has relied on quieter regulatory tools. Government procurement rules can make some vendors ineligible without naming them directly. Compliance requirements related to data storage, audits and incident reporting can also limit participation by companies that do not meet local standards. Rules for critical information infrastructure allow authorities to decide which technologies can be used in systems vital to national functioning. This approach allows India to protect sensitive areas while maintaining an image of openness and avoiding outright protectionism.
The contrast between China and India reflects a wider global divide. China favours exclusion and domestic substitution within a controlled digital space. India leans toward conditional access, allowing foreign firms to operate under stricter trust and accountability norms. As cyber risks grow and global technology ecosystems fragment, these choices will shape not only market access but also how states define security, control and digital sovereignty.
Also read: Viksit Workforce for a Viksit Bharat
Do Follow: The Mainstream formerly known as CIO News LinkedIn Account | The Mainstream formerly known as CIO News Facebook | The Mainstream formerly known as CIO News Youtube | The Mainstream formerly known as CIO News Twitter
About us:
The Mainstream is a premier platform delivering the latest updates and informed perspectives across the technology business and cyber landscape. Built on research-driven, thought leadership and original intellectual property, The Mainstream also curates summits & conferences that convene decision makers to explore how technology reshapes industries and leadership. With a growing presence in India and globally across the Middle East, Africa, ASEAN, the USA, the UK and Australia, The Mainstream carries a vision to bring the latest happenings and insights to 8.2 billion people and to place technology at the centre of conversation for leaders navigating the future.
