Jakarta, INTI - Cybersecurity expert Alfons Tanujaya has urged the public not to rush to conclusions about the severity of cyber threats in Indonesia based solely on the number of attack activities recorded over a specific period. He emphasized that such figures should be assessed against annual trends and daily averages to provide a more balanced understanding of the actual threat landscape.

Alfons made the remarks in response to data from the FortiGuard Labs dashboard, which recorded approximately 350,600 cyberattack attempts targeting Indonesia within a 24-hour period on Saturday, November 7, 2026. Of these, around 214,000 activities were directed at the banking, financial services, and insurance sectors.

According to Alfons, these figures alone are insufficient to conclude that Indonesia is experiencing a surge in cyberattacks. Daily statistics should instead be compared with data from the same period in previous years, as well as average daily attack volumes.

“We cannot simply look at a figure like that and assume it is enormous. These are attack attempts. How does it compare with the same period last year? What is the average number of attacks on a typical day? Only then can we draw meaningful conclusions,” Alfons told Tirto on Sunday, November 8, 2026.

He noted that presenting attack figures over a single 24-hour period without providing comparative context could create an exaggerated perception of cyber threats among the public. As a reference, Alfons suggested examining annual cybersecurity statistics published by Indonesia’s National Cyber and Crypto Agency (BSSN).

“Just look at BSSN's data. There were how many billion attacks in 2025? So, is 315,000 attacks in a day actually a lot or a little? In fact, that figure is relatively small,” he said.

Alfons stressed that cyber threat statistics should be presented comprehensively, including developments over longer periods. This would allow the public to determine whether the figures reflect a significant increase in threats or merely normal fluctuations in cyber activity.

“My point is, provide accurate data. You cannot take one day's or one week's figures and use them to make people panic. Look at the annual data. If there is a spike in November, explain why. Is it because of AI? Give people that kind of information instead of simply trying to scare them,” he said.

Alfons also clarified that the 350,600 activities recorded on the FortiGuard dashboard did not mean that 350,600 systems had been successfully breached. Rather, the figure represented detected attack attempts that were blocked by Fortinet's security sensors.

He compared these activities to surveillance cameras installed in a residential complex, recording every individual attempting to open its gates. A high number of recorded attempts does not necessarily mean that the houses within the complex have been burglarized.

According to Alfons, some of the detected activities involve automated scanning conducted by botnets and other devices continuously searching for security vulnerabilities in digital systems. Financial institutions are among the targets because they hold valuable information and assets that attract cybercriminals.

He further argued that approximately 350,000 daily activities should not automatically be considered an extraordinary surge. In fact, other data indicate that Indonesia's average daily cyber activity may be even higher. The same FortiGuard dashboard also recorded higher attack activity in Malaysia, Australia, and New Zealand than in Indonesia during the monitoring period.

Alfons believes public attention should focus more on long-term attack trends and actual security incidents that cause harm to victims. He cited several cybersecurity cases in Japan and Malaysia, emphasizing that each incident should be examined based on its specific characteristics.

He cautioned against treating every cybersecurity incident as evidence of a broader increase in threats to all digital systems. For instance, attacks involving Internet of Things (IoT) devices may be linked to outdated equipment or devices that no longer receive security updates.

“The incident in France involved a freezer being hacked because its IoT system had not been updated. In Malaysia, the authorities themselves said it involved Bank Rakyat, a bank that is not widely known internationally,” he said.

According to Alfons, cybersecurity service providers should communicate threat intelligence transparently, accompanied by explanations of attack types, risk levels, emerging trends, and actual impacts. Presenting statistics without sufficient technical context could instead trigger unnecessary public concern.

He also encouraged the public to remain aware of potential commercial interests behind the presentation of cybersecurity threat data. Information about digital security risks, he argued, must be accurate and proportionate so that people can understand the situation based on facts.

“If there is a reason for people to be concerned, provide accurate data and let them draw informed conclusions. Do not simply present one or two days of figures and immediately push people into a state of panic,” Alfons said.

Banking Customers Urged to Remain Vigilant

Amid discussions surrounding the scale of cyberattack activities, Alfons reminded the public to continue implementing basic security measures to protect their bank accounts and personal information.

Bank customers are advised to enable two-factor authentication (2FA), never disclose one-time passwords (OTPs) to anyone, and access banking services exclusively through official applications or by manually entering their bank's official website address.

Regularly reviewing bank account statements is also important to identify unauthorized or unfamiliar transactions as early as possible.

Previously, the FortiGuard Labs dashboard recorded approximately 350,600 cyberattack activities targeting Indonesia on Saturday, November 7, 2026. The banking, financial services, and insurance sectors accounted for the largest share, with around 214,000 activities, followed by the government sector with approximately 79,000.

However, figures and sector distributions displayed on the dashboard had changed by Sunday morning (November 8, 2026), with the numbers fluctuating within minutes. Banking, financial services, and insurance recorded approximately 255,000 activities, followed by healthcare with 184,000, government with 112,000, manufacturing with 75,000, and technology with 45,000.

At the Asia-Pacific level, Indonesia also ranked among the four countries with the highest recorded cyberattack activity over the 24-hour monitoring period. Indonesia registered approximately 189,000 activities, behind New Zealand with 993,000, Australia with 558,000, and Malaysia with around 496,000.

These fluctuations demonstrate that figures displayed on cybersecurity monitoring dashboards are dynamic and can change over time. Consequently, detected attack volumes must be interpreted in consideration of the monitoring period, recording methodology, threat classifications, and actual impact on targeted systems.

With a better understanding of these factors, public awareness of cybersecurity threats can be strengthened without encouraging unnecessary panic or conclusions unsupported by technical evidence.

Conclusion

The discussion surrounding Indonesia’s reported cyberattack figures highlights the importance of interpreting cybersecurity data with proper context. While the number of detected attack attempts reflects ongoing digital security challenges, it does not necessarily indicate successful breaches or an extraordinary surge in threats. As Alfons Tanujaya emphasized, understanding long-term trends, actual security incidents, and their impact is essential to building informed public awareness. At the same time, individuals and businesses must remain vigilant by strengthening basic cybersecurity practices and protecting sensitive information.

Read more: Indonesia Strengthens Personal Data Protection Measures Under the One Data Indonesia Law