The Complication of Jurisdiction
Unlimited online nature is for online privacy, in which individual data is under different conditions of protection based on jurisdiction. Therefore, for example, Indian with Gmail, paid to US laws. On the one hand, it can be seen as positive, if a country has a stronger protection than anyone else, but can also be harmful to privacy in reverse status – where one of the standards of preservation Company privacy. In addition to the dilemma of different levels of data protection provided by data, because they flow through different reference conditions and have access to data stored in different domains or has data from access to a country. Because it is treated in its jurisdiction, its complications arise. These complications cannot be confirmed by the NSA leak. Since Indian data is evaluated on American servers, the US government has accessed and uses data without observing an individual.  In response to the NSA leak, the Indian government announced that all facts should be recognized before action, while citizens first introduced joint companies that provide information to US security organizations such as Google, Facebook etc. have changed.
However, because companies occur within the US legal range where it is included, it cannot be responsible. In response to the dilemma of many actors in India, including government and industry, the creation of internal servers needs. For example, Dr. Kamlesh Bajag, executive director of the Indian Security Council in the Forbes magazine to create social networking operating systems in India. Similarly, after public release, the national communications adviser only asked you to guide traffic data through Indian servers.
In these areas, the Internet is a driving force behind privacy and growing awareness in India.
Current Policy for Internet Privacy in India
Currently, India, the most complete legal provisions that speak to the Internet, can be found in the Information Technology Act (ITA) 2000. Ita contains a range of provision that can in some cases protect privacy online or in other cases, dilute privacy online. The provisions that clearly protect the privacy of the user include: Considering child pornography, Punishment, Hack and Fraud and define data protection standards for the corporate body.
The provisions that serve to dilute the privacy of the User, talk to access by applying the Personal Information Act of the Act that is stored by the Corporate Body Composition and Monitoring of Internet Traffic Data and Monitoring, Interruption and decrypted in real time of online communication. In addition, the legislative gaps in ITA serve to weaken the privacy of online users. For example, ITA does not express questions and circumstances such as the evidence of the content of social networks in India, merger and data exchange through databases, as people can convey images of their own “private areas” through the Internet, if users have the Right to be notified of the presence of cookies and do not like the options, using electronic personal identifiers by databases, and if people have the right to request service providers to shoot and eliminate their personal content.