Malaysia

Malaysia is a leading knowledge economy in Southeast Asia with aspirations to become a global leader in tech and innovation. Having invested in cybersecurity early on, Malaysia has the legal and operational foundations to deal with sophisticated cyber-threat actors and counter cyber-enabled IP theft. Given Malaysia’s position in global value chains and ambitions for technology-driven growth, it’s important that the government continues to invest in cybersecure innovation.

ASPI assesses
Malaysia
to be
Moderately vulnerable
to state-sponsored acts of cyber-enabled theft of IP.

Author

Farlina Said and Dr. Ben Stevens

Key Facts

R&D Investments

USD $9 billion (2021)

Patent Applications

1,863 (2021)

Cybersecurity Agency

National Cyber Security Agency (NACSA)
How at risk is
Malaysia

Malaysia's ambitious digital transformation and its focus on developing a knowledge-based economy with significant investments in ICT, manufacturing, and electronics sectors, make it a prime target for cyber-enabled IP theft. Malaysia is an upper-middle-income economy with the third-highest GDP per capita in Southeast Asia. In 2019, 43% of Malaysians had completed tertiary education. Malaysia ranks 35th in the list of economies, based on the number of (full-time equivalent) researchers per million inhabitants in 2018 (2,185 researchers per million). That places Malaysia slightly above other upper-middle-income countries.

Malaysia considers scientific and technological development to be central components of its economic growth. Government initiatives such as the MyDigital program emphasise Malaysia’s drive for digital transformation across various sectors, focusing on infrastructure, talent development, and cybersecurity. Large firms adopt cloud services, though SMEs lag. Through tax breaks and innovation funds, the government promotes cloud adoption and supports R&D within its Industry 4.0 framework.  Malaysia’s primary IP-rich sectors include manufacturing, electronics, and natural resources, with substantial investment in R&D by global firms such as Motorola, Sony, and Panasonic. These sectors’ IP intensity heightens their vulnerability to cyber-attacks.

Malaysia's extensive linkages of economic and scientific partnerships and its role in global supply chains for IP-intensive industries make it an attractive target for state-sponsored actors seeking to exploit valuable intellectual property and economic information. Malaysia also has extensive international partnerships. Diplomatic and economic ties with major economies, including Japan, South Korea, the US, and UK, are reinforced by scientific collaborations and trade relationships, particularly in the electrical and electronics (E&E) sectors. China, Malaysia’s third-largest E&E export destination, is a major partner in scientific and technological development.

While Malaysia’s advanced economy and international integration bolster its digital capabilities, they also amplify the risks of cyber-enabled IP theft, particularly in sectors where Malaysia plays a critical role in global supply chains. This dual-edged growth requires Malaysia to strengthen its cybersecurity strategies to protect its valuable IP assets from external threats.

How prepared is
Malaysia

Given its relatively advanced knowledge economy, Malaysia emerges as a potential target for cyber-enabled IP theft. For that reason, its cybersecurity strategies have identified cyber-enabled threats to innovation since 2006. While there’s no road map on how the government intends to protect major knowledge-producing industries, Malaysia maintains strong foundations to combat the threat of cyber-enabled IP theft based on the strengths of its national IP system and cybersecurity ecosystem.

Malaysia performs well in global rankings on IP protection owing to its strengths in enforceability. This includes the work of IP courts and the Ministry of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs. Malaysia is also one of the most cybersecure nations in Southeast Asia. It has comprehensive cybersecurity legislation that criminalises computer intrusions and IP theft, while also providing incident response support to key IP-intensive industries, including those in ICT and energy. Petronas is a major IP-intensive entity. However, no specific sectoral legislation addresses cybersecurity matters and overlapping mandates within the government constrain the capacity to respond efficiently to major crises and to implement protective policies.

The Royal Malaysia Police is primarily responsible for enforcing cybersecurity laws, while the Attorney-General’s Department and specialised cyber and IP courts assist with prosecutions. The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission, under the Ministry of Communications and Multimedia, has the authority to enforce cybersecurity regulations related to content and industry governance. The National Cybersecurity Agency is mandated to develop and implement cybersecurity policies, while protective measures are partly executed through the national Cyber Emergency Response Team (MyCERT). There’s also the National Cyber Coordination and Command Centre, which is connected to the Cyber Defence Operation Centre, which deals with national cyber threats; a network security centre; a government integrated telecommunications network security operation centre; and the Cybersecurity Malaysia Security Operation Centre. Those multiple entities with ambiguous and partly overlapping responsibilities complicate cyber governance in Malaysia, including the obligations, practices and culture to report cyber incidents. As such, cases of economic cyber-espionage may go unreported.

Malaysia is strongly committed to international cybersecurity standards (it requires government contractors to comply with IT security standards, such as the ISO/IEC 27000 series) and the UN framework for responsible state behaviour in cyberspace. Malaysia views the UN open-ended working group process as an inclusive method to share unique perspectives and views on the issue of setting cyber norms. Singapore and Malaysia co-chair the ASEAN working committee on establishing norms for responsible state cyber behaviour.

Reported cases of economic cyber-espionage

Name of Incident

Victims (entities)

Sectors Affected

Affected economies

Threat Actor

Alleged state sponsor

Date reported

Ocean Lotus Campaign (APT32)
Ocean Lotus Campaign (APT32)
Ocean Lotus Campaign (APT32)
Australia, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Germany, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, USA and Vietnam
Ocean Lotus Campaign (APT32)
Ocean Lotus Campaign (APT32)
2017
2020-2021 Cyberespionage Campaign (APT41)
Banking/Finance, Civil Society, Construction, Defense Industrial Base, Government, Healthcare, High Technology, Higher Education, Legal, Manufacturing, Media, Non-profit, Oil & Gas, Petrochemical, Pharmaceutical, Real Estate, Research, Software development companies, Social Media, Telecommunications, Transportation, Travel, and Utility
1. Finance 2. Construction Services 3. Defense 4. Public Administration 5. Medical and Other Health Care Services 6. Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 7. Computer System Design and Related Services 8. Tertiary Education 9. Manufacturing 10. Information Media and Telecommunications 11. Personal and Other Services 12. Oil and Gas Extraction 13. Basic Chemical and Chemical Product Manufacturing 14. Property Operators and Real Estate Services 15. Telecommunications Services 16. Transport, Postal and Warehousing 17. Administrative Services 18. Electricity, Gas, Water and Waste Services 19. Transport, Postal and Warehousing 20. Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing 21. Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction 22. Publishing
Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, India, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, UAE, UK and USA, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Pakistan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam
APT41
China
2020, 2021
Mabna Institute Attacks
176 universities in 21 countries; 47 domestic and foreign private firms; several U.S. government agencies, United Nations, UNICEF
1. Public administration 2. Public and Other Services 3. Broadcasting 4. Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Primarily U.S., but also Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, Denmark, Israel, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Canada, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Sweden, UK, China, Ireland, Japan, Norway, ROK, Switzerland
Mabna Institute
Iran, with members of the Mabna Institute having links to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
2018
Malaysia Government Hacks (APT40)
Malaysian government officials
Public administration
Malaysia
APT40
China, associated with the Ministry of State Security
2020
Kasawari Block Incident (APT40)
Malaysian oil and gas refineries, along with companies involved with deep water drilling, oil and petroleum exploration, and Australian Naval Defense
1. Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 2. Oil and Gas Extraction 3. Petroleum and Coal Product Manufacturing 4. Defence
Malaysia, Australia
APT40
China, possible ties to the Ministry of State Security
2022