Microsoft Executive Calls Out FIITJEE Over Data Privacy and Service Failures
Sandeep Srivastava, the Director of Product at Agentic AI for Microsoft, recently leveled serious allegations against FIITJEE, a well-known coaching institute in India. In a LinkedIn post that has gained significant attention, Srivastava accused the institution of systemic mismanagement, inadequate digital infrastructure, and severe breaches of data privacy. His remarks stem from his personal experience with the organization, prompting him to caution parents against what he refers to as “resurrection propaganda.”
In his statement, Srivastava detailed the financial loss he incurred after paying ₹71,000 in advance for his daughter’s classes, which he claims were never conducted despite his persistent follow-ups over five months. This experience has led him to warn others against falling into similar traps, emphasizing that parents should protect their investments in education.
Srivastava criticized FIITJEE’s online platform as being wholly inadequate for delivering quality educational content. According to him, the academic operations of the institute are plagued by a lack of accountability and a revolving door of teaching and support staff. He described the digital infrastructure as virtually non-existent, alleging that classes are recorded on mobile devices and employ outdated teaching methods, such as traditional chalkboards, rather than engaging and modern online teaching practices.
In addition to these operational shortcomings, Srivastava raised significant concerns regarding data privacy. He claimed that FIITJEE not only fails to safeguard personal information but potentially facilitates its leakage to competitors in the educational sector. This serious breach of trust resulted in multiple rival institutes reaching out to him following his child’s enrollment, raising questions about the security of sensitive data within the organization.
After attempts to secure a refund were unsuccessful, Srivastava announced that he had initiated legal proceedings against FIITJEE by approaching consumer court. He has called upon both the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology to investigate the institution’s practices and to put a stop to the alleged fraudulent activities.
The allegations raised by Srivastava are echoed by other parents who have reported similar experiences with FIITJEE, suggesting that systemic issues may be pervasive within the organization. As of now, FIITJEE has not publicly addressed these serious claims.
For business owners, especially those operating in sectors heavily reliant on technology and data, Srivastava’s experience underscores the critical importance of implementing robust data protection measures. The situation may involve adversary tactics associated with the MITRE ATT&CK framework, such as initial access to sensitive user information and potential exploitation of unprotected data channels, illustrating how vulnerable educational institutions can be to data breaches.
In conclusion, Srivastava’s outspoken critique serves as a crucial reminder of the vulnerabilities present in digital education systems and emphasizes the need for stronger oversight and accountability in the handling of personal data. The narrative surrounding FIITJEE could very well highlight larger trends in data protection challenges that many organizations face today, from educational entities to corporate environments.
