Beyond writing and research, I contribute to the academic security community as a peer reviewer and invited speaker. I believe practitioners who engage with academic work make both worlds better — research gets grounded in operational reality, and practice gets informed by rigorous inquiry.
Technical Program Committees#
ICISPD — International Conference on Information Security, Privacy and Digital Forensics#
NIT Goa
Member of the Technical Program Committee. My role involves reviewing submitted research papers and providing structured feedback across the areas of information security, privacy engineering, and digital forensics. ICISPD brings together researchers and practitioners working on applied security problems.
ISPDA — International Conference on Security, Privacy and Data Analytics#
SVNIT, Surat
Member of the Technical Program Committee. Reviewing submitted research papers and providing feedback on work spanning security, privacy, and data analytics. ISPDA is hosted by my undergraduate institution, and this role reflects an ongoing connection with the academic community there.
Guest Speaking#
SVNIT, Surat
Invited to speak at multiple Short Term Training Programs (SSTPs) at SVNIT, Surat — covering applied cybersecurity topics for students and early-career practitioners.
| Talk | Program | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Security Risk Assessment and Management | STTP on Cyber Threat Intelligence and Digital Forensics | March 2021 |
| Software Development and Web Security | STTP on Cyber Security and Penetration Testing | January 2021 |
| Industry Perspective on Cybersecurity | STTP on Blockchain Technologies and Internet of Things | December 2020 |
These sessions focus on bridging the gap between what academia teaches and what the industry actually looks like — drawing on my experience across HSBC, Cyble, PwC, and Uniqus to give students an honest picture of security work in practice.
Peer review philosophy#
Good peer review is specific, constructive, and honest about limitations — not just a gate-keeping exercise. I try to engage with submissions on their own terms: what is the paper trying to do, does the methodology support that, and what would make it stronger? I’m particularly attentive to how well research translates into practitioner-relevant insight, which is where I think the field has the most room to grow.