This chapter provides a more comprehensive account of vulnerability since it considers the pandemic situation, which has created a massive disruption in this century. This chapter contains two major sections, both with a profound meaning: indigenous peoples and vulnerability. There has been no definite definition of indigenous people, and its related concepts and terminology are used all in a dynamic way depending on the context and time. The same applies to vulnerability, a term that is still open to being redefined. Due to the very diverse and unique conditions of indigenous peoples in each research site, this study uses the concept of relative vulnerability with a focus on its dynamic process. For instance, one indigenous people may not be as vulnerable as others in a specific period of time. In a similar manner, their vulnerability may change after they have taken measures or received an intervention. In general, Surtiari et al. distinguish two basic indicators of vulnerability: cognitive and quantitative measurements. The first refers to perceptions toward the COVID-19 pandemic, while the second includes socio-demographic aspects. In the field research conducted in Bali, Central Maluku (Maluku), Jambi, North Halmahera (North Maluku), Sumba (East Nusa Tenggara), and Malang (East Java), we highlighted seven measurable characteristics that have a crucial role in estimating the vulnerability of an area or population to the COVID-19 pandemic. The socio-demographic categories consist of age group, gender, population mobility, health behavior, settlement patterns, livelihoods, and sociocultural activities.