Digital India Bill- Turning to Reality

Introduction

Twitter is a popular social media plate form with millions of users all around the world. Twitter’s blue tick system, which verifies the identity of high-profile accounts, has been under intense scrutiny in recent years. The platform must face backlash from its users and brands who have accused it of basis, inaccuracy, and inconsistency in its verification process. This blog post will explore the questions raised on the verification process and its impact on users and big brands.

What is Twitter’s blue trick System?

The blue tick system was introduced in 2009 to help users identify the authenticity of well-known public figures, Politicians, celebrities, sportspeople, and big brands. The Twitter blue Tick system verifies the identity of high-profile accounts to display a blue badge next to your username.

According to a survey, roughly there are 294,000 verified Twitter Accounts which means they have a blue tick badge with them and have also paid the subscription for the service, which is nearly $7.99 monthly, so think about those subscribers who have paid the amount and have also lost their blue badge won’t they feel cheated?

The Controversy

Despite its initial aim, the blue tick system has received much criticism from consumers and brands. Twitter’s irregular and non-transparent verification procedure has sparked accusations of prejudice and inaccuracy. Many Twitter users have complained that the network’s verification process is random and favours account with huge followings or celebrity status. In contrast, others have criticised the platform for certifying accounts that promote harmful or controversial content.

Furthermore, the verification mechanism has generated user confusion, as many need to understand the significance of the blue tick badge. Some users have concluded that the blue tick symbol represents a Twitter endorsement or that the account is trustworthy. This confusion has resulted in users following and engaging with verified accounts that promote misleading or inaccurate data, undermining the platform’s credibility.

How did the Blue Tick Row start in India?

On 21 May 2021, when the government asked Twitter to remove the blue badge from several profiles of high-profile Indian politicians, including the Indian National Congress Party Vice-President Mr Rahul Ghandhi.

The blue badge gives the users an authenticated identity. Many celebrities, including Amitabh Bachchan, popularly known as Big B, Vir Das, Prakash Raj, Virat Kohli, and Rohit Sharma, have lost their blue tick despite being verified handles.

What is the Twitter policy on blue tick?

To Twitter’s policy, blue verification badges may be removed from accounts if the account holder violates the company’s verification policy or terms of service. In such circumstances, Twitter typically notifies the account holder of the removal of the verification badge and the reason for the removal. In the instance of the “Twitter blue badge row” in India, however, it appears that Twitter did not notify the impacted politicians or their representatives before revoking their verification badges. Twitter’s lack of communication has exacerbated the controversy around the episode, with some critics accusing the company of acting arbitrarily and not following due process.

Is there a solution?

The “Twitter blue badge row” has no simple answer since it involves a complex convergence of concerns about free expression, social media policies, and government laws. However, here are some alternatives:

• Establish clear guidelines: Twitter should develop and constantly implement clear guidelines and policies for the verification process. All users, including politicians and government officials, would benefit from greater transparency and clarity.
• Increase transparency: Twitter’s decision-making process for deleting or restoring verification badges should be more open. This could include providing explicit reasons for badge removal, notifying impacted users promptly, and offering an appeals mechanism for those who believe their credentials were removed unfairly.
• Engage in constructive dialogue: Twitter should engage in constructive dialogue with government authorities and other stakeholders to address concerns about the platform’s content moderation procedures. This could contribute to a more collaborative approach to managing online content, leading to more effective and accepted policies.
• Follow local rules and regulations: Twitter should collaborate with the Indian government to ensure it conforms to local laws and regulations while maintaining freedom of expression. This could involve adopting more precise standards for handling requests for material removal or other actions from governments and other organisations.

Conclusion

To sum up, the “Twitter blue tick row” in India has highlighted the complex challenges that Social media faces daily in handling the conflicting interests of free expression, government rules, and their own content moderation procedures. While Twitter’s decision to withdraw the blue verification badges of several prominent Indian politicians garnered anger from the government and some public members, it also raised questions about the transparency and uniformity of Twitter’s verification procedure. In order to deal with this issue, Twitter must establish clear verification procedures and norms, promote transparency in its decision-making process, participate in constructive communication with stakeholders, and adhere to local laws and regulations. Furthermore, the Indian government should collaborate with social media platforms to create more effective and acceptable laws that balance the necessity for free expression and the protection of citizens’ rights. The “Twitter blue tick row” is just one example of the complex challenges that social media platforms face in managing online content, and it emphasises the need for greater collaboration among platforms, governments, and civil society organisations to develop effective solutions that protect both free expression and citizens’ rights.

Disclaimer:

This report is based on extensive research conducted by CyberPeace Research using publicly available information, and advanced analytical techniques. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions presented are based on the data available at the time of study and aim to provide insights into global ransomware trends.

The statistics mentioned in this report are specific to the scope of this research and may vary based on the scope and resources of other third-party studies. Additionally, all data referenced is based on claims made by threat actors and does not imply confirmation of the breach by CyberPeace. CyberPeace includes this detail solely to provide factual transparency and does not condone any unlawful activities. This information is shared only for research purposes and to spread awareness. CyberPeace encourages individuals and organizations to adopt proactive cybersecurity measures to protect against potential threats.

CyberPeace Research does not claim to have identified or attributed specific cyber incidents to any individual, organization, or nation-state beyond the scope of publicly observable activities and available information. All analyses and references are intended for informational and awareness purposes only, without any intention to defame, accuse, or harm any entity.

While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, CyberPeace Research is not liable for any errors, omissions, subsequent interpretations and any unlawful activities of the findings by third parties. The report is intended to inform and support cybersecurity efforts globally and should be used as a guide to foster proactive measures against cyber threats.

Executive Summary: 

The 2024 ransomware landscape reveals alarming global trends, with 166 Threat Actor Groups leveraging 658 servers/underground resources and mirrors to execute 5,233 claims across 153 countries. Monthly fluctuations in activity indicate strategic, cyclical targeting, with peak periods aligned with vulnerabilities in specific sectors and regions. The United States was the most targeted nation, followed by Canada, the UK, Germany, and other developed countries, with the northwestern hemisphere experiencing the highest concentration of attacks. Business Services and Healthcare bore the brunt of these operations due to their high-value data, alongside targeted industries such as Pharmaceuticals, Mechanical, Metal, Electronics, and Government-related professional firms. Retail, Financial, Technology, and Energy sectors were also significantly impacted.

This research was conducted by CyberPeace Research using a systematic modus operandi, which included advanced OSINT (Open-Source Intelligence) techniques, continuous monitoring of Ransomware Group activities, and data collection from 658 servers and mirrors globally. The team utilized data scraping, pattern analysis, and incident mapping to track trends and identify hotspots of ransomware activity. By integrating real-time data and geographic claims, the research provided a comprehensive view of sectoral and regional impacts, forming the basis for actionable insights.

The findings emphasize the urgent need for proactive Cybersecurity strategies, robust defenses, and global collaboration to counteract the evolving and persistent threats posed by ransomware.

Overview:

This report provides insights into ransomware activities monitored throughout 2024. Data was collected by observing 166 Threat Actor Groups using ransomware technologies across 658 servers/underground resources and mirrors, resulting in 5,233 claims worldwide. The analysis offers a detailed examination of global trends, targeted sectors, and geographical impact.

Top 10 Threat Actor Groups:

The ransomware group ‘ransomhub’ has emerged as the leading threat actor, responsible for 527 incidents worldwide. Following closely are ‘lockbit3’ with 522 incidents and ‘play’ with 351. Other Groups are ‘akira’, ‘hunters’, ‘medusa’, ‘blackbasta’, ‘qilin’, ‘bianlian’, ‘incransom’. These groups usually employ advanced tactics to target critical sectors, highlighting the urgent need for robust cybersecurity measures to mitigate their impact and protect organizations from such threats.

Monthly Ransomware Incidents:

In January 2024, the value began at 284, marking the lowest point on the chart. The trend rose steadily in the subsequent months, reaching its first peak at 557 in May 2024. However, after this peak, the value dropped sharply to 339 in June. A gradual recovery follows, with the value increasing to 446 by August. September sees another decline to 389, but a sharp rise occurs afterward, culminating in the year’s highest point of 645 in November. The year concludes with a slight decline, ending at 498 in December 2024 (till 28th of December).

Top 10 Targeted Countries:

1. The United States consistently topped the list as the primary target probably due to its advanced economic and technological infrastructure.
2. Other heavily targeted nations include Canada, UK, Germany, Italy, France, Brazil, Spain, and India.
3. A total of 153 countries reported ransomware attacks, reflecting the global scale of these cyber threats

Top Affected Sectors:

1. Business Services and Healthcare faced the brunt of ransomware threat due to the sensitive nature of their operations.
2. Specific industries under threats:
   1. Pharmaceutical, Mechanical, Metal, and Electronics industries.
   2. Professional firms within the Government sector.
3. Other sectors:
   1. Retail, Financial, Technology, and Energy sectors were also significant targets.

Geographical Impact:

The continuous and precise OSINT(Open Source Intelligence) work on the platform, performed as a follow-up action to data scraping, allows a complete view of the geography of cyber attacks based on their claims. The northwestern region of the world appears to be the most severely affected by Threat Actor groups. The figure below clearly illustrates the effects of this geographic representation on the map.

Ransomware Threat Trends in India:

In 2024, the research identified 98 ransomware incidents impacting various sectors in India, marking a 55% increase compared to the 63 incidents reported in 2023. This surge highlights a concerning trend, as ransomware groups continue to target India's critical sectors due to its growing digital infrastructure and economic prominence.

Top Threat Actors Group Targeted India:

Among the following threat actors ‘killsec’ is the most frequent threat. ‘lockbit3’  follows as the second most prominent threat, with significant but lower activity than killsec. Other groups, such as ‘ransomhub’, ‘darkvault’, and ‘clop’, show moderate activity levels. Entities like ‘bianlian’, ‘apt73/bashe’, and ‘raworld’ have low frequencies, indicating limited activity. Groups such as ‘aps’ and ‘akira’ have the lowest representation, indicating minimal activity. The chart highlights a clear disparity in activity levels among these threats, emphasizing the need for targeted cybersecurity strategies.

Top Impacted Sectors in India:

The pie chart illustrates the distribution of incidents across various sectors, highlighting that the industrial sector is the most frequently targeted, accounting for 75% of the total incidents. This is followed by the healthcare sector, which represents 12% of the incidents, making it the second most affected. The finance sector accounts for 10% of the incidents, reflecting a moderate level of targeting. In contrast, the government sector experiences the least impact, with only 3% of the incidents, indicating minimal targeting compared to the other sectors. This distribution underscores the critical need for enhanced cybersecurity measures, particularly in the industrial sector, while also addressing vulnerabilities in healthcare, finance, and government domains.

Month Wise Incident Trends in India:

The chart indicates a fluctuating trend with notable peaks in May and October, suggesting potential periods of heightened activity or incidents during these months. The data starts at 5 in January and drops to its lowest point, 2, in February. It then gradually increases to 6 in March and April, followed by a sharp rise to 14 in May. After peaking in May, the metric significantly declines to 4 in June but starts to rise again, reaching 7 in July and 8 in August. September sees a slight dip to 5 before the metric spikes dramatically to its highest value, 24, in October. Following this peak, the count decreases to 10 in November and then drops further to 7 in December.

CyberPeace Advisory:

1. Implement Data Backup and Recovery Plans: Backups are your safety net. Regularly saving copies of your important data ensures you can bounce back quickly if ransomware strikes. Make sure these backups are stored securely—either offline or in a trusted cloud service—to avoid losing valuable information or facing extended downtime.  
2. Enhance Employee Awareness and Training: People often unintentionally open the door to ransomware. By training your team to spot phishing emails, social engineering tricks, and other scams, you empower them to be your first line of defense against attacks.  
3. Adopt Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): Think of MFA as locking your door and adding a deadbolt. Even if attackers get hold of your password, they’ll still need that second layer of verification to break in. It’s an easy and powerful way to block unauthorized access.  
4. Utilize Advanced Threat Detection Tools: Smart tools can make a world of difference. AI-powered systems and behavior-based monitoring can catch ransomware activity early, giving you a chance to stop it in its tracks before it causes real damage.  
5. Conduct Regular Vulnerability Assessments: You can’t fix what you don’t know is broken. Regularly checking for vulnerabilities in your systems helps you identify weak spots. By addressing these issues proactively, you can stay one step ahead of attackers.

 ‍

Conclusion:

The 2024 ransomware landscape reveals the critical need for proactive cybersecurity strategies. High-value sectors and technologically advanced regions remain the primary targets, emphasizing the importance of robust defenses. As we move into 2025, it is crucial to anticipate the evolution of ransomware tactics and adopt forward-looking measures to address emerging threats. 

Global collaboration, continuous innovation in cybersecurity technologies, and adaptive strategies will be imperative to counteract the persistent and evolving threats posed by ransomware activities. Organizations and governments must prioritize preparedness and resilience, ensuring that lessons learned in 2024 are applied to strengthen defenses and minimize vulnerabilities in the year ahead.

‍

‍

Executive Summary:

Internship scams have infiltrated the academic landscape, scamming students of many prestigious colleges. The students often prefer to carry out internships to gain knowledge and work experience. These scams use the name of popular multinational companies to exploit the students. This report studies the various case studies, their modus operandi, impact on the students and preventive strategies. This report emphasises the importance of awareness and proactive measures to protect students from falling victim to such frauds.

1. Introduction

Internships are the opportunity to overcome the gap between the practical knowledge acquired at the university and practical experience, to get practical skills and contacts in the field of activity, as well as improve employment prospects. Instead, because of high paying internships and interesting positions students have become targets of work scams. As we have seen with the advancement in digital technology, scammers take advantage of the disguise of the internet, making very neat, smart, and convincing scams. 

 Internship scams are very prevalent and they include fake job listings and phishing schemes as well as payment frauds which make students lose lots of money and also emotionally expose them. In this specific case, this paper examines how these scams work, the warning signs, and ways of protecting students from falling victim to them.

2. Detailed Modus Operandi of Internship Scams

Internship scams often employ  a variety of tactics to attract and deceive unsuspecting students. Below is a detailed breakdown of the common methods used by scammers:

1. Fake Job Listings and Offers:some text
   • Scammers post attractive internship offers on popular job portals, social media platforms, and even send personalised messages via LinkedIn. These listings often mimic the branding and style of reputable companies, including well-designed logos, professional email addresses, and official-looking websites.
   • Example: A fake internship offer from a reputed software firm circulates on a job portal, with a professional landing page. Students who apply are quickly “hired” without any interviews, and are asked to pay a security deposit to confirm their acceptance.
2. Upfront Payment Requests:some text
   • Scammers ask for payment such as registration fees, training materials, background checks, or security deposits. These payments comes under non-refundable payment  and it act as the primary revenue stream for the fraudsters.
   • Example: A group of students receive internship offers requiring a payment of INR 10,000 for "training materials" and "online assessments." After making the payment, the students never hear back from the company, and all attempts to contact them were futile.
3. Phishing and Identity Theft:some text
   • Beyond financial fraud, some scams aim to steal personal information. Fake internship applications often require detailed personal data, including identity proofs, bank account details. This data will be used as identity theft or sold on the dark web.
   • Example: A student applies for an internship that asks for copies of identification documents and bank details. This information sharing led to unauthorised transactions in their bank account. 
4. Work-from-Home Frauds:some text
   • With the rise of remote work, scammers also offer work-from-home internships that require students to purchase software or pay for specialised training. After payment, students are often given irrelevant tasks or no tasks at all, leaving them with no real work experience.
   • Example: An internship advertised as a "remote data analysis role" required students to buy a proprietary software licence. After paying, students realised the software was freely available online, and the internship tasks were non-existent.
5. Impersonation of Reputed Companies:some text
   • Scammers use the name of well-known companies, they modify the email addresses or create fake websites that look original. They use these platforms to send offer letters, making it difficult for students to identify the scam.
   • Example: A scammer creates a fake website mirroring a major consulting firm's internship page. The only difference is a minor change in the URL. Dozens of students are duped into paying registration fees.

3. Case Studies of Real-Life Incidents

1. Case Study 1: The Certification Course and Internshipsome text
   • A group of students received personalised emails from an official domain of a reputed tech industry providing an internship offer. Students were asked to pay Rs 10,000 to undergo a certification course to carry the internship. After paying the amount, the students did not receive any instructions, and the company was found to be nonexistent. The scammer had spoofed the company’s email domain, making it difficult to trace the source.
2. Case Study 2: The Social Media Trapsome text
   • A student from a university encountered an internship post on Instagram, advertising roles at a popular fashion brand. The application process involved a "screening fee" of INR 5,000. Despite appearing legitimate, the internship was fake, and the brand had no knowledge of the post. The student's personal data was also compromised, leading to unauthorised social media activity.
3. Case Study 3: Internship Providing Social Platformssome text
   • A popular internship providing platform, faced an incident where a scammer posted fraudulent internship offers under the guise of a major multinational. The scam involved asking students to purchase expensive software to start their work. The platform had to issue warnings and remove the listings after several complaints.

4. The Impact on Students

The consequences of internship scams extend beyond immediate financial loss, affecting students on multiple levels:

1. Financial Impact:some text
   • Students lose their money, ranging from minor fees to significant payments.
2. Emotional and Psychological Distress:some text
   • These kinds of scams can lead to anxiety, depression and loss of confidence in availing the opportunities in future. 
3. Exposure to Further Scams:some text
   • Scammers often share details of their victims with other fraudsters, making students susceptible to repeated scams, including phishing attacks, financial frauds, and unsolicited offers.

5. Preventive Measures

1. Verification of Internships:some text
   • Always verify the authenticity of the internship by researching the company on official platforms such as LinkedIn, the company’s official website, and through trusted contacts or college placement cells.
2. Avoid Upfront Payments:some text
   • Employers do not ask for money in exchange for job or internship offers. If they demand for any kind of payment, then the employer is not original. Always question the necessity of such payments and consult trusted advisors before proceeding.
3. Use Trusted Job Portals:some text
   • Apply for internships through recognized platforms like LinkedIn, Internshala, or your college’s placement cell, which have verification processes to filter out fraudulent postings.
4. Reporting Scams:some text
   • Report suspicious offers to your college authorities, placement cells, and local cybercrime departments. Additionally, use platforms like Internshala’s “Report This Job” feature to flag fraudulent listings.
5. Stay Educated and Updated:some text
   • It is important to educate students by providing workshops, webinars, and awareness sessions on cybersecurity to stay informed and report about the latest scams. 

6. Conclusion

Internship scams are a severe threat to the student society since they manipulate the student’s desire for an internship. The best ways to prevent such cons are by being cautious and receptive to whatever is being offered. Internship seekers, colleges and the placement cells have to work hand in hand to ensure that there is no fear among  people seeking internships.

References

1. Smith, J. (2024). Internship Scams on the Rise: How to Spot and Avoid Them. Retrieved from example1.com.
2. Brown, A. (2023). Student Internship Scams in India: A Growing Concern. Retrieved from example2.com.
3. Johnson, L. (2024). How to Protect Yourself from Fake Internship Offers. Retrieved from example3.com.
4. Gupta, R. (2024). Social Media and the Rise of Job Scams. Retrieved from example4.com.

‍