#Fact Check-Misleading Newspaper from Kerala stating ban on paper currency

Introduction

Web applications are essential in various sectors, including online shopping, social networks, banking, and healthcare systems. However, they also pose numerous security threats, including Cross-Site Scripting (XSS), a client-side code injection vulnerability. XSS attacks exploit the trust relationship between users and websites, allowing them to change web content, steal private information, hijack sessions, and gain full control of user accounts without breaking into the core server. This vulnerability is part of the OWASP Top 10 Web Application Security Risks.

‍

What is Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)?

An XSS attack occurs when an attacker injects client-side scripts into web pages viewed by other users. When users visit the affected pages, their browsers naively execute the inserted scripts. The exploit takes advantage of web applications that allow users to submit content without properly sanitising inputs or encoding outputs. These scripts can cause a wide range of damage, including but not limited to stealing session cookies for session hijacking, redirecting users to malicious sites, logging keystrokes to capture credentials, and altering the DOM to display fake or phishing content.

‍

How Does XSS Work?

1. Injection: A malicious user submits code through a website input, like a comment or form.
2. Execution: The submitted code runs automatically in the browsers of other users who view the page.
3. Exploitation:The attacker can steal session information, capture credentials, redirect users, or modify the page content.

The fundamental cause behind the XSS vulnerabilities is the application of:

• Accepting trusted input from the users.  
• After users' input, web pages have the strings embedded without any sanitisation.  
• Not abiding by security policies like Content Security Policy (CSP).  

With such vulnerabilities, attackers can generate malicious payloads like:  <script>alert('XSS');</script>  

‍

This code might seem simple, but its execution provides the attacker with the possibility to do the following:  

• Copy session tokens through hidden HTTP requests.  
• From attacker-controlled domains, load attacker scripts.  
• Change the DOM structure to show fake login forms for phishing.

‍

Types of XSS Attacks: XSS (Cross-Site Scripting) attacks can occur in three main variations: 

1. Stored XSS: This type of attack occurs when an attacker injects an administered payload into the database or a message board. The script then runs whenever a user visits the affected board.
2. Reflected XSS: In this attack, the danger lies in a parameter of the URL. Its social engineering techniques are attacks, in which it requires tricking people to click on a specially designed link. For example:
3. DOM-Based XSS: This technique injects anything harmful without the need for server-side scripts, in contrast to other approaches. It targets JavaScript client-side scripts such as `document.write` and `innerHTML`. Without carrying out any safety checks, these scripts will alter the page's look (DOM stands for Document Object Model). If the hash is given a malicious string, it is run directly within the browser.

‍

What Makes XSS a Threat?  

‍

A Cross-Site Scripting attack is only a primary attack vector, and can lead to significant damage that includes the following: 

• Statement Hijacking. This uses scripts to steal cookies, which are then used to pose as authorized users.  
• Theft of Credentials. Users’ passwords and usernames are wrenched from keystroke trackers.  
• Phishing. Users are prompted with deceitful login forms that are used to capture sensitive details.  
• Website Vandalism. Modified website material lowers the esteem of the brand.  
• Monetary and Legal Consequences. There are compounding effects to GDPR and DPDP Act compliance in case of Data breaches, which incur penalties and fines.  ‍

‍

Incidents in the Real World  

In 2021, an XSS Stored attack occurred on a famous e-commerce platform eBay, through their product review system. The malicious JavaScript code was set to trigger every time an infected product page was accessed by customers. This caused a lot of problems, including account takeovers, unauthorised purchases, and damage to the company’s reputation. This example further worsens the fact that even reputed platforms can be targeted by XSS attacks.

‍‍

How to Prevent XSS?

Addressing XSS vulnerabilities demands attention to detail and coordinated efforts across functions, as illustrated in the steps below:

 Input Validation and Output Encoding:

• Ensure input validation is in place on the client and server.
• Perform output encoding relative to context: HTML: <, >, &.
• JavaScript: Escape quotes and slashes

Content Security Policy (CSP): CSP allows scripts to be executed only from the verified sources, which helps diminish the odds of harmful scripts running on your website. For example, the Header in the code could look to some degree like this: Content-Security-Policy: script-src 'self';

Unsafe APIs should be dodged: Avoid the use of document.write(), innerHTML, and eval(), and make sure to use:

• TextContent for inserting text.
• CreateElement() and other DOM creation methods for structured content.

Secure Cookies: Apply the HttpOnly and Secure cookie flags to block JavaScript access. 

Framework Protections: Use the protective features in frameworks such as:

• React, which escapes data embedded in JSX automatically.
• Angular, which uses context-aware sanitisation.

Periodic Security Assessment:

• Use DAST tools to test the security posture of an application.
• Perform thorough penetration testing and security-oriented code reviews.

‍

‍Best Practices for Developers: Assume a Secure Development Lifecycle (SDLC) integrating XSS stoppage at each point.

• Educate developers on OWASP secure coding guidelines.
• Automate scanning for vulnerabilities in CI/CD pipelines.

‍

‍Conclusion:

To reduce the potential danger of XSS, both developers and companies must be diligent in their safety initiatives, ranging from using Content Security Policies (CSP) to verifying user input. Web applications can shield consumers and the company from the subtle but long-lasting threat of Cross-Site Scripting if security controls are implemented during the web application development stage and regular vulnerability scans are conducted.

‍

References

• https://owasp.org/www-community/attacks/xss/
• https://www.paloaltonetworks.com/cyberpedia/xss-cross-site-scripting
• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Cross-site_scripting
• https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/threats/cross-site-scripting/

‍

‍

Misinformation spread has become a cause for concern for all stakeholders, be it the government, policymakers, business organisations or the citizens. The current push for combating misinformation is rooted in the growing awareness that misinformation leads to sentiment exploitation and can result in economic instability, personal risks, and a rise in political, regional, and religious tensions. The circulation of misinformation poses significant challenges for organisations, brands and administrators of all types. The spread of misinformation online poses a risk not only to the everyday content consumer, but also creates concerns for the sharer but the platforms themselves. Sharing misinformation in the digital realm, intentionally or not, can have real consequences.

Consequences for Platforms

Platforms have been scrutinised for the content they allow to be published and what they don't. It is important to understand not only how this misinformation affects platform users, but also its impact and consequences for the platforms themselves. These consequences highlight the complex environment that social media platforms operate in, where the stakes are high from the perspective of both business and societal impact. They are:

• Legal Consequences: Platforms can be fined by regulators if they fail to comply with content moderation or misinformation-related laws and a prime example of such a law is the Digital Services Act of the EU, which has been created for the regulation of digital services that act as intermediaries for consumers and goods, services, and content. They can face lawsuits by individuals, organisations or governments for any damages due to misinformation. Defamation suits are part of the standard practice when dealing with misinformation-causing vectors.  In India, the Prohibition of Fake News on Social Media Bill of 2023 is in the pipeline and would establish a regulatory body for fake news on social media platforms. 
• Reputational Consequences: Platforms employ a trust model where the user trusts it and its content. If a user loses trust in the platform because of misinformation, it can reduce engagement. This might even lead to negative coverage that affects the public opinion of the brand, its value and viability in the long run. 
• Financial Consequences: Businesses that engage with the platform may end their engagement with platforms accused of misinformation, which can lead to a revenue drop. This can also have major consequences affecting the long-term financial health of the platform, such as a decline in stock prices.
• Operational Consequences: To counter the scrutiny from regulators, the platform might need to engage in stricter content moderation policies or other resource-intensive tasks, increasing operational costs for the platforms. 
• Market Position Loss: If the reliability of a platform is under question, then, platform users can migrate to other platforms, leading to a loss in the market share in favour of those platforms that manage misinformation more effectively.
• Freedom of Expression vs. Censorship Debate: There needs to be a balance between freedom of expression and the prevention of misinformation. Censorship can become an accusation for the platform in case of stricter content moderation and if the users feel that their opinions are unfairly suppressed. 
• Ethical and Moral Responsibilities: Accountability for platforms extends to moral accountability as they allow content that affects different spheres of the user's life such as public health, democracy etc. Misinformation can cause real-world harm like health misinformation or inciting violence, which leads to the fact that platforms have social responsibility too.

Misinformation has turned into a global issue and because of this, digital platforms need to be vigilant while they navigate the varying legal, cultural and social expectations across different jurisdictions. Efforts to create standardised practices and policies have been complicated by the diversity of approaches, leading platforms to adopt flexible strategies for managing misinformation that align with global and local standards.

Addressing the Consequences

These consequences can be addressed by undertaking the following measures:

• The implementation of a more robust content moderation system by the platforms using a combination of AI and human oversight for the identification and removal of misinformation in an effective manner. 
• Enhancing the transparency in platform policies for content moderation and decision-making would build user trust and reduce the backlash associated with perceived censorship. 
• Collaborations with fact checkers in the form of partnerships to help verify the accuracy of content and reduce the spread of misinformation.
• Engage with regulators proactively to stay ahead of legal and regulatory requirements and avoid punitive actions. 
• Platforms should Invest in media literacy initiatives and help users critically evaluate the content available to them. 

Final Takeaways

The accrual of misinformation on digital platforms has resulted in presenting significant challenges across legal, reputational, financial, and operational functions for all stakeholders. As a result, a critical need arises where the interlinked, but seemingly-exclusive priorities of preventing misinformation and upholding freedom of expression must be balanced. Platforms must invest in the creation and implementation of a robust content moderation system with in-built transparency, collaborating with fact-checkers, and media literacy efforts to mitigate the adverse effects of misinformation. In addition to this, adapting to diverse international standards is essential to maintaining their global presence and societal trust.

References

• https://pirg.org/edfund/articles/misinformation-on-social-media/ 
• https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/12/12/674
• https://scroll.in/article/1057626/israel-hamas-war-misinformation-is-being-spread-across-social-media-with-real-world-consequences 
• https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/01-09-2022-infodemics-and-misinformation-negatively-affect-people-s-health-behaviours--new-who-review-finds 

‍

Introduction
‍

India is reaching a turning point in its technological development when the AI Impact Summit 2026 is held in New Delhi. Artificial Intelligence (AI)is transforming economies, labour markets, governance structures and even the grammar of public discourse. It is no longer a frontier of speculation. The challenge facing the Summit is not whether AI will change our societies, it has already done so but rather whether inclusiveness and human dignity will serve as the foundation for this change. 

India’s AI journey is defined by scale. The nation has one of the biggest user bases for cutting edge AI systems worldwide. According to projections, AI may create millions of new technology-driven occupations by 2030 and change the nature of millions more. This is a structural reconfiguration rather than an incremental alteration. The stakes are high for a country with a large youth population and diverse socioeconomic diversity. 

‍

India’s Tryst with Artificial Intelligence
‍

India’s tryst with AI is a developmental imperative occurring at a civilisational scale not a show put on for a western favour. AI is still portrayed in many international storylines as a competition between China’s state backed rapidity, Europe’s sophisticated regulations and Silicon Valley’s capital. India is far too frequently a huge consumer market rather than a significant force behind the AI era.  Such evaluations undervalue a nation that has already proven its capacity to implement technology at a democratic scale through its digital public infrastructure. AI in India is about more than just improving algorithms, it’s about giving millions more people access to social safety, healthcare, agriculture and education.

The scepticism overlooks a deeper truth, India innovates not from abundance but from urgency. India remains certain that technical advancement must be in line with social justice and inclusive growth. The recollections from history suggest that India’s greatest technological strides have often followed underestimation. 

‍

A Conclave of Contagious Ideas

‍

India has long been the favourite underestimation of certain western observers, a nation of 1.4 billion people, the world’s fifth largest economy, a noisy democracy with inconvenient geopolitical realities, often assessed by counterparts governing populations smaller than many of its states. Advice follows in spades, sometimes from cities that mastered the art of strategic improvisation long before they preached restraint and sometimes with lectures on innovation, governance and order. 

However, there are times when hierarchies need to be rearranged. It was hard to overlook the symbolism when Ranvir Sachdeva, the youngest keynote speaker at the AI Impact Summit, 2026, took the stage, “I’m here as the youngest keynote speaker at the Indian AI Impact Summit,” he said, discussing how he’s connecting ancient Indian beliefs to contemporary technology and the various strategies that other countries are doing to develop AI. In that simple articulation lay a quiet rebuttal, a civilization that once debated metaphysics under banyan trees is now debating ethics in plenary halls. History constantly demonstrates that India’s permanent address has never been underestimation. 

‍

From New Delhi to Geneva: The Global Arc of AI Governance
‍

Now that the AI Impact Summit, 2026 is coming to an end, what’s left is not just the recollection of its size but also the form of new international dialogue. The New Delhi Declaration, a remarkable highlight of the Summit, was signed by eighty-eight nations and international organisations to support the democratic spread of AI. 

The increasing complexity of the AI order was also made clear by the Summit. Pledges for investments totalled hundred of billions. The U.S. led Pax Silica effort was joined by India. SovereignLLMs in the country were introduced. At the same time, spectators were reminded that the politics of AI are inextricably linked to its promise via logistical challenges, protest disruptions and business rivalries. Although nations are not bound by the New Delhi Declaration it does represent a growing consensus that acceleration must be accompanied by governance. 

The revelation that the 2027 AI Impact Summit will be in Geneva represents a significant shift in this regard. Guy Parmelin, the president of Switzerland, described the upcoming chapter as one that is primarily concerned with international law and good governance in an attempt to guarantee that the future of AI is not entirely in the hands of powerful nations. From scale and ambition in New Delhi to normative consolidation in Europe, Geneva, longtime hotbed of multilateral diplomacy, provides symbolic continuity. 

‍

Concluding Confluence
‍

It is tempting to view the Global CyberPeace Summit (GCS), a Pre-Summit Event of AI Impact Summit held in close succession at Bharat Mandapam on 10th February, 2026. They formed a strong intellectual arc. At GCS, inclusion was not ornamental. A deeper message was conveyed by India Signing Hands’ involvement and purposeful emphasis on accessibility, digital systems must be created with, not just for, those on margins. Resilience must start at the economic level, according to the AI-enabled cybersecurity engagement for MSMEs. Participants were reminded during the talks on Technology Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV), CSAM prevention and child safety that technological arguments only gain significance when they are connected to real-world outcomes.

When Geneva takes over in 2027, the issue  will not just be how AI should be regulated, but also what ethical foundation that governance is built upon. New Delhi’s belief that wisdom and power must coexist may be its contribution to this developing narrative. That persistence has content than spectacle, as well as possibly the faint form of technical conscience. 

‍