#Fact Check: Pakistan’s Airstrike Claim Uses Video Game Footage
Executive Summary:
A widely circulated claim on social media, including a post from the official X account of Pakistan, alleges that the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) carried out an airstrike on India, supported by a viral video. However, according to our research, the video used in these posts is actually footage from the video game Arma-3 and has no connection to any real-world military operation. The use of such misleading content contributes to the spread of false narratives about a conflict between India and Pakistan and has the potential to create unnecessary fear and confusion among the public.

Claim:
Viral social media posts, including the official Government of Pakistan X handle, claims that the PAF launched a successful airstrike against Indian military targets. The footage accompanying the claim shows jets firing missiles and explosions on the ground. The video is presented as recent and factual evidence of heightened military tensions.


Fact Check:
As per our research using reverse image search, the videos circulating online that claim to show Pakistan launching an attack on India under the name 'Operation Sindoor' are misleading. There is no credible evidence or reliable reporting to support the existence of any such operation. The Press Information Bureau (PIB) has also verified that the video being shared is false and misleading. During our research, we also came across footage from the video game Arma-3 on YouTube, which appears to have been repurposed to create the illusion of a real military conflict. This strongly indicates that fictional content is being used to propagate a false narrative. The likely intention behind this misinformation is to spread fear and confusion by portraying a conflict that never actually took place.


Conclusion:
It is true to say that Pakistan is using the widely shared misinformation videos to attack India with false information. There is no reliable evidence to support the claim, and the videos are misleading and irrelevant. Such false information must be stopped right away because it has the potential to cause needless panic. No such operation is occurring, according to authorities and fact-checking groups.
- Claim: Viral social media posts claim PAF attack on India
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs

Introduction
The ramifications of cybercrime can be far-reaching. Depending on the size of the attack, even entire countries can be affected if their critical infrastructure is connected to the internet. The vast majority of security breaches start within the perimeter and most internet attacks are socially engineered. Unwittingly trusting any email or web request from an unknown sender creates a potential danger for those organisations that depend on the Internet for their business functions. In this ever-evolving digital downtown yet another group has emerged from its darkest corners of targeting the UK’s very bastion of British and global heritage; a treasure trove of around 14 million volumes, ancient manuscripts, in the precious British Library. A group self-identified as Rhysida. Their bold maneuver, executed with the stealth of seasoned cyber brigands, has cast a shadow as long and dark as those found in the Gothic novels that rest on the library's shelves. The late October cyber-attack has thrust the British Library into an unnerving state of chaos, a situation more commonly aligned with works of dystopian fiction than the everyday reality of a revered institution.
The Modus Operandi
The gang uses all-new Rhysida ransomware to jeopardize Virtual Private Networks, which is typically used by library staff to gain access to their employee’s systems remotely. The Ransomware presents itself as a regular decoy file in a familiar fashion as regular phishing attacks in an email, tricking its victim and downloading itself into the host system. Once the malware enters the system it stays dormant and lurks around the system for a period of time. The new malware has significantly reduced the dwell time from 4 days to less than 24 hours which enables it to evade periodic system checks to avoid detection.
Implications of Cyber Attack
Implications of the cyber-attack have been sobering and multifaceted. The library's systems, which serve as the lifeline for countless scholars, students, and the reading public, were left in disarray, unsettlingly reminiscent of a grand mansion invaded by incorporeal thieves. The violation has reverberated through the digital corridors of this once-impenetrable fortress, and the virtual aftershocks are ongoing. Patrons, who traverse a diverse spectrum of society, but share a common reverence for knowledge, received unsettling news: the possibility that their private data has been compromised—a sanctity breached, revealing yet again how even the most hallowed of spaces are not impervious to modern threats.
It is with no small sense of irony that we consider the nature of the stolen goods—names, email addresses, and the like. It is not the physical tomes of inestimable value that have been ransacked, but rather the digital footprints of those who sought the wisdom within the library's walls. This virtual Pandora's Box, now unleashed onto the dark web, has been tagged with a monetary value. Rhysida has set the ominous asking price of a staggering $740,000 worth of cryptocurrency for the compromised data, flaunting their theft with a hubris that chills the spine.
Yet, in this convoluted narrative unfolds a subplot that offers some measure of consolation. Payment information purports the library has not been included in this digital heist, offering a glint of reassurance amidst the prevailing uncertainty. This digital storm has had seismic repercussions: the library's website and interconnected systems have been besieged and access to the vast resources significantly hampered. The distressing notice of a 'major technology outage' transformed the digital facade from a portal for endless learning to a bulletin of sorrow, projecting the sombre message across virtual space.
The Impact
The impact of this violation will resonate far beyond the mere disruption of services; it signals the dawn of an era where venerable institutions of culture and learning must navigate the depths of cybersecurity. As the library grapples with the breach, a new front has opened in the age-old battle for the preservation of knowledge. The continuity of such an institution in a digitised world will be tested, and the outcome will define the future of digital heritage management. As the institution rallies, led by Roly Keating, its Chief Executive, one observes not a defeatist retreat, but a stoic, strategic regrouping. Gratitude is extended to patrons and partners whose patience has become as vital a resource as the knowledge the library preserves. The reassurances given, while acknowledging the laborious task ahead, signal not just an intention to repair but to fortify, to adapt, to evolve amidst adversity.
This wretched turn of events serves as a portentous reminder that threats to our most sacred spaces have transformed. The digital revolution has indeed democratised knowledge but has also exposed it to neoteric threats. The British Library, a repository of the past, must now confront a distinctly modern adversary. It requires us to posit whether our contemporary guardians of history are equipped to combat those who wield malicious code as their weapons of choice.
Best Practices for Cyber Resilience
It is crucial to keep abreast with recent developments in cyberspace and emerging trends. Libraries in the digital age must ensure the protection of their patron’s data by applying comprehensive security protocols to safeguard the integrity, availability and confidentiality of sensitive information of their patrons. A few measures that can be applied by libraries include.
- Secured Wi-Fi networks: Libraries offering public Wi-Fi facilities must secure them with strong encryption protocols such as WPA 3. Libraries should establish separate networks for internal operations allowing separation of staff and public networks to protect sensitive information.
- Staff Training Programs: To avoid human error it is imperative that comprehensive training programs are conducted on a regular basis to generate greater awareness of cyber threats among staff and educate them about best practices of cyber hygiene and data security.
- Data Backups and Recovery Protocols: Patrons' sensitive data should be updated and backed up regularly. Proper verification of the user’s data integrity is crucial and should be stored securely in a dedicated repository to ensure full recovery of the user’s data in the event of a breach.
- Strong Authentication: Strong authentication to enhance library defenses is crucial to combat cyber threats. Staff and Patrons should be educated on strong password usage and the implementation of Multi-Factor Authentication to add an extra layer of security.
Conclusion
Finally, whatever the future holds, what remains unassailable is the cultural edifice that is the British Library. Its trials and tribulations, like those of the volumes it safeguards, become a part of a larger narrative of endurance and defiance. In the canon of history—filled with conflicts and resolutions—the library, like the lighter anecdotes and tragic tales it harbours, will decidedly hold its place. And perhaps, with some assurance, we might glean from the sentiment voiced by Milton—an assurance that the path from turmoil to enlightenment, though fraught with strenuous challenges, is paved with lessons learned and resilience rediscovered. Cyberspace is constantly evolving hence it is in our best interest to keep abreast of all developments in this digital sphere. Maximum threats can be avoided if we are vigilant.
References:

Introduction
Given the era of digital trust and technological innovation, the age of artificial intelligence has provided a new dimension to how people communicate and how they create and consume content. However, like all borrowed powers, the misuse of AI can lead to terrible consequences. One recent dark example was a cybercrime in Brazil: a sophisticated online scam using deepfake technology to impersonate celebrities of global stature, including supermodel Gisele Bündchen, in misleading Instagram ads. Luring in millions of reais in revenue, this crime clearly brings forth the concern of AI-generative content having rightfully set on the side of criminals.
Scam in Motion
Lately, the federal police of Brazil have stated that this scheme has been in circulation since 2024, when the ads were already being touted as apparently very genuine, using AI-generated video and images. The ads showed Gisele Bündchen and other celebrities endorsing skincare products, promotional giveaways, or time-limited discounts. The victims were tricked into making petty payments, mostly under 100 reais (about $19) for these fake products or were lured into paying "shipping costs" for prizes that never actually arrived.
The criminals leveraged their approach by scaling it up and focusing on minor losses accumulated from every victim, thus christening it "statistical immunity" by investigators. Victims being pocketed only a couple of dollars made most of them stay on their heels in terms of filing a complaint, thereby allowing these crooks extra limbs to shove on. Over time, authorities estimated that the group had gathered over 20 million reais ($3.9 million) in this elaborate con.
The scam was detected when a victim came forth with the information that an Instagram advertisement portraying a deepfake video of Gisele Bündchen was indeed false. With Anna looking to be Gisele and on the recommendation of a skincare company, the deepfake video was the most well-produced fake video. On going further into the matter, it became apparent that the investigations uncovered a whole network of deceptive social media pages, payment gateways, and laundering channels spread over five states in Brazil.
The Role of AI and Deepfakes in Modern Fraud
It is one of the first few large-scale cases in Brazil where AI-generated deepfakes have been used to perpetrate financial fraud. Deepfake technology, aided by machine learning algorithms, can realistically mimic human appearance and speech and has become increasingly accessible and sophisticated. Whereas before a level of expertise and computer resources were needed, one now only requires an online tool or app.
With criminals gaining a psychological advantage through deepfakes, the audiences would be more willing to accept the ad as being genuine as they saw a familiar and trusted face, a celebrity known for integrity and success. The human brain is wired to trust certain visual cues, making deepfakes an exploitation of this cognitive bias. Unlike phishing emails brimming with spelling and grammatical errors, deepfake videos are immersive, emotional, and visually convincing.
This is the growing terrain: AI-enabled misinformation. From financial scams to political propaganda, manipulated media is killing trust in the digital ecosystem.
Legalities and Platform Accountability
The Brazilian government had taken a proactive stance on the issue. In June 2025, the country's Supreme Court held that social media platforms could be held liable for failure to expeditiously remove criminal content, even in the absence of a formal order from a court. The icing on the cake is that that judgment would go a long way in architecting platform accountability in Brazil and potentially worldwide as jurisdictions adopt processes to deal with AI-generated fraud.
Meta, the parent company of Instagram, had said its policies forbid "ads that deceptively use public figures to scam people." Meta claims to use advanced detection mechanisms, trained review teams, and user tools to report violations. The persistence of such scams shows that the enforcement mechanisms still lag the pace and scale of AI-based deception.
Why These Scams Succeed
There are many reasons for the success of these AI-powered scams.
- Trust Due to Familiarity: Human beings tend to believe anything put forth by a known individual.
- Micro-Fraud: Keeping the money laundered from victims small prevents any increase in the number of complaints about these crimes.
- Speed To Create Content: New ads are being generated by criminals faster than ads can be checked for and removed by platforms via AI tools.
- Cross-Platform Propagation: A deepfake ad is then reshared onto various other social networking platforms once it starts gaining some traction, thereby worsening the problem.
- Absence of Public Awareness: Most users still cannot discern manipulated media, especially when high-quality deepfakes come into play.
Wider Implications on Cybersecurity and Society
The Brazilian case is but a microcosm of a much bigger problem. With deepfake technology evolving, AI-generated deception threatens not only individuals but also institutions, markets, and democratic systems. From investment scams and fake charters to synthetic IDs for corporate fraud, the possibilities for abuse are endless.
Moreover, with generative AIs being adopted by cybercriminals, law enforcement faces obstructions to properly attributing, validating evidence, and conducting digital forensics. Determining what is actual and what is manipulated has now given rise to the need for a forensic AI model that has triggered the deployment of the opposite on the other side, the attacker, thus initiating a rising tech arms race between the two parties.
Protecting Citizens from AI-Powered Scams
Public awareness has remained the best defence for people in such scams. Gisele Bündchen's squad encouraged members of the public to verify any advertisement through official brand or celebrity channels before engaging with said advertisements. Consumers need to be wary of offers that appear "too good to be true" and double-check the URL for authenticity before sharing any kind of personal information
Individually though, just a few acts go so far in lessening some of the risk factors:
- Verify an advertisement's origin before clicking or sharing it
- Never share any monetary or sensitive personal information through an unverifiable link
- Enable two-factor authentication on all your social accounts
- Periodically check transaction history for any unusual activity
- Report any deepfake or fraudulent advertisement immediately to the platform or cybercrime authorities
Collaboration will be the way ahead for governments and technology companies. Investing in AI-based detection systems, cooperating on international law enforcement, and building capacity for digital literacy programs will enable us to stem this rising tide of synthetic media scams.
Conclusion
The deepfake case in Brazil with Gisele Bündchen acts as a clarion for citizens and legislators alike. This shows the evolution of cybercrime that profited off the very AI technologies that were once hailed for innovation and creativity. In this new digital frontier that society is now embracing, authenticity stands closer to manipulation, disappearing faster with each dawn.
While keeping public safety will certainly still require great cybersecurity measures in this new environment, it will demand equal contributions on vigilance, awareness, and ethical responsibility. Deepfakes are not only a technology problem but a societal one-crossing into global cooperation, media literacy, and accountability at every level throughout the entire digital ecosystem.

Executive Summary
A video widely circulated on social media claims to show a confrontation between a Zee News journalist and Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Upendra Dwivedi during the Indian Army’s Annual Press Briefing 2026. The video alleges that General Dwivedi made sensitive remarks regarding ‘Operation Sindoor’, including claims that the operation was still ongoing and that diplomatic intervention by former US President Donald Trump had restricted India’s military response. Several social media users shared the clip while questioning the Indian Army’s operational decisions and demanding accountability over the alleged remarks. The CyberPeace concludes that the viral video claiming to show a discussion between a Zee News journalist and Chief of Army Staff General Upendra Dwivedi on ‘Operation Sindoor’ is misleading and digitally manipulated. Although the visuals were sourced from the Indian Army’s Annual Press Briefing 2026, the audio was artificially created and added later to misinform viewers. The Army Chief did not make any remarks regarding diplomatic interference or limitations on military action during the briefing.
Claim:
An X (formerly Twitter) user, Abbas Chandio (@AbbasChandio__), shared the video on January 14, asserting that it showed a Zee News journalist questioning the Army Chief about the status and outcomes of ‘Operation Sindoor’ during a recent press conference. In the clip, the journalist is purportedly heard challenging the Army Chief over his earlier statement that the operation was “still ongoing,” while the COAS is allegedly heard responding that diplomatic intervention during the conflict limited the Army’s ability to pursue further military action. Here is the link and archive link to the post, along with a screenshot.
The reverse image search also directed to an extended version of the footage uploaded on the official YouTube channel of India Today. The original video was identified as coverage from the Indian Army’s Annual Press Conference 2026, held on January 13 in New Delhi and addressed by COAS General Upendra Dwivedi. Upon reviewing the original press briefing footage, CyberPeace found no instance where a Zee News journalist questioned the Army Chief about ‘Operation Sindoor’. There was also no mention of the statements attributed to General Dwivedi in the viral clip.
In the authentic footage, journalist Anuvesh Rath was seen raising questions related to defence procurement and modernization, not military operations or diplomatic interventions. Here is the link to the original video, along with a screenshot.

To further verify the claim, CyberPeace extracted the audio track from the viral video and analysed it using the AI-based voice detection tool Aurigin. The analysis revealed that the voice heard in the clip was artificially generated, indicating the use of synthetic or manipulated audio. This confirmed that while genuine visuals from the Army’s official press briefing were used, a fabricated audio track had been overlaid to falsely attribute controversial statements to the Army Chief and a Zee News journalist.

Conclusion
The CyberPeace concludes that the viral video claiming to show a discussion between a Zee News journalist and Chief of Army Staff General Upendra Dwivedi on ‘Operation Sindoor’ is misleading and digitally manipulated. Although the visuals were sourced from the Indian Army’s Annual Press Briefing 2026, the audio was artificially created and added later to misinform viewers. The Army Chief did not make any remarks regarding diplomatic interference or limitations on military action during the briefing. The video is a clear case of digital manipulation and misinformation, aimed at creating confusion and casting doubts over the Indian Army’s official position.