#FactCheck - AI Generated Photo Circulating Online Misleads About BARC Building Redesign

Introduction

‍

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is fast transforming our future in the digital world, transforming healthcare, finance, education, and cybersecurity. But alongside this technology, bad actors are also weaponising it. More and more, state-sponsored cyber actors are misusing AI tools such as ChatGPT and other generative models to automate disinformation, enable cyberattacks, and speed up social engineering operations. This write-up explores why and how AI, in the form of large language models (LLMs), is being exploited in cyber operations associated with adversarial states, and the necessity for international vigilance, regulation, and AI safety guidelines.

‍

The Shift: AI as a Cyber Weapon

‍

State-sponsored threat actors are misusing tools such as ChatGPT to turbocharge their cyber arsenal.

• Phishing Campaigns using AI- Generative AI allows for highly convincing and grammatically correct phishing emails. Unlike the shoddily written scams of yesteryears, these AI-based messages are tailored according to the victim's location, language, and professional background, increasing the attack success rate considerably. Example: It has recently been reported by OpenAI and Microsoft that Russian and North Korean APTs have employed LLMs to create customised phishing baits and malware obfuscation notes.
  
  
• Malware Obfuscation and Script Generation- Big Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT may be used by cyber attackers to help write, debug, and camouflage malicious scripts. While the majority of AI instruments contain safety mechanisms to guard against abuse, threat actors often exploit "jailbreaking" to evade these protections. Once such constraints are lifted, the model can be utilised to develop polymorphic malware that alters its code composition to avoid detection. It can also be used to obfuscate PowerShell or Python scripts to render them difficult for conventional antivirus software to identify. Also, LLMs have been employed to propose techniques for backdoor installation, additional facilitating stealthy access to hijacked systems.
  
  
• Disinformation and Narrative Manipulation
  State-sponsored cyber actors are increasingly employing AI to scale up and automate disinformation operations, especially on election, protest, and geopolitical dispute days. With LLMs' assistance, these actors can create massive amounts of ersatz news stories, deepfake interview transcripts, imitation social media posts, and bogus public remarks on online forums and petitions. The localisation of content makes this strategy especially perilous, as messages are written with cultural and linguistic specificity, making them credible and more difficult to detect. The ultimate aim is to seed societal unrest, manipulate public sentiments, and erode faith in democratic institutions.

‍

Disrupting Malicious Uses of AI – OpenAI Report (June 2025) 

‍

OpenAI released a comprehensive threat intelligence report called "Disrupting Malicious Uses of AI" and the “Staying ahead of threat actors in the age of AI”, which outlined how state-affiliated actors had been testing and misusing its language models for malicious intent. The report named few advanced persistent threat (APT) groups, each attributed to particular nation-states. OpenAI highlighted that the threat actors used the models mostly for enhancing linguistic quality, generating social engineering content, and expanding operations. Significantly, the report mentioned that the tools were not utilized to produce malware, but rather to support preparatory and communicative phases of larger cyber operations.

‍

AI Jailbreaking: Dodging Safety Measures

‍

One of the largest worries is how malicious users can "jailbreak" AI models, misleading them into generating banned content using adversarial input. Some methods employed are:

• Roleplay: Simulating the AI being a professional criminal advisor
• Obfuscation: Concealing requests with code or jargon
• Language Switching: Proposing sensitive inquiries in less frequently moderated languages
• Prompt Injection: Lacing dangerous requests within innocent-appearing questions

These methods have enabled attackers to bypass moderation tools, transforming otherwise moral tools into cybercrime instruments.

‍

Conclusion

‍

As AI generations evolve and become more accessible, its application by state-sponsored cyber actors is unprecedentedly threatening global cybersecurity. The distinction between nation-state intelligence collection and cybercrime is eroding, with AI serving as a multiplier of adversarial campaigns. AI tools such as ChatGPT, which were created for benevolent purposes, can be targeted to multiply phishing, propaganda, and social engineering attacks. The cross-border governance, ethical development practices, and cyber hygiene practices need to be encouraged.  AI needs to be shaped not only by innovation but by responsibility.

‍

References

• https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/blog/2024/02/14/staying-ahead-of-threat-actors-in-the-age-of-ai/
• https://www.bankinfosecurity.com/openais-chatgpt-hit-nation-state-hackers-a-28640
• https://oecd.ai/en/incidents/2025-06-13-b5e9
• https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/security-insider/meet-the-experts/emerging-AI-tactics-in-use-by-threat-actors
• https://www.wired.com/story/youre-not-ready-for-ai-hacker-agents/
• https://www.cert-in.org.in/PDF/Digital_Threat_Report_2024.pdf
• https://cdn.openai.com/threat-intelligence-reports/5f73af09-a3a3-4a55-992e-069237681620/disrupting-malicious-uses-of-ai-june-2025.pdf

‍

Introduction

‍

In today’s hyper-connected world, information spreads faster than ever before. But while much attention is focused on public platforms like Facebook and Twitter, a different challenge lurks in the shadows: misinformation circulating on encrypted and closed-network platforms such as WhatsApp and Telegram. Unlike open platforms where harmful content can be flagged in public, private groups operate behind a digital curtain. Here, falsehoods often spread unchecked, gaining legitimacy because they are shared by trusted contacts. This makes encrypted platforms a double-edged sword. It is essential for privacy and free expression, yet uniquely vulnerable to misuse.

As Prime Minister Narendra Modi rightly reminded,

‍

‍“Think 10 times before forwarding anything,” warning that even a “single fake news has the capability to snowball into a matter of national concern.”

‍

The Moderation Challenge with End-to-End Encryption

‍

Encrypted messaging platforms were built to protect personal communication. Yet, the same end-to-end encryption that shields users’ privacy also creates a blind spot for moderation. Authorities, researchers, and even the platforms themselves cannot view content circulating in private groups, making fact-checking nearly impossible.

Trust within closed groups makes the problem worse. When a message comes from family, friends, or community leaders, people tend to believe it without questioning and quickly pass it along. Features like large group chats, broadcast lists, and “forward to many” options further speed up its spread. Unlike open networks, there is no public scrutiny, no visible counter-narrative, and no opportunity for timely correction.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, false claims about vaccines spread widely through WhatsApp groups, undermining public health campaigns. Even more alarming, WhatsApp rumors about child kidnappers and cow meat in India triggered mob lynchings, leading to the tragic loss of life.

Encrypted platforms, therefore, represent a unique challenge: they are designed to protect privacy, but, unintentionally, they also protect the spread of dangerous misinformation.

‍

Approaches to Curbing Misinformation on End-to-End Platforms

‍

• Regulatory: Governments worldwide are exploring ways to access encrypted data on messaging platforms, creating tensions between the right to user privacy and crime prevention. Approaches like traceability requirements on WhatsApp, data-sharing mandates for platforms in serious cases, and stronger obligations to act against harmful viral content are also being considered.
• Technological Interventions: Platforms like WhatsApp have introduced features such as “forwarded many times” labels and limits on mass forwarding. These tools can be expanded further by introducing AI-driven link-checking and warnings for suspicious content.

• Community-Based Interventions: Ultimately, no regulation or technology can succeed without public awareness. People need to be inoculated against misinformation through pre-bunking efforts and digital literacy campaigns. Fact-checking websites and tools also have to be taught.

‍

Best Practices for Netizens

‍

Experts recommend simple yet powerful habits that every user can adopt to protect themselves and others. By adopting these, ordinary users can become the first line of defence against misinformation in their own communities:

• Cross-Check Before Forwarding: Verify claims from trusted platforms & official sources.
• Beware of Sensational Content: Headlines that sound too shocking or dramatic probably need checking. Consult multiple sources for a piece of news. If only one platform/ channel is carrying sensational news, it is likely to be clickbait or outright false.
• Stick to Trusted News Sources: Verify news through national newspapers and expert commentary. Remember, not everything on the internet/television is true.
• Look Out for Manipulated Media: Now, with AI-generated deepfakes, it becomes more difficult to tell the difference between original and manipulated media. Check for edited images, cropped videos, or voice messages without source information. Always cross-verify any media received.
• Report Harmful Content: Report misinformation to the platform it is being circulated on and PIB’s Fact Check Unit.

‍

Conclusion

‍

In closed, unmonitored groups, platforms like WhatsApp and Telegram often become safe havens where people trust and forward messages from friends and family without question. Once misinformation takes root, it becomes extremely difficult to challenge or correct, and over time, such actions can snowball into serious social, economic and national concerns.

Preventing this is a matter of shared responsibility. Governments can frame balanced regulations, but individuals must also take initiative: pause, think, and verify before sharing. Ultimately, the right to privacy must be upheld, but with reasonable safeguards to ensure it is not misused at the cost of societal trust and safety.

‍

References

‍

• India WhatsApp ‘child kidnap’ rumours claim two more victims (BBC) The people trying to fight fake news in India (BBC)
• Press Information Bureau – PIB Fact Check
• Brookings Institution – Encryption and Misinformation Report (2021)
• Curtis, T. L., Touzel, M. P., Garneau, W., Gruaz, M., Pinder, M., Wang, L. W., Krishna, S., Cohen, L., Godbout, J.-F., Rabbany, R., & Pelrine, K. (2024). Veracity: An Open-Source AI Fact-Checking System. arXiv.
• NDTV – PM Modi cautions against fake news (2022)
• Times of India – Govt may insist on WhatsApp traceability (2019)
• Medianama – Telegram refused to share ISIS channel data (2019)

‍

Executive Summary:

A misleading video has been widely shared online, falsely portraying Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru stating that he was not involved in the Indian independence struggle and he even opposed it. The video is a manipulated excerpt from Pandit Nehru’s final major interview in 1964 with American TV host Arnold Mich. The original footage available on India’s state broadcaster Prasar Bharati’s YouTube channel shows Pandit Nehru discussing about Muhammad Ali Jinnah, stating that Jinnah did not participate in the independence movement and opposed it. The viral video falsely edits Pandit Nehru’s comments to create a false narrative, which has been debunked upon reviewing the full, unedited interview.

Claims:

In the viral video, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru states that he was not involved in the fight for Indian independence and even opposed it.

‍

‍

Fact check:

Upon receiving the posts, we thoroughly checked the video and then we divided the video into keyframes using the inVid tool. We reverse-searched one of the frames of the video. We found a video uploaded by Prasar Bharati Archives official YouTube channel on 14 May 2019.

The description of the video reads, “Full video recording of what was perhaps Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's last significant interview to American TV Host Arnold Mich Jawaharlal Nehru's last TV Interview - May 1964e his death. Another book by Chandrika Prasad provides a date of 18th May 1964  when the interview was aired in New York, this is barely a few days before the death of Pandit Nehru on 27th May 1964.”

On reviewing the full video, we found that the viral clip of Pandit Nehru runs from 14:50 to 15:45. In this portion, Pandit Nehru is speaking about Muhammad Ali Jinnah, a key leader of the Muslim League.

At the timestamp 14:34, the American TV interviewer Arnold Mich says, “You and Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Jinnah, you were all involved at that point of Independence and then partition in the fight for Independence of India from the British domination.” Pandit Nehru replied, “Mr. Jinnah was not involved in the fight for independence at all. In fact, he opposed it. Muslim League was started in about 1911 I think. It was started really by the British encouraged by them so as to create factions, they did succeed to some extent. And ultimately there came the partition.” 

Upon thoroughly analyzing we found that the viral video is an edited version of the real video to misrepresent the actual context of the video.

We also found the same interview uploaded on a Facebook page named Nehru Centre for Social Research on 1 December 2021.

Hence, the viral claim video is misleading and fake.

Hence, the viral video is fake and misleading and netizens must be careful while believing in such an edited video.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the viral video claiming that Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru stated that he was not involved in the Indian independence struggle is found to be falsely edited. The original footage reveals that Pandit Nehru was referring to Muhammad Ali Jinnah's participation in the struggle, not his own. This explanation debunks the false story conveyed by the manipulated video.

• Claim:  Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru stated that he was not involved in the struggle for Indian independence and even he opposed it.
• Claimed on: YouTube, LinkedIn, Facebook, X (Formerly known as Twitter)
• Fact Check: Fake & Misleading

‍