#FactCheck - Edited Video Falsely Claims as an attack on PM Netanyahu in the Israeli Senate
Executive Summary:
A viral online video claims of an attack on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Israeli Senate. However, the CyberPeace Research Team has confirmed that the video is fake, created using video editing tools to manipulate the true essence of the original footage by merging two very different videos as one and making false claims. The original footage has no connection to an attack on Mr. Netanyahu. The claim that endorses the same is therefore false and misleading.

Claims:
A viral video claims an attack on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Israeli Senate.


Fact Check:
Upon receiving the viral posts, we conducted a Reverse Image search on the keyframes of the video. The search led us to various legitimate sources featuring an attack on an ethnic Turkish leader of Bulgaria but not on the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, none of which included any attacks on him.

We used AI detection tools, such as TrueMedia.org, to analyze the video. The analysis confirmed with 68.0% confidence that the video was an editing. The tools identified "substantial evidence of manipulation," particularly in the change of graphics quality of the footage and the breakage of the flow in footage with the change in overall background environment.



Additionally, an extensive review of official statements from the Knesset revealed no mention of any such incident taking place. No credible reports were found linking the Israeli PM to the same, further confirming the video’s inauthenticity.
Conclusion:
The viral video claiming of an attack on Prime Minister Netanyahu is an old video that has been edited. The research using various AI detection tools confirms that the video is manipulated using edited footage. Additionally, there is no information in any official sources. Thus, the CyberPeace Research Team confirms that the video was manipulated using video editing technology, making the claim false and misleading.
- Claim: Attack on the Prime Minister Netanyahu Israeli Senate
- Claimed on: Facebook, Instagram and X(Formerly Twitter)
- Fact Check: False & Misleading
Related Blogs

Introduction
An age of unprecedented problems has been brought about by the constantly changing technological world, and misuse of deepfake technology has become a reason for concern which has also been discussed by the Indian Judiciary. Supreme Court has expressed concerns about the consequences of this quickly developing technology, citing a variety of issues from security hazards to privacy violations to the spread of disinformation. In general, misuse of deepfake technology is particularly dangerous since it may fool even the sharpest eye because they are almost identical to the actual thing.
SC judge expressed Concerns: A Complex Issue
During a recent speech, Supreme Court Justice Hima Kohli emphasized the various issues that deepfakes present. She conveyed grave concerns about the possibility of invasions of privacy, the dissemination of false information, and the emergence of security threats. The ability of deepfakes to be created so convincingly that they seem to come from reliable sources is especially concerning as it increases the potential harm that may be done by misleading information.
Gender-Based Harassment Enhanced
In this internet era, there is a concerning chance that harassment based on gender will become more severe, as Justice Kohli noted. She pointed out that internet platforms may develop into epicentres for the quick spread of false information by anonymous offenders who act worrisomely and freely. The fact that virtual harassment is invisible may make it difficult to lessen the negative effects of toxic online postings. In response, It is advocated that we can develop a comprehensive policy framework that modifies current legal frameworks—such as laws prohibiting sexual harassment online —to adequately handle the issues brought on by technology breakthroughs.
Judicial Stance on Regulating Deepfake Content
In a different move, the Delhi High Court voiced concerns about the misuse of deepfake and exercised judicial intervention to limit the use of artificial intelligence (AI)-generated deepfake content. The intricacy of the matter was highlighted by a division bench. The bench proposed that the government, with its wider outlook, could be more qualified to handle the situation and come up with a fair resolution. This position highlights the necessity for an all-encompassing strategy by reflecting the court's acknowledgement of the technology's global and borderless character.
PIL on Deepfake
In light of these worries, an Advocate from Delhi has taken it upon himself to address the unchecked use of AI, with a particular emphasis on deepfake material. In the event that regulatory measures are not taken, his Public Interest Litigation (PIL), which is filed at the Delhi High Court, emphasises the necessity of either strict limits on AI or an outright prohibition. The necessity to discern between real and fake information is at the center of this case. Advocate suggests using distinguishable indicators, such as watermarks, to identify AI-generated work, reiterating the demand for openness and responsibility in the digital sphere.
The Way Ahead:
Finding a Balance
- The authorities must strike a careful balance between protecting privacy, promoting innovation, and safeguarding individual rights as they negotiate the complex world of deepfakes. The Delhi High Court's cautious stance and Justice Kohli's concerns highlight the necessity for a nuanced response that takes into account the complexity of deepfake technology.
- Because of the increased complexity with which the information may be manipulated in this digital era, the court plays a critical role in preserving the integrity of the truth and shielding people from the possible dangers of misleading technology. The legal actions will surely influence how the Indian judiciary and legislature respond to deepfakes and establish guidelines for the regulation of AI in the nation. The legal environment needs to change as technology does in order to allow innovation and accountability to live together.
Collaborative Frameworks:
- Misuse of deepfake technology poses an international problem that cuts beyond national boundaries. International collaborative frameworks might make it easier to share technical innovations, legal insights, and best practices. A coordinated response to this digital threat may be ensured by starting a worldwide conversation on deepfake regulation.
Legislative Flexibility:
- Given the speed at which technology is advancing, the legislative system must continue to adapt. It will be required to introduce new legislation expressly addressing developing technology and to regularly evaluate and update current laws. This guarantees that the judicial system can adapt to the changing difficulties brought forth by the misuse of deepfakes.
AI Development Ethics:
- Promoting moral behaviour in AI development is crucial. Tech businesses should abide by moral or ethical standards that place a premium on user privacy, responsibility, and openness. As a preventive strategy, ethical AI practices can lessen the possibility that AI technology will be misused for malevolent purposes.
Government-Industry Cooperation:
- It is essential that the public and commercial sectors work closely together. Governments and IT corporations should collaborate to develop and implement legislation. A thorough and equitable approach to the regulation of deepfakes may be ensured by establishing regulatory organizations with representation from both sectors.
Conclusion
A comprehensive strategy integrating technical, legal, and social interventions is necessary to navigate the path ahead. Governments, IT corporations, the courts, and the general public must all actively participate in the collective effort to combat the misuse of deepfakes, which goes beyond only legal measures. We can create a future where the digital ecosystem is safe and inventive by encouraging a shared commitment to tackling the issues raised by deepfakes. The Government is on its way to come up with dedicated legislation to tackle the issue of deepfakes. Followed by the recently issued government advisory on misinformation and deepfake.
References:
.webp)
Introduction
The rise of misinformation, disinformation, and synthetic media content on the internet and social media platforms has raised serious concerns, emphasizing the need for responsible use of social media to maintain information accuracy and combat misinformation incidents. With online misinformation rampant all over the world, the World Economic Forum's 2024 Global Risk Report, notably ranks India amongst the highest in terms of risk of mis/disinformation.
The widespread online misinformation on social media platforms necessitates a joint effort between tech/social media platforms and the government to counter such incidents. The Indian government is actively seeking to collaborate with tech/social media platforms to foster a safe and trustworthy digital environment and to also ensure compliance with intermediary rules and regulations. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has used ‘extraordinary powers’ to block certain YouTube channels, X (Twitter) & Facebook accounts, allegedly used to spread harmful misinformation. The government has issued advisories regulating deepfake and misinformation, and social media platforms initiated efforts to implement algorithmic and technical improvements to counter misinformation and secure the information landscape.
Efforts by the Government and Social Media Platforms to Combat Misinformation
- Advisory regulating AI, deepfake and misinformation
The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) issued a modified advisory on 15th March 2024, in suppression of the advisory issued on 1st March 2024. The latest advisory specifies that the platforms should inform all users about the consequences of dealing with unlawful information on platforms, including disabling access, removing non-compliant information, suspension or termination of access or usage rights of the user to their user account and imposing punishment under applicable law. The advisory necessitates identifying synthetically created content across various formats, and instructs platforms to employ labels, unique identifiers, or metadata to ensure transparency.
- Rules related to content regulation
The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (Updated as on 6.4.2023) have been enacted under the IT Act, 2000. These rules assign specific obligations on intermediaries as to what kind of information is to be hosted, displayed, uploaded, published, transmitted, stored or shared. The rules also specify provisions to establish a grievance redressal mechanism by platforms and remove unlawful content within stipulated time frames.
- Counteracting misinformation during Indian elections 2024
To counter misinformation during the Indian elections the government and social media platforms made their best efforts to ensure the electoral integrity was saved from any threat of mis/disinformation. The Election Commission of India (ECI) further launched the 'Myth vs Reality Register' to combat misinformation and to ensure the integrity of the electoral process during the general elections in 2024. The ECI collaborated with Google to empower the citizenry by making it easy to find critical voting information on Google Search and YouTube. In this way, Google has supported the 2024 Indian General Election by providing high-quality information to voters and helping people navigate AI-generated content. Google connected voters to helpful information through product features that show data from trusted institutions across its portfolio. YouTube showcased election information panels, featuring content from authoritative sources.
- YouTube and X (Twitter) new ‘Notes Feature’
- Notes Feature on YouTube: YouTube is testing an experimental feature that allows users to add notes to provide relevant, timely, and easy-to-understand context for videos. This initiative builds on previous products that display helpful information alongside videos, such as information panels and disclosure requirements when content is altered or synthetic. YouTube clarified that the pilot will be available on mobiles in the U.S. and in the English language, to start with. During this test phase, viewers, participants, and creators are invited to give feedback on the quality of the notes.
- Community Notes feature on X: Community Notes on X aims to enhance the understanding of potentially misleading posts by allowing users to add context to them. Contributors can leave notes on any post, and if enough people rate the note as helpful, it will be publicly displayed. The algorithm is open source and publicly available on GitHub, allowing anyone to audit, analyze, or suggest improvements. However, Community Notes do not represent X's viewpoint and cannot be edited or modified by their teams. A post with a Community Note will not be labelled, removed, or addressed by X unless it violates the X Rules, Terms of Service, or Privacy Policy. Failure to abide by these rules can result in removal from accessing Community Notes and/or other remediations. Users can report notes that do not comply with the rules by selecting the menu on a note and selecting ‘Report’ or using the provided form.
CyberPeace Policy Recommendations
Countering widespread online misinformation on social media platforms requires a multipronged approach that involves joint efforts from different stakeholders. Platforms should invest in state-of-the-art algorithms and technology to detect and flag suspected misleading information. They should also establish trustworthy fact-checking protocols and collaborate with expert fact-checking groups. Campaigns, seminars, and other educational materials must be encouraged by the government to increase public awareness and digital literacy about the mis/disinformation risks and impacts. Netizens should be empowered with the necessary skills and ability to discern fact and misleading information to successfully browse true information in the digital information age. The joint efforts by Government authorities, tech companies, and expert cyber security organisations are vital in promoting a secure and honest online information landscape and countering the spread of mis/disinformation. Platforms must encourage netizens/users to foster appropriate online conduct while using platforms and abiding by the terms & conditions and community guidelines of the platforms. Encouraging a culture of truth and integrity on the internet, honouring differing points of view, and confirming facts all help to create a more reliable and information-resilient environment.
References:
- https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Advisory%2015March%202024.pdf
- https://blog.google/intl/en-in/company-news/outreach-initiatives/supporting-the-2024-indian-general-election/
- https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/new-ways-to-offer-viewers-more-context/
- https://help.x.com/en/using-x/community-notes

What Is a VPN and its Significance
A Virtual Private Network (VPN) creates a secure and reliable network connection between a device and the internet. It hides your IP address by rerouting it through the VPN’s host servers. For example, if you connect to a US server, you appear to be browsing from the US, even if you’re in India. It also encrypts the data being transferred in real-time so that it is not decipherable by third parties such as ad companies, the government, cyber criminals, or others.
All online activity leaves a digital footprint that is tracked for data collection, and surveillance, increasingly jeopardizing user privacy. VPNs are thus a powerful tool for enhancing the privacy and security of users, businesses, governments and critical sectors. They also help protect users on public Wi-Fi networks ( for example, at airports and hotels), journalists, activists and whistleblowers, remote workers and businesses, citizens in high-surveillance states, and researchers by affording them a degree of anonymity.
What VPNs Do and Don’t
- What VPNs Can Do:
- Mask your IP address to enhance privacy.
- Encrypt data to protect against hackers, especially on public Wi-Fi.
- Bypass geo-restrictions (e.g., access streaming content blocked in India).
- What VPNs Cannot Do:
- Make you completely anonymous and protect your identity (websites can still track you via cookies, browser fingerprinting, etc.).
- Protect against malware or phishing.
- Prevent law enforcement from tracing you if they have access to VPN logs.
- Free VPNs usually even share logs with third parties.
VPNs in the Context of India’s Privacy Policy Landscape
In April 2022, CERT-In (Computer Emergency Response Team- India) released Directions under Section 70B (6) of the Information Technology (“IT”) Act, 2000, mandating VPN service providers to store customer data such as “validated names of subscribers/customers hiring the services, period of hire including dates, IPs allotted to / being used by the members, email address and IP address and time stamp used at the time of registration/onboarding, the purpose for hiring services, validated address and contact numbers, and the ownership pattern of the subscribers/customers hiring services” collected as part of their KYC (Know Your Customer) requirements, for a period of five years, even after the subscription has been cancelled. While this directive was issued to aid with cybersecurity investigations, it undermines the core purpose of VPNs- anonymity and privacy. It also gave operators very little time to carry out compliance measures.
Following this, operators such as NordVPN, ExpressVPN, ProtonVPN, and others pulled their physical servers out of India, and now use virtual servers hosted abroad (e.g., Singapore) with Indian IP addresses. While the CERT-In Directions have extra-territorial applicability, virtual servers are able to bypass them since they physically operate from a foreign jurisdiction. This means that they are effectively not liable to provide user information to Indian investigative agencies, beating the whole purpose of the directive. To counter this, the Indian government could potentially block non-compliant VPN services in the future. Further, there are concerns about overreach since the Directions are unclear about how long CERT-In can retain the data it acquires from VPN operators, how it will be used and safeguarded, and the procedure of holding VPN operators responsible for compliance.
Conclusion: The Need for a Privacy-Conscious Framework
The CERT-In Directions reflect a governance model which, by prioritizing security over privacy, compromises on safeguards like independent oversight or judicial review to balance the two. The policy design renders a lose-lose situation because virtual VPN services are still available, while the government loses oversight. If anything, this can make it harder for the government to track suspicious activity. It also violates the principle of proportionality established in the landmark privacy judgment, Puttaswamy v. Union of India (II) by giving government agencies the power to collect excessive VPN data on any user. These issues underscore the need for a national-level, privacy-conscious cybersecurity framework that informs other policies on data protection and cybercrime investigations. In the meantime, users who use VPNs are advised to choose reputable providers, ensure strong encryption, and follow best practices to maintain online privacy and security.
References
- https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/definitions/what-is-a-vpn
- https://internetfreedom.in/top-secret-one-year-on-cert-in-refuses-to-reveal-information-about-compliance-notices-issued-under-its-2022-directions-on-cybersecurity/#:~:text=tl;dr,under%20this%20new%20regulatory%20mandate.
- https://www.wired.com/story/vpn-firms-flee-india-data-collection-law/#:~:text=Starting%20today%2C%20the%20Indian%20Computer,years%2C%20even%20after%20they%20have