#FactCheck - MS Dhoni Sculpture Falsely Portrayed as Chanakya 3D Recreation

Executive Summary:

One of the most complex threats that have appeared in the space of network security is focused on the packet rate attacks that tend to challenge traditional approaches to DDoS threats’ involvement. In this year, the British based biggest Internet cloud provider of Europe, OVHcloud was attacked by a record and unprecedented DDoS attack reaching the rate of 840 million packets per second. Targets over 1 Tbps have been observed more regularly starting from 2023, and becoming nearly a daily occurrence in 2024. The maximum attack on May 25, 2024, got to 2.5 Tbps, this points to a direction to even larger and more complex attacks of up to 5 Tbps. Many of these attacks target critical equipment such as Mikrotik models within the core network environment; detection and subsequent containment of these threats prove a test for cloud security measures.

Modus Operandi of a Packet Rate Attack:

A type of cyberattack where an attacker sends with a large volume of packets in a short period of time aimed at a network device is known as packet rate attack, or packet flood attack or network flood attack under volumetric DDoS attack. As opposed to the deliberately narrow bandwidth attacks, these raids target the computation time linked with package processing. 

Key technical characteristics include: 

• Packet Size: Usually compact, and in many cases is less than 100 bytes 
• Protocol: Named UDP, although it can also involve TCP SYN or other protocol flood attacks 
•  Rate: Exceeding 100 million packets per second (Mpps), with recent attacks exceeding 840 Mpps 
• Source IP Diversity: Usually originating from a small number of sources and with a large number of requests per IP, which testifies about the usage of amplification principles 
• Attack on the Network Stack : To understand the impact, let's examine how these attacks affect different layers of the network stack:

1. Layer 3 (Network Layer):

• Each packet requires routing table lookups and hence routers and L3 switches have the problem of high CPU usage. 
• These mechanisms can often be saturated so that network communication will be negatively impacted by the attacker.

2. Layer 4 (Transport Layer):

• Other stateful devices (e.g. firewalls, load balancers) have problems with tables of connections 
• TCP SYN floods can also utilize all connection slots so that no incoming genuine connection can be made.

3. Layer 7 (Application Layer): 

• Web servers and application firewalls may be triggered to deliver a better response in a large number of requests 
• Session management systems can become saturated, and hence, the performance of future iterations will be a little lower than expected in terms of their perceived quality by the end-user. 

Technical Analysis of Attack Vectors

Recent studies have identified several key vectors exploited in high-volume packet rate attacks:

1.MikroTik RouterOS Exploitation:

• Vulnerability: CVE-2023-4967
• Impact: Allows remote attackers to generate massive packet floods
• Technical detail: Exploits a flaw in the FastTrack implementation

2.DNS Amplification:

• Amplification factor: Up to 54x
• Technique: Exploits open DNS resolvers to generate large responses to small queries
• Challenge: Difficult to distinguish from legitimate DNS traffic

3.NTP Reflection:

• Command: monlist
• Amplification factor: Up to 556.9x
• Mitigation: Requires NTP server updates and network-level filtering

Mitigation Strategies: A Technical Perspective

1. Combating packet rate attacks requires a multi-layered approach:

• Hardware-based Mitigation:
• Implementation: FPGA-based packet processing
• Advantage: Can handle millions of packets per second with minimal latency
• Challenge: High cost and specialized programming requirements

2.Anycast Network Distribution:

• Technique: Distributing traffic across multiple global nodes
• Benefit: Dilutes attack traffic, preventing single-point failures
• Consideration: Requires careful BGP routing configuration

3.Stateless Packet Filtering:

• Method: Applying filtering rules without maintaining connection state
• Advantage: Lower computational overhead compared to stateful inspection
• Trade-off: Less granular control over traffic

4.Machine Learning-based Detection:

• Approach: Using ML models to identify attack patterns in real-time
• Key metrics: Packet size distribution, inter-arrival times, protocol anomalies
• Challenge: Requires continuous model training to adapt to new attack patterns

Performance Metrics and Benchmarking

When evaluating DDoS mitigation solutions for packet rate attacks, consider these key performance indicators:

• Flows per second (fps) or packet per second (pps) capability
• Dispersion and the latency that comes with it is inherent to mitigation systems.
• The false positive rate in the case of the attack detection
• Exposure time before beginning of mitigation from the moment of attack

Way Forward

The packet rate attacks are constantly evolving where the credible defenses have not stayed the same. The next step entails extension to edge computing and 5G networks for distributing mitigation closer to the attack origins. Further, AI-based proactive tools of analysis for prediction of such threats will help to strengthen the protection of critical infrastructure against them in advance.

In order to stay one step ahead in this, it is necessary to constantly conduct research, advance new technologies, and work together with other cybersecurity professionals. There is always a need to develop secure defenses that safeguard these networks.

Reference:

https://blog.ovhcloud.com/the-rise-of-packet-rate-attacks-when-core-routers-turn-evil/

https://cybersecuritynews.com/record-breaking-ddos-attack-840-mpps/

https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/famous-ddos-attacks/

‍

Executive Summary:

QakBot, a particular kind of banking trojan virus, is capable of stealing personal data, banking passwords, and session data from a user's computer. Since its first discovery in 2009, Qakbot has had substantial modifications.

C2 Server commands infected devices and receives stolen data, which is essentially the brain behind Qakbot's operations.Qakbot employs PEDLL (Communication Files), a malicious program, to interact with the server in order to accomplish its main goals. Sensitive data, including passwords or personal information, is taken from the victims and sent to the C2 server. Referrer files start the main line of communication between Qakbot and the C2 server, such as phishing papers or malware droppers. WHOIS data includes registration details for this server, which helps to identify its ownership or place of origin.

This report specifically focuses on the C2 server infrastructure located in India, shedding light on its architecture, communication patterns, and threat landscape.

Introduction:

QakBot is also known as Pinkslipbot, QuakBot, and QBot, capable of stealing personal data, banking passwords, and session data from a user's computer. Malware is bad since it spreads very quickly to other networks, affecting them like a worm.,It employs contemporary methods like web injection to eavesdrop on customer online banking interactions. Qakbot is a member of a kind of malware that has robust persistence techniques, which are said to be the most advanced in order to gain access to compromised computers for extended periods of time.
‍

Technical Analysis: 

The following IP addresses have been confirmed as active C2 servers supporting Qbot malware activity:

‍

Sample IP's

• 123.201.40[.]112
• 117.198.151[.]182
• 103.250.38[.]115
• 49.33.237[.]65
• 202.134.178[.]157
• 124.123.42[.]115
• 115.96.64[.]9
• 123.201.44[.]86
• 117.202.161[.]73
• 136.232.254[.]46

These servers have been operational in the past 14 days (report created in the month of Nov) and are being leveraged to perpetuate malicious activities globally.

URL/IP: 123.201.40[.]112

• inetnum: 123.201.32[.]0 - 123.201.47[.]255
• netname: YOUTELE
• descr: YOU Telecom India Pvt Ltd
• country: IN
• admin-c: HA348-AP
• tech-c: NI23-AP
• status: ASSIGNED NON-PORTABLE 
• mnt-by: MAINT-IN-YOU
• last-modified: 2022-08-16T06:43:19Z
• mnt-irt: IRT-IN-YOU
• source: APNIC
• irt: IRT-IN-YOU
• address: YOU Broadband India Limited
• address: 2nd Floor, Millennium Arcade
• address: Opp. Samarth Park, Adajan-Hazira Road
• address: Surat-395009,Gujarat
• address: India
• e-mail: abuse@youbroadband.co.in
• abuse-mailbox: abuse@youbroadband.co.in 
• admin-c: HA348-AP
• tech-c: NI23-AP
• auth: # Filtered
• mnt-by: MAINT-IN-YOU
• last-modified: 2022-08-08T10:30:51Z
• source: APNIC
• person: Harindra Akbari
• nic-hdl: HA348-AP
• e-mail: harindra.akbari@youbroadband.co.in
• address: YOU Broadband India Limited
• address: 2nd Floor, Millennium Arcade
• address: Opp. Samarth Park, Adajan-Hazira Road
• address: Surat-395009,Gujarat
• address: India
• phone: +91-261-7113400
• fax-no: +91-261-2789501
• country: IN
• mnt-by: MAINT-IN-YOU
• last-modified: 2022-08-10T11:01:47Z
• source: APNIC
• person: NOC IQARA
• nic-hdl: NI23-AP
• e-mail: network@youbroadband.co.in
• address: YOU Broadband India Limited
• address: 2nd Floor, Millennium Arcade
• address: Opp. Samarth Park, Adajan-Hazira Road
• address: Surat-395009,Gujarat
• address: India
• phone: +91-261-7113400
• fax-no: +91-261-2789501
• country: IN
• mnt-by: MAINT-IN-YOU
• last-modified: 2022-08-08T10:18:09Z
• source: APNIC
• route: 123.201.40.0/24
• descr: YOU Broadband & Cable India Ltd.
• origin: AS18207
• mnt-lower: MAINT-IN-YOU
• mnt-routes: MAINT-IN-YOU
• mnt-by: MAINT-IN-YOU
• last-modified: 2012-01-25T11:25:55Z
• source: APNIC

IP 123.201.40[.]112 uses the requested URL-path to make a GET request on the IP-address at port 80. "NOT RESPONDED" is the response status code for the request "C:\PROGRAM FILES GOOGLE CHROME APPLICATION CHROME.EXE" that was started by the process. 

Programs that retrieve their server data using a GET request are considered legitimate. The Google Chrome browser, a fully functional application widely used for web browsing, was used to make the actual request. It asks to get access to the server with IP 123.201.40[.]112 in order to collect its data and other resources. 

Malware uses GET requests to retrieve more commands or to send data back to the command and control servers. In this instance, it may be an attack server making the request to a known IP address with a known port number. Since the server has not replied to the request, the response status "NOT RESPONDED" may indicate that the activity was carried out with malicious intent.

This graph illustrates how the Qakbot virus operates and interacts with its C2 server, located in India and with the IP address 123.201.40[.]112. 

Impact

Qbot is a kind of malware that is typically distributed through hacked websites, malicious email attachments, and phishing operations. It targets private user information, including corporate logins or banking passwords. The deployment of ransomware: Payloads from organizations such as ProLock and Egregor ransomware are delivered by Qbot, a predecessor. Network Vulnerability: Within corporate networks, compromised systems will act as gateways for more lateral movement.

Proposed Recommendations for Mitigation

• Quick Action: To stop any incoming or outgoing traffic, the discovered IP addresses will be added to intrusion detection/prevention systems and firewalls.
• Network monitoring: Examining network log information for any attempts to get in touch with these IPs
• Email security: Give permission for anti-phishing programs.
• Endpoint Protection: To identify and stop Qbot infestations, update antivirus definitions.,Install tools for endpoint detection and response.
• Patch management: To reduce vulnerabilities that Qbot exploits, update all operating systems and software on a regular basis.
• Incident Response: Immediately isolate compromised computers.
• Awareness: Dissemination of this information to block the IP addresses of active C2 servers supporting Qbot malware activity has to be carried out.

Conclusion:

The discovery of these C2 servers reveals the growing danger scenario that Indian networks must contend with. To protect its infrastructure from future abuse, organizations are urged to act quickly and put the aforementioned precautions into place. 

Reference: 

• Threat Intelligence - ANY.RUN
• https://www.virustotal.com/gui
• https://www.virustotal.com/gui/ip-address/123.201.40.112/relations

‍

Executive Summary

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was reportedly killed in a major attack carried out by Israel and the United States, with claims circulating that Iranian state media confirmed his death early Sunday morning. Amid these claims, a video is being widely shared on social media. The viral video shows a body trapped under debris. Users sharing the clip claim that the body seen in the footage is that of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. However, research conducted by CyberPeace found the viral claim to be false. Our research revealed that the video is not authentic but AI-generated.

‍

Claim:

‍

On March 1, 2026, an Instagram user shared the viral video with the caption: “Shaheed Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Hosseini Khamenei — Neither fled nor hid in a bunker, embraced death like a brave man.” The link to the post and its archived version are provided below along with a screenshot.

• https://archive.ph/tdMDs 
• https://www.instagram.com/reel/DVWPB9ziYlg/ 

‍

‍

‍

Fact Check:

‍

Upon closely examining the viral video, we noticed several visual irregularities and technical inconsistencies. This raised suspicion about its authenticity. We then scanned the video using the AI detection tool Hive Moderation. The results indicated that approximately 83 percent of the content showed signs of being AI-generated.

‍

‍

To further verify the claim, we also analyzed the video using another AI detection tool, WasItAI. The findings similarly suggested that the video was generated using artificial intelligence.

‍

‍

‍

Conclusion:

‍

Our research establishes that the viral video is not real. It has been artificially generated using AI and is being shared with misleading claims.

‍