#FactCheck - Old Ajman Fire Video Falsely Linked to Iran Drone Attack on Dubai Airport
Executive Summary:
The ongoing conflict between Iran and the US-Israel has entered its 19th day. Meanwhile, a video is being widely shared on social media claiming that Iran is carrying out continuous drone attacks at Dubai International Airport. The clip shows visuals of massive fire and explosion However, research by the CyberPeace has found the claim to be misleading. Our research revealed that the video has been available on the internet since 2020. In reality, the footage shows a fire at a market in Ajman, UAE, and not explosions at Dubai Airport in 2026. Although there were recent reports of a fire near DXB (Dubai Airport) following a drone attack, this video is not related to that incident.
Claim:
On social media platform X (formerly Twitter), a user shared the viral video on March 17, 2026, writing:
“Dubai International Airport – Iran is dropping drones continuously.”
Post link, archive link, and screenshot are given below:
Fact Check:
To verify the viral claim, we extracted keyframes from the video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the research, we found the same video on a YouTube channel, where it was uploaded on August 6, 2020. The caption read: “Ajman fruits and vegetables market caught in fire.”
Based on this clue, it became clear that the viral video has no connection with the ongoing Iran-US-Israel conflict. In the next step, we searched using relevant keywords and found a report published on August 5, 2020, on the website of Gulf News, which contained visuals similar to the viral video.
According to the Gulf News report, a major fire broke out at a public market in the new industrial area of Ajman at around 6:30 pm. The blaze was later brought under control by Ajman Civil Defence with assistance from teams in Dubai, Sharjah, and Umm Al Quwain.
Conclusion:
Our research found that the viral video has been online since 2020 and shows a fire at a market in Ajman, UAE. It is not related to any recent incident at Dubai Airport.
Related Blogs
Introduction
On August 8, 2026, Hyderabad Police Commissioner V.C. Sajjanar posted an unusual warning on X: colourful posters offering a "handsome guy" to join you for coffee or a movie at 50% off: it was not a quirky dating startup but a calculated cyber fraud. Within hours, the "Rent Boyfriend" alert had gone viral, pulling back the curtain on a scam that blends India's growing loneliness economy, classic confidence tricks, and AI-generated imagery. Here is what's actually happening, why it works, and how to protect yourself.
A Trend Growing Fast: In India and Worldwide
Paid-companionship culture itself isn't new. "Rent a friend" services began in Japan and later China, where apps let people hire a company for a movie, a walk, or a family event without romantic or sexual expectations. The idea reached India as early as 2018, when Mumbai's "Rent A Guy" app began recruiting men for casual outings; by 2022, similar pages like "Toy Boy" and "Hire a Friend" had spread to Bengaluru, and Valentine's Day 2025 saw ₹389 "rent a boyfriend" posters plastered across the city. Fraudsters have now hijacked this recognisable, socially normalised idea and weaponised it: the Hyderabad ads promised specific packages, ₹499 for a coffee date, ₹1,249 for a movie, ₹1,999 for a wedding, and ₹4,499 for ten hours collected via QR codes and wallets, then vanished. The underlying numbers show why this template is so attractive to criminals. Complaints filed on India's National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal jumped from roughly 4.5 lakh in 2021 to about 2.3 million by 2026, and the country now logs an estimated 4,000-plus cybercrime complaints a day. Globally, romance and "confidence fraud" are some of the costliest online crimes: the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center recorded 23,159 romance-fraud complaints in 2025 worth $929.3 million, which is a 38% jump over 2024, while the UK logged over £102 million in losses and Australia and Canada reported tens of millions more. Crucially, IC3's 2025 report flagged AI as an accelerant for the first time, attributing roughly $19 million in romance-scam losses directly to AI-generated profiles, images and chat exactly the "AI-generated photographs" Hyderabad Police say the Rent Boyfriend network used.
Case Studies
The Rent Boyfriend network is one data point in a wider, well-documented pattern in India:
- Hyderabad, August 2026: Fraudsters ran Instagram, Telegram and Facebook pages using stock or AI-generated photos of "attractive men", collected advance payments and security deposits, and then blocked victims, the case that prompted this advisory.
- Jaipur, 2026: A honey-trap and extortion ring allegedly used AI-manipulated videos and images to blackmail a businessman out of nearly ₹90 lakh, with police examining how far synthetic media was used to fabricate compromising content.
- Mumbai: A gang was arrested for cheating a woman out of ₹16.18 lakh in gold and cash after promising to "reunite" her with a lost partner, a variant that exploits the same emotional vulnerability through a different pretext.
- Gujarat, 2025: A social media influencer with over 10 lakh followers was arrested for allegedly honey-trapping and blackmailing a builder, illustrating how organised such rackets have become.
These sit alongside a global backdrop where FBI data shows confidence and romance fraud disproportionately drains people over 60 (63% of US losses in 2025) even as India's version increasingly targets young women and students, a sign the tactic is being localised for different demographics rather than disappearing.
Why It Works: The Psychology of Loneliness and Grooming
Researchers who study romance-fraud victims consistently find that loneliness, a tendency toward idealised romantic beliefs, and a need for social connection are the strongest predictors of victimisation. Scammers exploit this through a well-rehearsed grooming arc: rapid, excessive flattery ("love bombing") to create instant intimacy; mirroring the target's interests and values to seem like a perfect match; gently discouraging outside opinions so doubts don't surface; and only then introducing a financial ask, framed as something small and reasonable — a booking fee or a security deposit precisely because it feels low-stakes compared to a direct cash demand. The "package" pricing in the Rent Boyfriend ads (₹499 for coffee, scaling up to ₹4,499) mimics legitimate e-commerce, which lowers a target's guard further. Once payment is made and blocked, many victims feel too embarrassed to report it — a shame response researchers and police repeatedly flag as the biggest reason such scams are under-reported.
Red Flags and What To Do?
Red flags to watch for:
- Companionship or dating offers with attractive stock/AI-style photos and steep "discounts"
- Contact only through DMs, with no verifiable business identity, address or reviews.
- Requests for advance payment, "security deposits", or booking fees via UPI/QR code before any service is delivered.
- Reluctance to do a video call or a video call that looks slightly off (a common AI/deepfake tell).
- Pressure to move fast, share personal photos, or keep the interaction secret from friends and family.
Precautions:
- Never send money to confirm a booking with an unverified individual or page.
- Avoid sharing personal photographs, phone numbers, addresses or financial details with strangers online.
- Don't meet anyone in person whom you've only interacted with through such ads.
- Parents should stay engaged with what their children see and who they talk to on social media.
If you suspect a scam or have lost money: Don't panic and don't pay more to "fix" it. Stop all contact, save screenshots and payment records, and call the 1930 cybercrime helpline or file a complaint at cybercrime.gov.in immediately — reporting within the first "golden hour" significantly improves the chance of freezing transferred funds before they're withdrawn.
The Government, Platform and Legal Angle
India already has legal tools for this, though enforcement lags the pace of the fraud. Cheating by personation online is punishable under Section 66D of the IT Act, 2000 (up to three years' imprisonment plus fine), often paired with Section 66C on identity theft; the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita's cheating provisions (replacing IPC Sections 420/419) apply where money is dishonestly induced. Under the IT (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules, 2021, platforms like Instagram, Facebook and Telegram must appoint a grievance officer, acknowledge complaints within 24 hours, and take down unlawful content within 36 hours of a court or government notification obligation. Hyderabad's cybercrime wing can invoke to force the removal of these ad networks. Larger "significant social media intermediaries" carry added duties around traceability and proactive monitoring.
The gap is upstream: platforms currently do little to verify who is running a commercial-sounding page before it reaches thousands of users, and AI-generated "profile" images are not systematically flagged. A stronger response would combine faster platform-side KYC for pages soliciting payment, proactive detection of AI-generated advertising imagery, and continued expansion of the 1930 golden-hour fund-freezing mechanism paired with public advisories like Hyderabad's, which remain one of the fastest ways to blunt a scam before it scales.
Conclusion
Loneliness is not something anyone should be ashamed of, but it is exactly what these networks are built to exploit. No genuine companionship service needs an advance QR payment before you've even met the person.
Sources
- Deccan Herald — Hyderabad Police Commissioner cautions young women over 'rent boyfriend' offers
- Republic World — 'Rent Boyfriend' Offers On Social Media?
- Newsdrum — What is 'Rent Boyfriend' trap?
- IndiaSpend — How India's Cyber Crime Incidence Is Rising
- FBI IC3 2025 Annual Report Brochure
Introduction
In a setback to the Centre, the Bombay High Court on Friday 20th September 2024, struck down the provisions under IT Amendment Rules 2023, which empowered the Central Government to establish Fact Check Units (FCUs) to identify ‘fake and misleading’ information about its business on social media platforms.
Chronological Overview
- On 6th April 2023, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) notified the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023 (IT Amendment Rules, 2023). These rules introduced new provisions to establish a fact-checking unit with respect to “any business of the central government”. This amendment was done In exercise of the powers conferred by section 87 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. (IT Act).
- On 20 March 2024, the Central Government notified the Press Information Bureau (PIB) as FCU under rule 3(1)(b)(v) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules 2023 (IT Amendment Rules 2023).
- The next day on 21st March 2024, the Supreme Court stayed the Centre's decision on notifying PIB -FCU, considering the pendency of the proceedings before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. A detailed analysis covered by CyberPeace on the Supreme Court Stay decision can be accessed here.
- In the latest development, the Bombay High Court on 20th September 2024, struck down the provisions under IT Amendment Rules 2023, which empowered the Central Government to establish Fact Check Units (FCUs) to identify ‘fake and misleading’ information about its business on social media platforms.
Brief Overview of Bombay High Court decision dated 20th September 2024
Justice AS Chandurkar was appointed as the third judge after a split verdict in January 2023 by a division bench consisting of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhal. As a Tie-breaker judge' Justice AS Chandurkar delivered the decision striking down provisions for setting up a Fact Check Unit under IT amendment 2023 rules. Striking down the Centre's proposed fact check unit provision, Justice A S Chandurkar of Bombay High Court also opined that there was no rationale to undertake an exercise in determining whether information related to the business of the Central govt was fake or false or misleading when in digital form but not doing the same when such information was in print. It was also contended that there is no justification to introduce an FCU only in relation to the business of the Central Government. Rule 3(1)(b)(v) has a serious chilling effect on the exercise of the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution since the communication of the view of the FCU will result in the intermediary simply pulling down the content for fear of consequences or losing the safe harbour provision given under IT Act.
Justice Chandurkar held that the expressions ‘fake, false or misleading’ are ‘vague and overbroad’, and that the ‘test of proportionality’ is not satisfied. Rule 3(1)(b)(v), was violative of Articles 14 and 19 (1) (a) and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution and it is “ultra vires”, or beyond the powers, of the IT Act.
Role of Expert Organisations in Curbing Mis/Disinformation and Fake News
In light of the recent developments, and the rising incidents of Mis/Disinformation and Fake News it becomes significantly important that we all stand together in the fight against these challenges. The actions against Mis/Disinformation and fake news should be strengthened by collective efforts, the expert organisations like CyberPeace Foundation plays an key role in enabling and encouraging netizens to exercise caution and rely on authenticated sources, rather than solely rely on govt FCU to block the content.
Mis/Disinformation and Fake News should be stopped, identified and countered by netizens at the very first stage of its spread. In light of the Bombay High Court's decision to stuck down the provision related to setting up the FCU by the Central Government, it entails that the government's intention to address misinformation related solely to its business/operations may not have been effectively communicated in the eyes of the judiciary.
It is high time to exercise collective efforts against Mis/Disinformation and Fake News and support expert organizations who are actively engaged in conducting proactive measures, and campaigns to target these challenges, specifically in the online information landscape. CyberPeace actively publishes fact-checking reports and insights on Prebunking and Debunking, conducts expert sessions and takes various key steps aimed at empowering netizens to build cognitive defences to recognise the susceptible information, disregard misleading claims and prevent further spreads to ensure the true online information landscape.
References:
- https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2024/09/20/bombay-high-court-it-rules-amendment-2023-fact-check-units-article14-article19-legal-news/#:~:text=Bombay%20High%20Court%3A%20A%20case,grounds%20that%20it%20violated%20constitutional
- https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/bombay-hc-strikes-down-it-act-amendment-fact-check-unit-9579044/
- https://www.cyberpeace.org/resources/blogs/supreme-court-stay-on-centres-notification-of-pibs-fact-check-unit-under-it-amendment-rules-2023
Executive Summary
A purported clipping from an Australian newspaper is being circulated on social media with the claim that it published a report stating that people attended Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s public event in Melbourne only because free roti and curry were being served. CyberPeace Research Wing’s research found the viral newspaper clipping to be fake and digitally edited. Our research revealed that The Age, the newspaper featured in the viral image, did not publish any such report in its July 10 edition. Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in Melbourne, Australia, on July 8, after concluding his visit to Indonesia. On July 9, he addressed the Indian diaspora at Melbourne's stadium alongside Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, with more than 30,000 people attending the event. The viral newspaper clipping falsely links this event to a fabricated headline claiming that “the crowd gathered because free roti and curry were being served.”
Claim
Sharing the purported newspaper clipping, an X user wrote:“Modi supporters go anywhere for free food! If there is anything left to disgrace the country, let us know. Free curry and roti were served using taxpayers’ money to gather a crowd at PM Modi’s event in Australia. Australian newspaper report.”
https://x.com/ssrajputINC/status/2075806767129235668
https://archive.ph/https://x.com/ssrajputINC/status/2075806767129235668
Fact Check
To verify the authenticity of the purported Australian newspaper clipping, we first extracted keyframes and performed a reverse image search. During the research, we found that the original newspaper clipping had been posted on X by journalist Aman Sharma on July 10, 2026. The original clipping contained no such report as the one seen in the viral image. According to the caption of the post, the newspaper coverage was published by Australian newspapers during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Australia.
https://x.com/AmanKayamHai_/status/2075362478364787165/photo/3
Since Prime Minister Modi's Melbourne event took place on July 9, we examined the July 10 digital edition of The Age. We found the same coverage on Pages 4 and 5 of the newspaper. However, there was no report mentioning that people attended the event because free food was being distributed. Instead, the space shown in the viral clipping actually carried a report about Australian Opposition Leader Angus Taylor's criticism of far-right Senator Pauline Hanson's One Nation party. https://edition.theage.com.au/shortcode/THE965/archive
Our comparison confirmed that the viral image had been digitally altered, with the original news story replaced by fabricated text to falsely suggest that The Age had published such a report.
Conclusion
Our research found that the purported Australian newspaper clipping is fake and digitally edited. The Age did not publish any report claiming that people attended Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Melbourne event because free roti and curry were being served. The viral image has been manipulated to spread a false narrative and is being shared with a misleading claim.
