#FactCheck -AI-Generated Image Falsely Shared as Iranian Soldiers Standing Near Downed Helicopter
Executive Summary
Amid rising tensions involving Iran, Israel and the United States following reports in early April 2026 that Iran had shot down an American fighter aircraft, a picture is going viral on social media claiming to show Iranian soldiers standing beside the wreckage of a destroyed helicopter while holding the Iranian flag. Research by CyberPeace Research Wing found that the viral claim is false. The image has been created using artificial intelligence and does not depict any real incident. The picture was generated using Google AI tools and is being misleadingly circulated online with different claims.
Claim
A Facebook page named “official salman 09” shared the image on May 1, 2026, along with a lengthy caption describing the scene as a symbol of Iran’s battlefield success. The post portrayed the image as evidence of a helicopter being brought down during ongoing tensions in the Middle East and suggested that the photo reflected strength, morale and victory in war.
- https://www.facebook.com/permalink.phpstory_fbid=pfbid02TAac6JwZha2UU4T8QiCGq4ENmsnNSwvigaz3vKxr9UWLbhghNsnMMpZdQ3dUuQ1rl&id=100092392280139
- https://archive.ph/
Fact Check
To verify the authenticity of the image, we first conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. The image did not appear in any credible news reports or authentic media coverage. Instead, it was found circulating mainly on social media platforms, raising suspicion about its authenticity. We then analyzed the image using Google’s SynthID detector. The analysis confirmed the presence of a SynthID watermark with a “very high confidence” score, indicating that the image had been generated using Google AI tools. SynthID is Google’s watermarking technology used to identify AI-generated content created through its models.
Further verification using another AI-detection platform, Hive Moderation, also indicated a high probability that the image had been generated using AI. The tool identified Gemini as the likely source and assessed the image as overwhelmingly AI-generated.
Conclusion
Our research confirms that the viral image is AI-generated and unrelated to any real-world event. The picture showing soldiers holding the Iranian flag near helicopter wreckage was created using Google AI tools and is being falsely shared on social media to spread misleading claims.
Related Blogs
Introduction
In today’s digital world, where everything is related to data, the more data you own, the more control and compliance you have over the market, which is why companies are looking for ways to use data to improve their business. But at the same time, they have to make sure they are protecting people’s privacy. It is very tricky to strike a balance between both of them. Imagine you are trying to bake a cake where you need to use all the ingredients to make it taste great, but you also have to make sure no one can tell what’s in it. That’s kind of what companies are dealing with when it comes to data. Here, ‘Pseudonymisation’ emerges as a critical technical and legal mechanism that offers a middle ground between data anonymisation and unrestricted data processing.
Legal Framework and Regulatory Landscape
Pseudonymisation, as defined by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Article 4(5), refers to “the processing of personal data in such a manner that the personal data can no longer be attributed to a specific data subject without the use of additional information, provided that such additional information is kept separately and is subject to technical and organisational measures to ensure that the personal data are not attributed to an identified or identifiable natural person”. This technique represents a paradigm shift in data protection strategy, enabling organisations to preserve data utility while significantly reducing privacy risks. The growing importance of this balance is evident in the proliferation of data protection laws worldwide, from GDPR in Europe to India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP) of 2023.
Its legal treatment varies across jurisdictions, but a convergent approach is emerging that recognises its value as a data protection safeguard while maintaining that the pseudonymised data remains personal data. Article 25(1) of GDPR recognises it as “an appropriate technical and organisational measure” and emphasises its role in reducing risks to data subjects. It protects personal data by reducing the risk of identifying individuals during data processing. The European Data Protection Board’s (EDPB) 2025 Guidelines on Pseudonymisation provide detailed guidance emphasising the importance of defining the “pseudonymisation domain”. It defines who is prevented from attributing data to specific individuals and ensures that the technical and organised measures are in place to block unauthorised linkage of pseudonymised data to the original data subjects. In India, while the DPDP Act does not explicitly define pseudonymisation, legal scholars argue that such data would still fall under the definition of personal data, as it remains potentially identifiable. The Act defines personal data defined in section 2(t) broadly as “any data about an individual who is identifiable by or in relation to such data,” suggesting that the pseudonymised information, being reversible, would continue to require compliance with data protection obligations.
Further, the DPDP Act, 2023 also includes principles of data minimisation and purpose limitation. Section 8(4) says that a “Data Fiduciary shall implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure effective observance of the provisions of this Act and the Rules made under it.” The concept of Pseudonymization fits here because it is a recognised technical safeguard, which means companies can use pseudonymization as one of the methods or part of their compliance toolkit under Section 8(4) of the DPDP Act. However, its use should be assessed on a case to case basis, since ‘encryption’ is also considered one of the strongest methods for protecting personal data. The suitability of pseudonymization depends on the nature of the processing activity, the type of data involved, and the level of risk that needs to be mitigated. In practice, organisations may use pseudonymization in combination with other safeguards to strengthen overall compliance and security.
The European Court of Justice’s recent jurisprudence has introduced nuanced considerations about when pseudonymised data might not constitute personal data for certain entities. In cases where only the original controller possesses the means to re-identify individuals, third parties processing such data may not be subject to the full scope of data protection obligations, provided they cannot reasonably identify the data subjects. The “means reasonably likely” assessment represents a significant development in understanding the boundaries of data protection law.
Corporate Implementation Strategies
Companies find that pseudonymisation is not just about following rules, but it also brings real benefits. By using this technique, businesses can keep their data more secure and reduce the damage in the event of a breach. Customers feel more confident knowing that their information is protected, which builds trust. Additionally, companies can utilise this data for their research or other important purposes without compromising user privacy.
Key Benefits of Pseudonymisation:
- Enhanced Privacy Protection: It hides personal details like names or IDs with fake ones (with artificial values or codes), making it harder for accidental privacy breaches.
- Preserved Data Utility: Unlike completely anonymous data, pseudonymised data keeps its usefulness by maintaining important patterns and relationships within datasets.
- Facilitate Data Sharing: It’s easier to share pseudonymised data with partners or researchers because it protects privacy while still being useful.
However, using pseudonymisation is not as easy as companies have to deal with tricky technical issues like choosing the right methods, such as encryption or tokenisation and managing security keys safely. They have to implement strong policies to stop anyone from figuring out who the data belongs to. This can get expensive and complicated, especially when dealing with a large amount of data, and it often requires expert help and regular upkeep.
Balancing Privacy Rights and Data Utility
The primary challenge in pseudonymisation is striking the right balance between protecting individuals' privacy and maintaining the utility of the data. To get this right, companies need to consider several factors, such as why they are using the data, the potential hacker's level of skill, and the type of data being used.
Conclusion
Pseudonymisation offers a practical middle ground between full anonymisation and restricted data use, enabling organisations to harness the value of data while protecting individual privacy. Legally, it is recognised as a safeguard but still treated as personal data, requiring compliance under frameworks like GDPR and India’s DPDP Act. For companies, it is not only regulatory adherence but also ensuring that it builds trust and enhances data security. However, its effectiveness depends on robust technical methods, governance, and vigilance. Striking the right balance between privacy and data utility is crucial for sustainable, ethical, and innovation-driven data practices.
References:
- https://gdpr-info.eu/art-4-gdpr/
- https://www.meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2024/06/2bf1f0e9f04e6fb4f8fef35e82c42aa5.pdf
- https://gdpr-info.eu/art-25-gdpr/
- https://www.edpb.europa.eu/system/files/2025-01/edpb_guidelines_202501_pseudonymisation_en.pdf
- https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=303863&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=16466915
- https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=303863&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=16466915
Executive Summary:
A viral video circulating on social media that appears to be deliberately misleading and manipulative is shown to have been done by comedian Samay Raina casually making a lighthearted joke about actress Rekha in the presence of host Amitabh Bachchan which left him visibly unsettled while shooting for an episode of Kaun Banega Crorepati (KBC) Influencer Special. The joke pointed to the gossip and rumors of unspoken tensions between the two Bollywood Legends. Our research has ruled out that the video is artificially manipulated and reflects a non genuine content. However, the specific joke in the video does not appear in the original KBC episode. This incident highlights the growing misuse of AI technology in creating and spreading misinformation, emphasizing the need for increased public vigilance and awareness in verifying online information.
Claim:
The claim in the video suggests that during a recent "Influencer Special" episode of KBC, Samay Raina humorously asked Amitabh Bachchan, "What do you and a circle have in common?" and then delivered the punchline, "Neither of you and circle have Rekha (line)," playing on the Hindi word "rekha," which means 'line'.ervicing routes between Amritsar, Chandigarh, Delhi, and Jaipur. This assertion is accompanied by images of a futuristic aircraft, implying that such technology is currently being used to transport commercial passengers.
Fact Check:
To check the genuineness of the claim, the whole Influencer Special episode of Kaun Banega Crorepati (KBC) which can also be found on the Sony Set India YouTube channel was carefully reviewed. Our analysis proved that no part of the episode had comedian Samay Raina cracking a joke on actress Rekha. The technical analysis using Hive moderator further found that the viral clip is AI-made.
Conclusion:
A viral video on the Internet that shows Samay Raina making a joke about Rekha during KBC was released and completely AI-generated and false. This poses a serious threat to manipulation online and that makes it all the more important to place a fact-check for any news from credible sources before putting it out. Promoting media literacy is going to be key to combating misinformation at this time, with the danger of misuse of AI-generated content.
- Claim: Fake AI Video: Samay Raina’s Rekha Joke Goes Viral
- Claimed On: X (Formally known as Twitter)
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Introduction
Cyber attacks are becoming increasingly common and most sophisticated around the world. India's Telecom operator BSNL has allegedly suffered a data breach. Reportedly, Hackers managed to steal sensitive information of BSNL customers and the same is now available for sale on the dark web. The leaked information includes names email addresses billing details contact numbers and outgoing call records of BSNL customers victims include both BSNL fibre and landline users. The threat actor using Querel has released a sample data set on a dark web forum and the data set contains 32,000 lines of leaked information the threat actor has claimed that the total number of lines across all databases amounts to approximately 2.9 Million.
The Persistent Threat to Digital Fortresses
As we plunge into the abyssal planes of the internet, where the shadowy tendrils of cyberspace stretch out like the countless arms of some digital leviathan, we find ourselves facing a stark and chilling revelation. At its murky depths lurks the dark web, a term that brings forth images of a clandestine digital netherworld where anonymity reigns supreme and the conventional rules of law struggle to cast their net. It is here, in this murky digital landscape, where the latest trophy of cyber larceny has been flagrantly displayed — the plundered data of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL), India's state-owned telecommunications colossus.
This latest breach serves not simply as a singular incident in the tapestry of cyber incursions but as a profound reminder of the enduring fragility of our digital bastions against the onslaught wielded by the ever-belligerent adversaries in cyberspace.
The Breach
Tracing the genesis of this worrisome event, we find a disconcerting story unfold. It began to surface when a threat actor, shrouded in the mystique of the digital shadows and brandishing the enigmatic alias 'Perell,' announced their triumph on the dark web. This self-styled cyber gladiator took to the encrypted recesses of this hidden domain with bravado, professing to have extracted 'critical information' from the inner sanctum of BSNL's voluminous databases. It is from these very vaults that the most sensitive details of the company's fibre network and landline customers originate.
A portion of the looted data, a mere fragment of a more extensive and damning corpus, was brandished like a nefariously obtained banner for all to see on the dark web. It was an ostentatious display, a teaser intended to tantalize and terrify — approximately 32,000 lines of data, a hint of the reportedly vast 2.9 million lines of data that 'Perell' claimed to have sequestered in their digital domain. The significance of this compromised information cannot be overstated; it is not mere bytes and bits strewn about in the cyber-wind. It constitutes the very essence of countless individuals, an amalgamation of email addresses, billing histories, contact numbers, and a myriad of other intimate details that, if weaponized, could set the stage for heinous acts of identity theft, insidious financial fraud, and precisely sculpted phishing schemes.
Ramifications
The ramifications of such a breach extend far beyond individual concerns of privacy invasion. This event signifies an alarming clarion call highlighting the susceptibility of our digital identities. In an era where the strands of our daily lives are ever more entwined with the World Wide Web, such penetrations are not merely an affront to corporate entities; they are a direct assault on the individual's inherent right to security and the implicit trust placed in the institutions that profess to shield their most private information.
Ripples of concern have emanated throughout the cybersecurity community, prompting urgent action from Cert-In, India's cyber security sentinel. Upon notification of this digital transgression, alarms were sounded, and yet, in a disconcerting turn, BSNL has remained enigmatic, adopting a silence that seems to belie the gravity of the situation. This reticence stands in contrast to the urgency for open dialogue and transparency — it is within the anvil of these principles that the foundations of trust are laid and sustained.
Conclusion
The narrative of the BSNL data breach transcends a singular tale of digital larceny or vulnerability; it unfolds as an insistent call to action, demanding a unified and proactive response to the perpetually morphing threat landscape that haunts our technologically dependent world. It is an uncomfortable reminder that in the intricately woven web of our online existence, we each stand as potential targets with our personal data held precariously as the coveted prize for those shadow-walkers and data marauders who dwell in the secretive realms of the internet's darkest corners.
