#FactCheck- Doctored Audio in News18 Video Fuels False ‘Operation Sindoor’ Claim
Executive Summary
A video clip bearing the logo of News18 is being widely shared on social media with the claim that a serving Indian Army brigadier and his son were attacked in Delhi by an RSS-supporting mob for criticising the government over “Operation Sindoor.” The clip features an anchor allegedly explaining the motive behind the assault. However, research by the CyberPeace Research Wing found the claim to be false. The viral video has been digitally manipulated, with its audio altered to include misleading information.
Claim
An X user (@Mohammad776157) shared a video clip from Network18 on April 13, claiming that a serving Indian Army brigadier and his son were attacked in Delhi by an RSS-supporting mob for criticising the government over “Operation Sindoor.”
- https://x.com/Mohammad776157/status/2043691737609347166?s=20
- https://archive.ph/5EpbJ
To verify the claim, we extracted multiple keyframes from the viral video using the InVid tool and conducted reverse image searches via Google Lens. The same clip was found circulating across several social media platforms with similar claims.
- https://www.facebook.com/reel/2397972117364665
- https://www.instagram.com/reels/DXE4FFdjcnq/
- https://archive.ph/hjG3b
- https://archive.ph/9IkTY
Fact Check
Since the video carried the News18 logo, we examined the outlet’s official social media handles. We found the original video on its X account, where the visuals matched the viral clip. However, a detailed analysis of the original footage showed that the anchor never stated that the brigadier and his son were attacked for criticising the government over “Operation Sindoor.”
In the authentic version, the anchor reported that the assault took place in Delhi’s Vasant Enclave after the brigadier objected to two individuals consuming alcohol inside a car parked outside his residence. This clearly indicates that the audio in the viral clip was tampered with to insert a false narrative.
For further verification, we extracted the audio segment from the viral clip and analysed it using Resemble AI. The tool indicated that the portion describing the motive behind the attack had been digitally manipulated.
Conclusion
The viral claim is false. The video has been altered by modifying its audio to mislead viewers. In reality, the assault was not related to “Operation Sindoor” but occurred after the brigadier objected to public drinking near his residence.
Related Blogs
Executive Summary:
A video circulating on social media claims to show a live elephant falling from a moving truck due to improper transportation, followed by the animal quickly standing up and reacting on a public road. The content may raise concerns related to animal cruelty, public safety, and improper transport practices. A detailed examination using AI content detection tools, visual anomaly analysis indicates that the video is not authentic and is likely AI generated or digitally manipulated.
Claim:
The viral video (archive link) shows a disturbing scene where a large elephant is allegedly being transported in an open blue truck with barriers for support. As the truck moves along the road, the elephant shifts its weight and the weak side barrier breaks. This causes the elephant to fall onto the road, where it lands heavily on its side. Shortly after, the animal is seen getting back on its feet and reacting in distress, facing the vehicle that is recording the incident. The footage may raise serious concerns about safety, as elephants are normally transported in reinforced containers, and such an incident on a public road could endanger both the animal and people nearby.
Fact Check:
After receiving the video, we closely examined the visuals and noticed some inconsistencies that raised doubts about its authenticity. In particular, the elephant is seen recovering and standing up unnaturally quickly after a severe fall, which does not align with realistic animal behavior or physical response to such impact.
To further verify our observations, the video was analyzed using the Hive Moderation AI Detection tool, which indicated that the content is likely AI generated or digitally manipulated.
Additionally, no credible news reports or official sources were found to corroborate the incident, reinforcing the conclusion that the video is misleading.
Conclusion:
The claim that the video shows a real elephant transport accident is false and misleading. Based on AI detection results, observable visual anomalies, and the absence of credible reporting, the video is highly likely to be AI generated or digitally manipulated. Viewers are advised to exercise caution and verify such sensational content through trusted and authoritative sources before sharing.
- Claim: The viral video shows an elephant allegedly being transported, where a barrier breaks as it moves, causing the animal to fall onto the road before quickly getting back on its feet.
- Claimed On: X (Formally Twitter)
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Executive Summary:
A new threat being uncovered in today’s threat landscape is that while threat actors took an average of one hour and seven minutes to leverage Proof-of-Concept(PoC) exploits after they went public, now the time is at a record low of 22 minutes. This incredibly fast exploitation means that there is very limited time for organizations’ IT departments to address these issues and close the leaks before they are exploited. Cloudflare released the Application Security report which shows that the attack percentage is more often higher than the rate at which individuals invent and develop security countermeasures like the WAF rules and software patches. In one case, Cloudflare noted an attacker using a PoC-based attack within a mere 22 minutes from the moment it was released, leaving almost no time for a remediation window.
Despite the constant growth of vulnerabilities in various applications and systems, the share of exploited vulnerabilities, which are accompanied by some level of public exploit or PoC code, has remained relatively stable over the past several years and fluctuates around 50%. These vulnerabilities with publicly known exploit code, 41% was initially attacked in the zero-day mode while of those with no known code, 84% was first attacked in the same mode.
Modus Operandi:
The modus operandi of the attack involving the rapid weaponization of proof-of-concept (PoC) exploits is characterized by the following steps:
- Vulnerability Identification: Threat actors bring together the exploitation of a system vulnerability that may be in the software or hardware of the system; this may be a code error, design failure, or a configuration error. This is normally achieved using vulnerability scanners and test procedures that have to be performed manually.
- Vulnerability Analysis: After the vulnerability is identified, the attackers study how it operates to determine when and how it can be triggered and what consequences that action will have. This means that one needs to analyze the details of the PoC code or system to find out the connection sequence that leads to vulnerability exploitation.
- Exploit Code Development: Being aware of the weakness, the attackers develop a small program or script denoted as the PoC that addresses exclusively the identified vulnerability and manipulates it in a moderated manner. This particular code is meant to be utilized in showing a particular penalty, which could be unauthorized access or alteration of data.
- Public Disclosure and Weaponization: The PoC exploit is released which is frequently done shortly after the vulnerability has been announced to the public. This makes it easier for the attackers to exploit it while waiting for the software developer to release the patch. To illustrate, Cloudflare has spotted an attacker using the PoC-based exploit 22 minutes after the publication only.
- Attack Execution: The attackers then use the weaponized PoC exploit to attack systems which are known to be vulnerable to it. Some of the actions that are tried in this context are attempts at running remote code, unauthorized access and so on. The pace at which it happens is often much faster than the pace at which humans put in place proper security defense mechanisms, such as the WAF rules or software application fixes.
- Targeted Operations: Sometimes, they act as if it’s a planned operation, where the attackers are selective in the system or organization to attack. For example, exploitation of CVE-2022-47966 in ManageEngine software was used during the espionage subprocess, where to perform such activity, the attackers used the mentioned vulnerability to install tools and malware connected with espionage.
Precautions: Mitigation
Following are the mitigating measures against the PoC Exploits:
1. Fast Patching and New Vulnerability Handling
- Introduce proper patching procedures to address quickly the security released updates and disclosed vulnerabilities.
- Focus should be made on the patching of those vulnerabilities that are observed to be having available PoC exploits, which often risks being exploited almost immediately.
- It is necessary to frequently check for the new vulnerability disclosures and PoC releases and have a prepared incident response plan for this purpose.
2. Leverage AI-Powered Security Tools
- Employ intelligent security applications which can easily generate desirable protection rules and signatures as attackers ramp up the weaponization of PoC exploits.
- Step up use of artificial intelligence (AI) - fueled endpoint detection and response (EDR) applications to quickly detect and mitigate the attempts.
- Integrate Artificial Intelligence based SIEM tools to Detect & analyze Indicators of compromise to form faster reaction.
3. Network Segmentation and Hardening
- Use strong networking segregation to prevent the attacker’s movement across the network and also restrict the effects of successful attacks.
- Secure any that are accessible from the internet, and service or protocols such as RDP, CIFS, or Active directory.
- Limit the usage of native scripting applications as much as possible because cyber attackers may exploit them.
4. Vulnerability Disclosure and PoC Management
- Inform the vendors of the bugs and PoC exploits and make sure there is a common understanding of when they are reported, to ensure fast response and mitigation.
- It is suggested to incorporate mechanisms like digital signing and encryption for managing and distributing PoC exploits to prevent them from being accessed by unauthorized persons.
- Exploits used in PoC should be simple and independent with clear and meaningful variable and function names that help reduce time spent on triage and remediation.
5. Risk Assessment and Response to Incidents
- Maintain constant supervision of the environment with an intention of identifying signs of a compromise, as well as, attempts of exploitation.
- Support a frequent detection, analysis and fighting of threats, which use PoC exploits into the system and its components.
- Regularly communicate with security researchers and vendors to understand the existing threats and how to prevent them.
Conclusion:
The rapid process of monetization of Proof of Concept (POC) exploits is one of the most innovative and constantly expanding global threats to cybersecurity at the present moment. Cyber security experts must react quickly while applying a patch, incorporate AI to their security tools, efficiently subdivide their networks and always heed their vulnerability announcements. Stronger incident response plan would aid in handling these kinds of menaces. Hence, applying measures mentioned above, the organizations will be able to prevent the acceleration of turning PoC exploits into weapons and the probability of neutral affecting cyber attacks.
Reference:
https://www.mayrhofer.eu.org/post/vulnerability-disclosure-is-positive/
https://www.uptycs.com/blog/new-poc-exploit-backdoor-malware
https://www.balbix.com/insights/attack-vectors-and-breach-methods/
https://blog.cloudflare.com/application-security-report-2024-update
Executive Summary:
A viral image circulating on social media claims it to be a natural optical illusion from Epirus, Greece. However, upon fact-checking, it was found that the image is an AI-generated artwork created by Iranian artist Hamidreza Edalatnia using the Stable Diffusion AI tool. CyberPeace Research Team found it through reverse image search and analysis with an AI content detection tool named HIVE Detection, which indicated a 100% likelihood of AI generation. The claim of the image being a natural phenomenon from Epirus, Greece, is false, as no evidence of such optical illusions in the region was found.
Claims:
The viral image circulating on social media depicts a natural optical illusion from Epirus, Greece. Users share on X (formerly known as Twitter), YouTube Video, and Facebook. It’s spreading very fast across Social Media.
Similar Posts:
Fact Check:
Upon receiving the Posts, the CyberPeace Research Team first checked for any Synthetic Media detection, and the Hive AI Detection tool found it to be 100% AI generated, which is proof that the Image is AI Generated. Then, we checked for the source of the image and did a reverse image search for it. We landed on similar Posts from where an Instagram account is linked, and the account of similar visuals was made by the creator named hamidreza.edalatnia. The account we landed posted a photo of similar types of visuals.
We searched for the viral image in his account, and it was confirmed that the viral image was created by this person.
The Photo was posted on 10th December, 2023 and he mentioned using AI Stable Diffusion the image was generated . Hence, the Claim made in the Viral image of the optical illusion from Epirus, Greece is Misleading.
Conclusion:
The image claiming to show a natural optical illusion in Epirus, Greece, is not genuine, and it's False. It is an artificial artwork created by Hamidreza Edalatnia, an artist from Iran, using the artificial intelligence tool Stable Diffusion. Hence the claim is false.
