#FactCheck- Old Ukraine War Video Falsely Shared as Iran Attack on Tel Aviv
Executive Summary
Amid renewed military tensions between Iran and Israel in West Asia, a video is widely circulating on social media showing a multi-storey building being struck, followed by a massive explosion and fire. Several users are sharing this clip with the claim that it shows a recent Iranian attack on Tel Aviv, Israel. However, CyberPeace Research Wing research found that the claim is misleading. The viral video has no connection to the current Iran–Israel conflict. It is actually from a Russian drone strike in Ukraine that took place in September 2025, and is now being falsely linked to the ongoing tensions in West Asia.
Claim
An Instagram user shared the viral video with the caption:“Iran–Israel tensions at peak, reports of retaliatory action towards Tel Aviv… New wave of Iranian response towards Tel Aviv amid escalating tensions between Iran and Israel. The situation in the region continues to intensify as both sides accuse each other, while the international community closely monitors developments. The Middle East situation is rapidly evolving and updates are emerging. It is important to rely only on official information and credible sources.”
https://www.instagram.com/shan_of_voice/reel/DZWRp8vqiM8
https://archive.ph/s26qV
Fact Check
To verify the authenticity of the video, we extracted keyframes and conducted a Google Lens reverse image search. The same footage was found in a report published by The Guardian on 16 September 2025.
According to the report, the video shows a Russian drone strike on a building in Kharkiv, Ukraine, in which three men and one woman were injured.
Further verification through keyword search led us to the same footage on the official YouTube channel of Associated Press, published on 17 September 2025.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAke3aAhPxs
The Associated Press also confirmed that the video shows a Russian drone strike on a building in Kharkiv, Ukraine.
Conclusion
Our research found that the viral video has no connection to the ongoing Iran–Israel tensions or any attack on Tel Aviv. The footage is from a Russian drone strike in Kharkiv, Ukraine (September 2025), and is being misleadingly shared in the context of the West Asia conflict.
Related Blogs
Introduction
Over the last few years, several public data breaches in Venezuela have revealed a lack of cohesion and progress in its data privacy system and left many people susceptible to fraud, identity theft and long-term harm via the internet. It is clear from these data breaches that when organizations fail to adequately protect their data, both through cybersecurity failures and weak legal protections, they can lead to problems throughout an entire system through which all individuals in the system could potentially suffer.
Among the more notable breaches are the Movistar Venezuela data breach from 2025 and the Cashea App data leak from earlier this year. Each of these examples demonstrates to some extent how the absence of an adequate privacy regulatory scheme can worsen the results of a data breach.
The Movistar Breach: A Regulatory Warning (2025)
Venezuelan digital rights group VE Sin Filtro published a report late in April 2025, which found a database revealed to have been opened onto the internet containing personal information belonging to over 3.2 million Movistar customers. The initial breach contained personal, and confidential, data of Venezuelan citizens such as national identification numbers, full names, city of residence, and phone numbers which could have been exploited to commit identity theft, SIM-swap fraud, and targeted scams.
One significant issue with this situation was that Movistar failed to disclose the breach publicly or contact impacted customers at the time of the disclosure. As a result, there appears to be a significant gap in Sanctions / Other Means of Enforcing Security Countermeasures Laws. Since there are numerous countries that enforce GDPR-style regulations and as such, this matter should lead to a complete investigation and possible fines against those responsible but in Venezuela there is still a lack of accountability.
Cashea App Leak: A 2026 Data Shock
A second alleged data breach came to light in February of 2026. It involved a Venezuelan buy-now-pay-later (BNPL) fintech called Cashea App, which is typically heavily utilized domestically. Reports have circulated that threat actors have been offering a database, believed to hold more than 79 million transaction records. This is more than double the size and sensitivity of the data involved in the Movistar Breach.
According to reports, the leaked data included:
- Bank account details and payment methods
- Merchant profiles and internal business identifiers
- Detailed transaction histories with names, national ID numbers, timestamps, and installment data
This level of exposure goes far beyond basic identifiers. Financial transaction histories combined with personal identifiers enable sophisticated fraud, targeted social engineering, and long-term misuse of financial identities. As with the Movistar breach, no official acknowledgment or notification was issued by Cashea at the time of reporting, again underscoring Venezuela’s weak enforcement environment.
Why These Breaches Matter: The Legal Dimension
The incidents show us that there is a bigger problem with the way Venezuela has set up its framework for protecting data. For instance, the Venezuelan Constitution recognises the principles of data protection and privacy; however, these rights only exist in a theoretical manner; they lack implementing legislation, procedural clarity, and institutional enforcement.
Constitutional Basis of Data Protection
The Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ) stated the core principles for protecting data are found in the Venezuelan Constitution. After the TSJ issued its 2011 ruling, Article 28 of the Venezuelan Constitution gives individuals the right to know what data the state has about them, how the state uses that data, and to correct or delete any harmful data. Article 60 of the Venezuelan Constitution protects individuals' privacy and restricts excessive data collection by the state.
The Constitutional Chamber also put into place additional guiding principles for how to protect personal data, including:
- The data subject must give prior informed and revocable consent.
- The purpose for which the data is collected must be specified and only the minimum amount of information necessary can be collected.
- The data collected must be accurate and of good quality.
- There are confidentiality obligations for third parties regarding the use of the data.
- It is the government's responsibility to put into place procedures and mechanisms to monitor compliance with the data protection laws.
- There are civil, criminal and administrative liabilities for individuals and legal entities that violate the data protection laws.
But, in a civil law country, when courts make rulings, they usually are persuasive only as opposed to being legally binding, and even constitutional rulings cannot be implemented until enabling legislation is passed.
Absence of a Comprehensive Data Protection Law
In contrast to the European Union's GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation), the United States' sectoral approach, and emerging Latin American data protection systems such as the ones in Brazil, Chile and Colombia, Venezuela has no independent data protection law. This lack of law leads to numerous types of uncertainty in the realm of data protection laws:
- No defined data controller or processor obligations
- No standardized lawful bases for processing
- No clear breach notification timelines
- No independent data protection authority
- No procedural pathway for individuals to seek redress
As a result, data protection in Venezuela is not treated as an independent legal discipline but instead becomes derivative, arising incidentally within constitutional litigation or sector-specific disputes.
Regulatory Fragmentation and Institutional Weakness
Due to the TSJ decisions made in 2011, there has been a lack of regulatory action taken in a systematic fashion and instead most actions have been done on a case by case basis as valid incidents arise. The National Cybersecurity Council was established in 2024; however, its function is to support the establishment of cybersecurity infrastructure and has no defined powers regarding the enforcement of privacy.
This creates a fragmented institutional landscape where:
- Authorities lack clear jurisdiction over privacy violations
- Companies face minimal compliance guidance
- Individuals struggle to understand or enforce their rights
The Movistar and Cashea incidents highlight how this fragmentation translates into practical impunity following major data exposures.
What’s Next? A Legal Opportunity for Reform
The repercussions of insufficient safeguards for data protection extend past the damage incurred to a person's privacy:
- Loss of trust in both financial and digital services
- Heightened likelihood of financial fraud and crime
- Lack of willingness from foreign companies to conduct business with Venezuela’s platforms.
- Long-term negative impact on the reputation of domestic companies.
- Possible inability to access cross-border transfer of data due to other jurisdictions’ decisions to restrict transfers into jurisdictions without cutting-edge enforcement of protections for privacy.
In a digital economy that increasingly requires robust data protection to function successfully, a lack of action to create strong protections will cause a significant economic impact.
Conclusion
Major data breaches such as the ones at Movistar in 2025 and Cashea App in 2026 show that constitutional privacy rights alone are insufficient without enforceable legal framework. Privacy laws must move from being just a principle to being a law that has institutions, procedures, and accountability to make sure the privacy of the users is protected.
Now with the global digital economy being so interconnected, not having regulations creates openings for vulnerabilities for people. If Venezuela hopes to protect their citizens, create an innovation-friendly environment, and compete in the global market, they must implement comprehensive data privacy reforms as soon as possible.
REFERENCES
- https://iapp.org/news/a/venezuela-data-breach-highlights-scattered-privacy-regulation
- https://www.apolocybersecurity.com/en/blog-posts/ciberataque-a-movistar-que-ha-pasado-a-quien-afecta-y-como-proteger-tus-datos
- https://darknetsearch.com/knowledge/news/en/cashea-app-data-leak-79m-records-exposed-in-venezuela/
- https://www.binance.com/en-IN/square/post/294369884695410
Introduction
Considering the development of technology, Voice cloning schemes are one such issue that has recently come to light. Scammers are moving forward with AI, and their methods and plans for deceiving and scamming people have also altered. Deepfake technology creates realistic imitations of a person’s voice that can be used to conduct fraud, dupe a person into giving up crucial information, or even impersonate a person for illegal purposes. We will look at the dangers and risks associated with AI voice cloning frauds, how scammers operate and how one might protect themselves from one.
What is Deepfake?
Artificial intelligence (AI), known as “deepfake,” can produce fake or altered audio, video, and film that pass for the real thing. The words “deep learning” and “fake” are combined to get the name “deep fake”. Deepfake technology creates content with a realistic appearance or sound by analysing and synthesising diverse volumes of data using machine learning algorithms. Con artists employ technology to portray someone doing something that has never been in audio or visual form. The best example is the American President, who used deep voice impersonation technology. Deep voice impersonation technology can be used maliciously, such as in deep voice fraud or disseminating false information. As a result, there is growing concerned about the potential influence of deep fake technology on society and the need for effective tools to detect and mitigate the hazards it may provide.
What exactly are deepfake voice scams?
Artificial intelligence (AI) is sometimes utilised in deepfake speech frauds to create synthetic audio recordings that seem like real people. Con artists can impersonate someone else over the phone and pressure their victims into providing personal information or paying money by using contemporary technology. A con artist may pose as a bank employee, a government official, or a friend or relative by utilising a deep false voice. It aims to earn the victim’s trust and raise the likelihood that they will fall for the hoax by conveying a false sense of familiarity and urgency. Deep fake speech frauds are increasing in frequency as deep fake technology becomes more widely available, more sophisticated, and harder to detect. In order to avoid becoming a victim of such fraud, it is necessary to be aware of the risks and take appropriate measures.
Why do cybercriminals use AI voice deep fake?
In order to mislead users into providing private information, money, or system access, cybercriminals utilise artificial intelligence (AI) speech-deep spoofing technology to claim to be people or entities. Using AI voice-deep fake technology, cybercriminals can create audio recordings that mimic real people or entities, such as CEOs, government officials, or bank employees, and use them to trick victims into taking activities that are advantageous to the criminals. This can involve asking victims for money, disclosing login credentials, or revealing sensitive information. In phishing assaults, where fraudsters create audio recordings that impersonate genuine messages from organisations or people that victims trust, deepfake AI voice technology can also be employed. These audio recordings can trick people into downloading malware, clicking on dangerous links, or giving out personal information. Additionally, false audio evidence can be produced using AI voice-deep fake technology to support false claims or accusations. This is particularly risky regarding legal processes because falsified audio evidence may lead to wrongful convictions or acquittals. Artificial intelligence voice deep fake technology gives con artists a potent tool for tricking and controlling victims. Every organisation and the general population must be informed of this technology’s risk and adopt the appropriate safety measures.
How to spot voice deepfake and avoid them?
Deep fake technology has made it simpler for con artists to edit audio recordings and create phoney voices that exactly mimic real people. As a result, a brand-new scam called the “deep fake voice scam” has surfaced. In order to trick the victim into handing over money or private information, the con artist assumes another person’s identity and uses a fake voice. What are some ways to protect oneself from deepfake voice scams? Here are some guidelines to help you spot them and keep away from them:
- Steer clear of telemarketing calls
- One of the most common tactics used by deep fake voice con artists, who pretend to be bank personnel or government officials, is making unsolicited phone calls.
- Listen closely to the voice
- Anyone who phones you pretending to be someone else should pay special attention to their voice. Are there any peculiar pauses or inflexions in their speech? Something that doesn’t seem right can be a deep voice fraud.
- Verify the caller’s identity
- It’s crucial to verify the caller’s identity in order to avoid falling for a deep false voice scam. You might ask for their name, job title, and employer when in doubt. You can then do some research to be sure they are who they say they are.
- Never divulge confidential information
- No matter who calls, never give out personal information like your Aadhar, bank account information, or passwords over the phone. Any legitimate companies or organisations will never request personal or financial information over the phone; if they do, it’s a warning sign that they’re a scammer.
- Report any suspicious activities
- Inform the appropriate authorities if you think you’ve fallen victim to a deep voice fraud. This may include your bank, credit card company, local police station, or the nearest cyber cell. By reporting the fraud, you could prevent others from being a victim.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the field of AI voice deep fake technology is fast expanding and has huge potential for beneficial and detrimental effects. While deep fake voice technology has the potential to be used for good, such as improving speech recognition systems or making voice assistants sound more realistic, it may also be used for evil, such as deep fake voice frauds and impersonation to fabricate stories. Users must be aware of the hazard and take the necessary precautions to protect themselves as AI voice deep fake technology develops, making it harder to detect and prevent deep fake schemes. Additionally, it is necessary to conduct ongoing research and develop efficient techniques to identify and control the risks related to this technology. We must deploy AI appropriately and ethically to ensure that AI voice-deep fake technology benefits society rather than harming or deceiving it.
Reference
Executive Summary
A video is being widely circulated on social media by Pakistani propaganda-linked users, showing a group of people protesting on a road. It is being claimed that protesters in Jammu & Kashmir stopped Indian Army personnel from entering Nagrota, indicating growing public opposition against the forces. Research by CyberPeace Research Wing found that the claim is misleading. The viral video is unrelated to any protest against the Indian Army.
Claim
A user posted the video on X, claiming: “The days of Indian military occupation are numbered; people of Jammu & Kashmir have risen against India. Protesters stopped the Indian Army from entering Nagrota.”
- https://x.com/Stealthfalconer/status/2050301106623045758?s=20
Fact Check
During the research, the CyberPeace Research Wing team found no evidence of any such incident where civilians blocked or opposed the Indian Army in Nagrota. Further probe led to a post by an X user “Defence News Of INDIA,” which contained the full version of the viral video. The accompanying information clarified that the protest took place in Dansal’s Badsu Panchayat area of Nagrota and was led by BJP MLA Devayani Rana.
The protest was organized against the Public Health Engineering (PHE) Department over severe water shortage issues in the region. Locals, along with the MLA, staged a sit-in to highlight the lack of water supply.
We also found multiple media reports, including from KBC News – Kashmir and Jammu Links News, confirming that Devayani Rana led a road blockade protest in her constituency over water scarcity and accused the Jal Shakti Department of negligence and administrative failure. Additionally, videos of the same protest were available on social media platforms, including live streams shared from Devayani Rana’s official pages.
Conclusion
Our research confirms that the viral claim is false and misleading. The video does not show any protest against the Indian Army. It is actually from a demonstration led by Devayani Rana and local residents over water shortage issues in Nagrota.
