#FactCheck- Viral ‘Army Jump Accident’ Video Is AI-Generated

Introduction

With the development of a digital economy in India, merchants in the country are often caught in a tough situation where their bank accounts have been placed under a debit freeze, due to a suspected link of the bank account with some form of cyber fraud. These merchants are left in a tough situation, as their funds, including their personal earnings, and money earned through the running of their business, have become frozen, regardless of whether or not the account holder had knowingly or intentionally engaged in any kind of illicit activity. The funds of legitimate businesses have become tied up due to this activity. 

This concern was recognized and was addressed by the Supreme Court of India in their order, which was issued in 2026, which prompted the RBI to issue their draft Directions, in 2026. The draft directions are aimed at balancing the need of the state to stop the rapid withdrawal of stolen funds, while also trying to balance the needs of law-abiding citizens to hold and access their own money and maintain some financial stability.

Understanding Money-Mule Accounts

A "money mule" account is used for depositing and/or layering/integrating illicit money. There is a broad range of culpability when a person uses their bank account as a money mule account. Some people knowingly give someone else control over their bank account and use that control to commit illegal acts to make some money. Others, however, are unsuspecting and fall victim to fraudulent activities such as online ads offering bogus jobs or romance scams.

The proliferation of these accounts introduces severe systemic friction into cybercrime investigations, as stolen assets are rapidly dispersed across multiple tranches and jurisdictions before law enforcement can trace the primary beneficiaries. Accordingly, banking institutions bear a rigorous compliance burden to deploy real-time transaction monitoring systems capable of identifying anomalous patterns to pre-emptively mitigate the dissipation of fraudulent proceeds.

However, having an account involved in a questionable money transfer does not make the person account holding automatically a money mule. There is the innocent account holder who is being used as a transferrer for money to a person who has something to trade in exchange, or perhaps an account holder whose account was taken over. There are also accounts who have unknowingly been victim to identity theft. Due process requires a framework that allows an account holder to contest their money hold while providing regulatory safeguards to protect consumers.

What Does the RBI’s Draft Propose?

1. Temporary debit holds on suspicious transactions

The Draft Directions mandate that banking institutions institute temporary debit holds upon detecting transactions or accounts exhibiting a suspected nexus with money mule activities or cyber-enabled financial fraud. Real-time transaction monitoring systems leveraging advanced Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) architectures shall be deployed to identify anomalous or suspicious transactions capturing a threshold value of ₹1,000 or more.

2. Notice and an opportunity to explain

Procedural safeguards within the framework include notice being provided by the banking institution to the customer within a statutory time period following a debit hold. The notice must specify the reason(s) behind the hold, and the procedures for a customer to request for the hold to be vacated, as well as providing information and contact details of the officer handling the matter.

• Showing Cause: The account holder shall ordinarily be granted a statutory window of 20 days from the receipt of notice to show cause and establish the legitimacy of the transaction or account.
• Adjudication by Bank: Upon submission of the customer's explanation, the bank is mandated to adjudicate the matter within 10 days. If the explanation is deemed statutorily satisfactory, the institution must vacate the hold instanter.
• Law Enforcement Referral: In the event the response is found to be lacking in substance, the bank can make a referral to the concerned law enforcement authority through the Citizen Financial Cyber Fraud Reporting and Management System (CFCFRMS) portal of the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal (NCRP).
• Temporal Sunset Clauses: The framework includes stringent temporal provisions for law enforcement actions to ensure that administrative delays do not turn the temporary holds into perpetual financial incapacitation:
  
  • The 30-Day Directive Rule: In case the competent law enforcement authority does not issue a formal directive for the need to maintain the hold beyond the stipulated period within 30 days of the referral, then the bank is statutorily bound to remove the restriction after 30 days.
  • Absolute Maximum Ceiling: In the absence of an explicit overriding direction from a competent judicial or statutory authority, the absolute maximum tenure of any temporary hold shall remain 60 days from the date of initiation of the hold.

3. Greater accountability for banks

Beyond the mechanics of fraud detection, the proposed framework also imposes greater responsibilities on banks with respect to compliance and governance. This implies that the banks need to have an internal policy on detection, implementation and release of the hold order, standardized customer communication, coordination with the law enforcement authorities, and also grievances redressal.

Balancing Fraud Prevention with Customer Rights

The promise of a proportionate approach

The core efficacy of the proposed regulatory framework rests upon its adherence to the constitutional doctrine of proportionality, seeking to calibrate administrative restrictions strictly to the scope of the alleged wrongdoing. Historically, the imposition of indiscriminate, blanket account freezes by banking institutions has induced severe financial disenfranchisement. These overreaching actions effectively inhibit the citizen’s ability to ensure basic necessities for oneself, meet one’s tenancy responsibilities, meet one’s medical liabilities, and remain solvent within the commercial environment.

For proprietary firms, micro-traders, and small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs), an inaccessible bank account means instant cessation of business activity, inability to pay salaries, and inability to pay suppliers. A transaction-based debit block, contingent upon statutory justification and limited by time is considerably less disruptive to the economic consequences.

The risks that remain

While Draft Directions are innovative, their effectiveness still rests on the ability of algorithms to detect fraud. An anomaly detection machine learning model is good at finding variations and deviations in transactions and the order of transactions. However, there are many variations in legitimate transactions, such as a large transfer in an otherwise small transaction account. An automated transaction system cannot identify fraud alone.

An over-reliance on unverified automated alerts creates an acute risk of systemic recidivism, wherein innocent depositors face iterative, unwarranted financial restrictions. Without legal and procedural support, automated fraud detection systems should not be used in banking and legal systems.

From an evidentiary standpoint, informal workers, small-scale vendors, and consumers lacking advanced digital literacy face severe structural barriers when ordered to establish the legitimacy of a transaction within the statutory 20-day window. These demographics frequently operate without formal invoices, digital ledger entries, or direct access to professional legal and banking assistance.

To prevent the reversing of the burden of proof onto the vulnerable, banking institutions must be mandated to provide simplified, multilingual channels for showing cause, accept alternative forms of secondary evidence, and eschew overly burdensome compliance hurdles. Crucially, where a depositor submits credible exculpatory evidence, clear statutory escalation and appellate pathways must be available to counter institutional inertia.

Recommendations for Effective Implementation

First, banks need to implement explainable and risk-based detection mechanisms, if needed, accompanied by human review. Secondly, banks need to give customers timely notice regarding the blocked transaction with explanation on what amount it concerns, steps to be taken and how one can submit additional evidence.

Thirdly, the RBI should ensure that grievance redressal is effective in practice, with urgent review of cases concerning necessary expenses and business hardship. Finally, coordination between banks and law-enforcement agencies must improve so that referrals are acted upon within the prescribed timelines.

Conclusion

The RBI’s Draft Know Your Customer Amendment Directions, 2026, represents a significant regulatory effort to resolve the systemic friction between combating cyber-enabled financial fraud and protecting consumer property rights. By introducing transaction-specific holds, mandatory customer notification, a statutory right to be heard, and strict temporal ceilings, the framework introduces a much-needed ethos of accountability into the digital ecosystem.

The sustainability of India’s digital economy in the long run cannot be contingent on a structure that inhibits the flow of illegitimate money through imposing severe, extrajudicial monetary disabilities on innocent people because the true effectiveness of any system entails not only inhibiting the criminals behind cybercrime but also protecting the financial safety and liquidity of regular depositors.

‍

References

1. Reserve Bank of India, Draft Reserve Bank of India (Know Your Customer) Amendment Directions, 2026 (11 September 2026) RBI official website.
2. In Re: Victims of Digital Arrest Related to Forged Documents, Suo Motu Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 3 of 2025 (Supreme Court of India, Order dated August 4, 2026)
3. Reserve Bank of India, Reserve Bank of India (Know Your Customer) Directions, 2025
4. ‘RBI Proposes Temporary Debit Holds on Suspected Money Mule Accounts’, Business Standard (13 September 2026), https://www.business-standard.com/finance/news/rbi-proposes-temporary-debit-holds-on-suspected-money-mule-accounts-126091300603_1.html.
5. ‘RBI Proposes Framework to Freeze Only Disputed Transaction Amount in Suspected Cyber Fraud Cases’, News on AIR (14 September 2026), https://newsonair.gov.in/rbi-proposes-framework-to-freeze-only-disputed-transaction-amount-in-suspected-cyber-fraud-cases/.
6. Reserve Bank of India, Draft Reserve Bank of India (Know Your Customer) Amendment Directions, 2026 (11 September 2026).

‍

Introduction

Your iPhone isn’t just a device: it’s a central hub for almost everything in your life. From personal photos and videos to sensitive data, it holds it all. You rely on it for essential services, from personal to official communications, sharing of information, banking and financial transactions, and more. With so much critical information stored on your device, protecting it from cyber threats becomes essential. This is where the iOS Lockdown Mode feature comes in as a digital bouncer to keep cyber crooks at bay.

Apple introduced the ‘lockdown’ mode in 2022. It is a new optional security feature and is available on iPhones, iPads, and Mac devices. It works as an extreme and optional protection mechanism for a certain segment of users who might be at a higher risk of being targeted by serious cyber threats and intrusions into their digital security.  So people like journalists, activists, government officials, celebrities, cyber security professionals, law enforcement professionals, and lawyers etc are some of the intended beneficiaries of the feature. Sometimes the data on their devices can be highly confidential and it can cause a lot of disruption if leaked or compromised by cyber threats. Given how prevalent cyber attacks are in this day and age, the need for such a feature cannot be overstated. This feature aims at providing an additional firewall by limiting certain functions of the device and hence reducing the chances of the user being targeted in any digital attack. 

How to Enable Lockdown Mode in Your iPhone

On your iPhone running on iOS 16 Developer Beta 3, you just need to go to Settings - Privacy and Security - Lockdown Mode. Tap on Turn on Lockdown Mode, and read all the information regarding the features that will be unavailable on your device if you go forward, and if you’re satisfied with the same all you have to do is scroll down and tap on Turn on Lockdown Mode. Your iPhone will get restarted with Lockdown Mode enabled. 

Easy steps to enable lockdown mode are as follows:

1. Open the Settings app.
2. Tap Privacy & Security.
3. Scroll down, tap Lockdown Mode, then tap Turn On Lockdown Mode.

‍

How Lockdown Mode Protects You

Lockdown Mode is a security feature that prevents certain apps and features from functioning properly when enabled. For example, your device will not automatically connect to Wi-Fi networks without security and will disconnect from a non-secure network when Lockdown Mode is activated. Many other features may be affected because the system will prioritise security standards above the typical operational functions. Since lockdown mode restricts certain features and activities, one can exclude a particular app or website in Safari from being impacted and limited by restrictions. Only exclude trusted apps or websites if necessary.

References:

1. https://support.apple.com/en-in/105120#:~:text=Tap%20Privacy%20%26%20Security.,then%20enter%20your%20device%20passcode
2. https://www.business-standard.com/technology/tech-news/apple-lockdown-mode-what-is-it-and-how-it-prevents-spyware-attacks-124041200667_1.html

‍

In the vast, uncharted territories of the digital world, a sinister phenomenon is proliferating at an alarming rate. It's a world where artificial intelligence (AI) and human vulnerability intertwine in a disturbing combination, creating a shadowy realm of non-consensual pornography. This is the world of deepfake pornography, a burgeoning industry that is as lucrative as it is unsettling.

According to a recent assessment, at least 100,000 deepfake porn videos are readily available on the internet, with hundreds, if not thousands, being uploaded daily. This staggering statistic prompts a chilling question: what is driving the creation of such a vast number of fakes? Is it merely for amusement, or is there a more sinister motive at play?

Recent Trends and Developments 

An investigation by India Today’s Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) team reveals that deepfake pornography is rapidly morphing into a thriving business. AI enthusiasts, creators, and experts are extending their expertise, investors are injecting money, and even small financial companies to tech giants like Google, VISA, Mastercard, and PayPal are being misused in this dark trade. Synthetic porn has existed for years, but advances in AI and the increasing availability of technology have made it easier—and more profitable—to create and distribute non-consensual sexually explicit material. The 2023 State of Deepfake report by Home Security Heroes reveals a staggering 550% increase in the number of deepfakes compared to 2019. 

What’s the Matter with Fakes? 

But why should we be concerned about these fakes? The answer lies in the real-world harm they cause. India has already seen cases of extortion carried out by exploiting deepfake technology. An elderly man in UP’s Ghaziabad, for instance, was tricked into paying Rs 74,000 after receiving a deep fake video of a police officer. The situation could have been even more serious if the perpetrators had decided to create deepfake porn of the victim.

The danger is particularly severe for women. The 2023 State of Deepfake Report estimates that at least 98 percent of all deepfakes is porn and 99 percent of its victims are women. A study by Harvard University refrained from using the term “pornography” for creating, sharing, or threatening to create/share sexually explicit images and videos of a person without their consent. “It is abuse and should be understood as such,” it states.

Based on interviews of victims of deepfake porn last year, the study said 63 percent of participants talked about experiences of “sexual deepfake abuse” and reported that their sexual deepfakes had been monetised online. It also found “sexual deepfake abuse to be particularly harmful because of the fluidity and co-occurrence of online offline experiences of abuse, resulting in endless reverberations of abuse in which every aspect of the victim’s life is permanently disrupted”.

Creating deepfake porn is disturbingly easy. There are largely two types of deepfakes: one featuring faces of humans and another featuring computer-generated hyper-realistic faces of non-existing people. The first category is particularly concerning and is created by superimposing faces of real people on existing pornographic images and videos—a task made simple and easy by AI tools.

During the investigation, platforms hosting deepfake porn of stars like Jennifer Lawrence, Emma Stone, Jennifer Aniston, Aishwarya Rai, Rashmika Mandanna to TV actors and influencers like Aanchal Khurana, Ahsaas Channa, and Sonam Bajwa and Anveshi Jain were encountered. It takes a few minutes and as little as Rs 40 for a user to create a high-quality fake porn video of 15 seconds on platforms like FakeApp and FaceSwap.

The Modus Operandi 

These platforms brazenly flaunt their business association and hide behind frivolous declarations such as: the content is “meant solely for entertainment” and “not intended to harm or humiliate anyone”. However, the irony of these disclaimers is not lost on anyone, especially when they host thousands of non-consensual deepfake pornography.

As fake porn content and its consumers surge, deepfake porn sites are rushing to forge collaborations with generative AI service providers and have integrated their interfaces for enhanced interoperability. The promise and potential of making quick bucks have given birth to step-by-step guides, video tutorials, and websites that offer tools and programs, recommendations, and ratings.

Nearly 90 per cent of all deepfake porn is hosted by dedicated platforms that charge for long-duration premium fake content and for creating porn—of whoever a user wants, and take requests for celebrities. To encourage them further, they enable creators to monetize their content.

One such website, Civitai, has a system in place that pays “rewards” to creators of AI models that generate “images of real people'', including ordinary people. It also enables users to post AI images, prompts, model data, and LoRA (low-rank adaptation of large language models) files used in generating the images. Model data designed for adult content is gaining great popularity on the platform, and they are not only targeting celebrities. Common people are equally susceptible.

Access to premium fake porn, like any other content, requires payment. But how can a gateway process payment for sexual content that lacks consent? It seems financial institutes and banks are not paying much attention to this legal question. During the investigation, many such websites accepting payments through services like VISA, Mastercard, and Stripe were found.

Those who have failed to register/partner with these fintech giants have found a way out. While some direct users to third-party sites, others use personal PayPal accounts to manually collect money in the personal accounts of their employees/stakeholders, which potentially violates the platform's terms of use that ban the sale of “sexually oriented digital goods or content delivered through a digital medium.”

 Among others, the MakeNude.ai web app – which lets users “view any girl without clothing” in “just a single click” – has an interesting method of circumventing restrictions around the sale of non-consensual pornography. The platform has partnered with Ukraine-based Monobank and Dublin’s BetaTransfer Kassa which operates in “high-risk markets”.

BetaTransfer Kassa admits to serving “clients who have already contacted payment aggregators and received a refusal to accept payments, or aggregators stopped payments altogether after the resource was approved or completely freeze your funds”. To make payment processing easy, MakeNude.ai seems to be exploiting the donation ‘jar’ facility of Monobank, which is often used by people to donate money to Ukraine to support it in the war against Russia.

The Indian Scenario 

India currently is on its way to design dedicated legislation to address issues arising out of deepfakes. Though existing general laws requiring such platforms to remove offensive content also apply to deepfake porn. However, persecution of the offender and their conviction is extremely difficult for law enforcement agencies as it is a boundaryless crime and sometimes involves several countries in the process.

A victim can register a police complaint under provisions of Section 66E and Section 66D of the IT Act, 2000. Recently enacted Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 aims to protect the digital personal data of users. Recently Union Government issued an advisory to social media intermediaries to identify misinformation and deepfakes. Comprehensive law promised by Union IT minister Ashwini Vaishnav will be able to address these challenges.

Conclusion 

In the end, the unsettling dance of AI and human vulnerability continues in the dark web of deepfake pornography. It's a dance that is as disturbing as it is fascinating, a dance that raises questions about the ethical use of technology, the protection of individual rights, and the responsibility of financial institutions. It's a dance that we must all be aware of, for it is a dance that affects us all.

References

• https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/deepfake-porn-artificial-intelligence-women-fake-photos-2471855-2023-12-04
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/opinion/the-legal-net-to-trap-peddlers-of-deepfakes-101701520933515.html
• https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/with-deepfakes-getting-better-and-more-alarming-seeing-is-no-longer-believing/