#FactCheck-A manipulated image showing Indian cricketer Virat Kohli allegedly watching Rahul Gandhi's media briefing on his mobile phone has been widely shared online.
Executive Summary:
A fake photo claiming to show the cricketer Virat Kohli watching a press conference by Rahul Gandhi before a match, has been widely shared on social media. The original photo shows Kohli on his phone with no trace of Gandhi. The incident is claimed to have happened on March 21, 2024, before Kohli's team, Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB), played Chennai Super Kings (CSK) in the Indian Premier League (IPL). Many Social Media accounts spread the false image and made it viral.
Claims:
The viral photo falsely claims Indian cricketer Virat Kohli was watching a press conference by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on his phone before an IPL match. Many Social media handlers shared it to suggest Kohli's interest in politics. The photo was shared on various platforms including some online news websites.
Fact Check:
After we came across the viral image posted by social media users, we ran a reverse image search of the viral image. Then we landed on the original image posted by an Instagram account named virat__.forever_ on 21 March.
The caption of the Instagram post reads, “VIRAT KOHLI CHILLING BEFORE THE SHOOT FOR JIO ADVERTISEMENT COMMENCE.❤️”
Evidently, there is no image of Congress Leader Rahul Gandhi on the Phone of Virat Kohli. Moreover, the viral image was published after the original image, which was posted on March 21.
Therefore, it’s apparent that the viral image has been altered, borrowing the original image which was shared on March 21.
Conclusion:
To sum up, the Viral Image is altered from the original image, the original image caption tells Cricketer Virat Kohli chilling Before the Jio Advertisement commences but not watching any politician Interview. This shows that in the age of social media, where false information can spread quickly, critical thinking and fact-checking are more important than ever. It is crucial to check if something is real before sharing it, to avoid spreading false stories.
Related Blogs
Introduction:
This Op-ed sheds light on the perspectives of the US and China regarding cyber espionage. Additionally, it seeks to analyze China's response to the US accusation regarding cyber espionage.
What is Cyber espionage?
Cyber espionage or cyber spying is the act of obtaining personal, sensitive, or proprietary information from individuals without their knowledge or consent. In an increasingly transparent and technological society, the ability to control the private information an individual reveals on the Internet and the ability of others to access that information are a growing concern. This includes storage and retrieval of e-mail by third parties, social media, search engines, data mining, GPS tracking, the explosion of smartphone usage, and many other technology considerations. In the age of big data, there is a growing concern for privacy issues surrounding the storage and misuse of personal data and non-consensual mining of private information by companies, criminals, and governments.
Cyber espionage aims for economic, political, and technological gain. Fox example Stuxnet (2010) cyber-attack by the US and its allies Israel against Iran’s Nuclear facilities. Three espionage tools were discovered connected to Stuxnet, such as Gauss, FLAME and DuQu, for stealing data such as passwords, screenshots, Bluetooth, Skype functions, etc.
Cyber espionage is one of the most significant and intriguing international challenges globally. Many nations and international bodies, such as the US and China, have created their definitions and have always struggled over cyber espionage norms.
The US Perspective
In 2009, US officials (along with other allied countries) mentioned that cyber espionage was acceptable if it safeguarded national security, although they condemned economically motivated cyber espionage. Even the Director of National Intelligence said in 2013 that foreign intelligence capabilities cannot steal foreign companies' trade secrets to benefit their firms. This stance is consistent with the Economic Espionage Act (EEA) of 1996, particularly Section 1831, which prohibits economic espionage. This includes the theft of a trade secret that "will benefit any foreign government, foreign agent or foreign instrumentality.
Second, the US advocates for cybersecurity market standards and strongly opposes transferring personal data extracted from the US Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to cybercrime markets. Furthermore, China has been reported to sell OPM data on illicit markets. It became a grave concern for the US government when the Chinese government managed to acquire sensitive details of 22.1 million US government workers through cyber intrusions in 2014.
Third, Cyber-espionage is acceptable unless it’s utilized for Doxing, which involves disclosing personal information about someone online without their consent and using it as a tool for political influence operations. However, Western academics and scholars have endeavoured to distinguish between doxing and whistleblowing. They argue that whistleblowing, exemplified by events like the Snowden Leaks and Vault 7 disclosures, serves the interests of US citizens. In the US, being regarded as an open society, certain disclosures are not promoted but rather required by mandate.
Fourth, the US argues that there is no cyber espionage against critical infrastructure during peacetime. According to the US, there are 16 critical infrastructure sectors, including chemical, nuclear, energy, defence, food, water, and so on. These sectors are considered essential to the US, and any disruption or harm would impact security, national public health and national economic security.
The US concern regarding China’s cyber espionage
According to James Lewis (a senior vice president at the Center for US-China Economic and Security Review Commission), the US faces losses between $ 20 billion and $30 billion annually due to China’s cyberespionage. The 2018 U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Section 301 report highlighted instances, where the Chinese government and executives from Chinese companies engaged in clandestine cyber intrusions to obtaining commercially valuable information from the U.S. businesses, such as in 2018 where officials from China’s Ministry of State Security, stole trade from General Electric aviation and other aerospace companies.
China's response to the US accusations of cyber espionage
China's perspective on cyber espionage is outlined by its 2014 anti-espionage law, which was revised in 2023. Article 1 of this legislation is formulated to prevent, halt, and punish espionage actions to maintain national security. Article 4 addresses the act of espionage and does not differentiate between state-sponsored cyber espionage for economic purposes and state-sponsored cyber espionage for national security purposes. However, China doesn't make a clear difference between government-to-government hacking (spying) and government-to-corporate sector hacking, unlike the US. This distinction is less apparent in China due to its strong state-owned enterprise (SOE) sector. However, military spying is considered part of the national interest in the US, while corporate spying is considered a crime.
China asserts that the US has established cyber norms concerning cyber espionage to normalize public attribution as acceptable conduct. This is achieved by targeting China for cyber operations, imposing sanctions on accused Chinese individuals, and making political accusations, such as blaming China and Russia for meddling in US elections. Despite all this, Washington D.C has never taken responsibility for the infamous Flame and Stuxnet cyber operations, which were widely recognized as part of a broader collaborative initiative known as Operation Olympic Games between the US and Israel. Additionally, the US takes the lead in surveillance activities conducted against China, Russia, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, and several French presidents. Surveillance programs such as Irritant Horn, Stellar Wind, Bvp47, the Hive, and PRISM are recognized as tools used by the US to monitor both allies and adversaries to maintain global hegemony.
China urges the US to cease its smear campaign associated with Volt Typhoon’s cyberattack for cyber espionage, citing the publication of a report titled “Volt Typhoon: A Conspiratorial Swindling Campaign Targets with U.S. Congress and Taxpayers Conducted by U.S. Intelligence Community” by China's National Computer Virus Emergency Response Centre and the 360 Digital Security Group on 15 April. According to the report, 'Volt Typhoon' is a ransomware cyber criminal group self-identified as the 'Dark Power' and is not affiliated with any state or region. Multiple cybersecurity authorities in the US collaborated to fabricate this story just for more budgets from Congress. In the meantime, Microsoft and other U.S. cybersecurity firms are seeking more big contracts from US cybersecurity authorities. The reality behind “Volt Typhoon '' is a conspiratorial swindling campaign to achieve two objectives by amplifying the "China threat theory" and cheating money from the U.S. Congress and taxpayers.
Beijing condemned the US claims of cyber espionage without any solid evidence. China also blames the US for economic espionage by citing the European Parliament report that the National Security Agency (NSA) was also involved in assisting Boeing in beating Airbus for a multi-billion dollar contract. Furthermore, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff also accused the US authorities of spying against the state-owned oil company “Petrobras” for economic reasons.
Conclusion
In 2015, the US and China marked a milestone as both President Xi Jinping and Barack Obama signed an agreement, committing that neither country's government would conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets, intellectual property, or other confidential business information to grant competitive advantages to firms or commercial sectors. However, the China Cybersecurity Industry Alliance (CCIA) published a report titled 'US Threats and Sabotage to the Security and Development of Global Cyberspace' in 2024, highlighting the US escalating cyber-attack and espionage activities against China and other nations. Additionally, there has been a considerable increase in the volume and sophistication of Chinese hacking since 2016. According to a survey by the Center for International and Strategic Studies, out of 224 cyber espionage incidents reported since 2000, 69% occurred after Xi assumed office. Therefore, China and the US must address cybersecurity issues through dialogue and cooperation, utilizing bilateral and multilateral agreements.
Executive Summary:
A viral video showing flames and thick smoke from large fuel tanks has been shared widely on social media. Many claimed it showed a recent Russian missile attack on a fuel depot in Ukraine. However, our research found that the video is not related to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. It actually shows a fire that happened at Al Hamriyah Port in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, on May 31, 2025. The confusion was likely caused by a lack of context and misleading captions.
Claim:
The circulating claim suggests that Russia deliberately bombed Ukraine's fuel reserves and the viral video shows evidence of the bombing. The posts claim the fuel depot was destroyed purposefully during military operations, implying an increase in violence. This narrative is intended to generate feelings and reinforce fears related to war.
Fact Check:
After doing a reverse image search of the key frames of the viral video, we found that the video is actually from Al Hamriyah Port, UAE, not from the Russia-Ukraine conflict. During further research we found the same visuals were also published by regional news outlets in the UAE, including Gulf News and Khaleej Times, which reported on a massive fire at Al Hamriyah Port on 31 May 2025.
As per the news report, a fire broke out at a fuel storage facility in Al Hamriyah Port, UAE. Fortunately, no casualties were reported. Fire Management Services responded promptly and successfully brought the situation under control.
Conclusion:
The belief that the viral video is evidence of a Russian strike in Ukraine is misleading and incorrect. The video is actually of a fire at a commercial port in the UAE. When you share misleading footage like that, you distort reality and incite fear based on lies. It is simply a reminder that not all viral media is what it appears to be, and every viewer should take the time to check and verify the content source and context before accepting or reposting. In this instance, the original claim is untrue and misleading.
- Claim: Fresh attack in Ukraine! Russian military strikes again!
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Introduction
Taj Hotels Group is well known for its luxurious ambience and old-world grace and charm, blended with contemporary comforts and amenities for its guests or customers. But what can make all the netizens perplexed is the recent data breach incident which took place in Tata-owned Taj hotels. The hotel suffer from a data breach that compromises nearly 1.5 million customers' data which includes addresses, membership IDs, mobile numbers and other personally identifiable information, according to sources. This news was brought to light which raised concerns about the privacy and data protection of personal data of individuals. We are living in a space influenced by advanced technology and digital communication which throws a concern or challenge to secure the personal information of individuals.
Unveiling the incident
Tata-owned Taj Hotels group has suffered a data breach that compromise information of over 1.5 million customers, according to a news report. A bad actor or entity going by the name “Dnacookies” claimed data set contains data from the 2014-2020 period and has not been disclosed anywhere till now. Such personal data includes name, address, customer ID, mobile number and other personally identifiable information. This shows the risks or challenges of data protection and security. The incidents raise an alarm about the risks and vulnerabilities that might be faced even by the big corporate giants. The bad actor with the handle “Dnacookies” also demanded a ransom of a sum of about Rs 4.16 lakh from the Taj hotel group. In response to the incident, a spokesperson from the concerned hotel group said that we have been made aware of someone claiming possession of a limited data customer data set, which is non-sensitive in nature. Investigation is underway and relevant authorities have been notified about the incident.
A demand for ransom
The report from CNBC-TV18 clears that the bad actor not only purloined the data but also demanded around 4.16 lakh as a ransom for the database. Along with this, the bad actor kept three conditions ahead. Firstly there has to be a middleman for a negotiable deal secondly the data cannot be split either the entire data has to be taken with the ransom demand or no data at all. Thirdly additional samples of data will not be provided. Further, the spokesperson of Indian Hotel Company Limited mentioned that they have been escalated with the fact that someone is claiming authority in a limited data set. The bad actor claimed that the database contains information from 2014- 2020 which has been kept confidential till now. The audacity of the bad actor went to such an extent that the sample containing one thousand rows of unique entries from the bad actor dataset was also provided by the bad actor as proof of the deed. This incident underlines the growing threat in cyberspace and the urgency for individuals, organizations or entities to priorities data security measures and maintain cyber resilience.
Personal Data on Stake
Such data is the personal information of the individuals and also constitutes the personal tastes and preferences of individuals which can be exploited. The biggest gush of winds the hotel and individuals face by such a data breach is not only the volume of data compromised but also the potential ways it can get misused and exploited against the hotel or its customers by cyber crooks. This paves the way for cybercriminals to put forward any demand knowing the sensitivity of the data. Followed by creating a dilemmatic situation for the affected entities to either accept the ransom demands or to stand against ransom. Since the risks are high, going ahead with any of these situations can have an adverse impact on the security of personal data. The organisation or entities holding the personal data need to make sure that data under their realm is well protected and secured.
While the organisation has to sail through the aftermath of this breach, such incidents also pose a challenge for the organisation to maintain the trust and reputation of the organization since these incidents question the cyber security posture of the organisation. It is suggested to be transparent with its stakeholders, and open about the vulnerabilities and steps taken against this. They should also discuss the amplified step added for safeguarding their customer's personal data. Since Taj is well known for its out-of-the-box luxury and for providing comfort to its customers it should take a step ahead to reinforce its digital infrastructure to ensure the security of data.
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023
The newly enacted Digital Personal Data Act, 2023 put certain obligations on data fiduciaries to take reasonable measures to maintain the security of personal data. The Act also requires to inform about the data breach to the data protection board constituted under the Act. The Act aims to protect the individual's digital personal data. The Act casts certain obligations on data principals and data fiduciaries. The Act provides penalty upto 250 crores in case of a data breach. The Act aims to provide consent-based data collection techniques. The Act also establishes the Data Protection Board to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Act and address grievances.
Conclusion
Data breach in such a big giant in the market serves as an alarming concern to be more cautious and proactively take precautionary measures to protect the security of data and compliance with data protection laws and regulations. We are living in an era where digital security is as important as the basic fundamental rights of an individual. Taj Hotels Group has actively taken steps to handle the aftermath of the data breach by informing the incident to law enforcement agencies and taking necessary steps. It is also on our part to be more aware, and vigilant about our personal data. Entities need to ensure compliance and measures to protect personal data and overall ensure a true cyber-safe & digital environment.
References
