#FactCheck-AI-Generated Video Falsely Shared as Drone Show Honouring Cristiano Ronaldo Introduction
Executive Summary
A video is being widely circulated on social media showing thousands of drones forming an image of Cristiano Ronaldo wearing his iconic Portugal jersey over what appears to be a water body. Moments later, the drones are seen creating his famous “SIUUU” celebration pose. The video is being shared with the claim that this spectacular aerial drone show was organised as a tribute to Ronaldo.
CyberPeace Research Wing’s research found the viral claim to be false. The research revealed that the video is not a real drone display but was created using Artificial Intelligence (AI) and is being circulated with a misleading claim.
Claim
The viral video is being shared on social media with the claim that the drone show was organised in honour of Cristiano Ronaldo.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DamaeegILpU/?igsh=NmtjOTN4cWJzenJ1

Fact Check
To verify the claim, we extracted multiple keyframes from the viral video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the research, we did not find any credible video, news report, or reliable source confirming that such a drone show was organised for Cristiano Ronaldo.
In the next stage of the research, we analysed the video using the AI detection tool Hive Moderation. The tool’s results indicated that the viral video had a 71% probability of being AI-generated.

For further verification, we checked the video using another AI detection tool, DetectVideo AI. The analysis showed that the video had an 80% probability of being AI-generated.

At the final stage of the research, the video was also analysed using Deepfake-O-Meter. The tool indicated an almost 100% probability that the video was AI-generated.

Conclusion
Our research found that the viral claim is false. The video does not show a real drone show organised in honour of Cristiano Ronaldo. The footage was found to be AI-generated and is being circulated on social media with a false narrative.
Related Blogs

As AI language models become more powerful, they are also becoming more prone to errors. One increasingly prominent issue is AI hallucinations, instances where models generate outputs that are factually incorrect, nonsensical, or entirely fabricated, yet present them with complete confidence. Recently, ChatGPT released two new models—o3 and o4-mini, which differ from earlier versions as they focus more on step-by-step reasoning rather than simple text prediction. With the growing reliance on chatbots and generative models for everything from news summaries to legal advice, this phenomenon poses a serious threat to public trust, information accuracy, and decision-making.
What Are AI Hallucinations?
AI hallucinations occur when a model invents facts, misattributes quotes, or cites nonexistent sources. This is not a bug but a side effect of how Large Language Models (LLMs) work, and it is only the probability that can be reduced, not their occurrence altogether. Trained on vast internet data, these models predict what word is likely to come next in a sequence. They have no true understanding of the world or facts, they simulate reasoning based on statistical patterns in text. What is alarming is that the newer and more advanced models are producing more hallucinations, not fewer. seemingly counterintuitive. This has been prevalent reasoning-based models, which generate answers step-by-step in a chain-of-thought style. While this can improve performance on complex tasks, it also opens more room for errors at each step, especially when no factual retrieval or grounding is involved.
As per reports shared on TechCrunch, it mentioned that when users asked AI models for short answers, hallucinations increased by up to 30%. And a study published in eWeek found that ChatGPT hallucinated in 40% of tests involving domain-specific queries, such as medical and legal questions. This was not, however, limited to this particular Large Language Model, but also similar ones like DeepSeek. Even more concerning are hallucinations in multimodal models like those used for deepfakes. Forbes reports that some of these models produce synthetic media that not only look real but are also capable of contributing to fabricated narratives, raising the stakes for the spread of misinformation during elections, crises, and other instances.
It is also notable that AI models are continually improving with each version, focusing on reducing hallucinations and enhancing accuracy. New features, such as providing source links and citations, are being implemented to increase transparency and reliability in responses.
The Misinformation Dilemma
The rise of AI-generated hallucinations exacerbates the already severe problem of online misinformation. Hallucinated content can quickly spread across social platforms, get scraped into training datasets, and re-emerge in new generations of models, creating a dangerous feedback loop. However, it helps that the developers are already aware of such instances and are actively charting out ways in which we can reduce the probability of this error. Some of them are:
- Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG): Instead of relying purely on a model’s internal knowledge, RAG allows the model to “look up” information from external databases or trusted sources during the generation process. This can significantly reduce hallucination rates by anchoring responses in verifiable data.
- Use of smaller, more specialised language models: Lightweight models fine-tuned on specific domains, such as medical records or legal texts. They tend to hallucinate less because their scope is limited and better curated.
Furthermore, transparency mechanisms such as source citation, model disclaimers, and user feedback loops can help mitigate the impact of hallucinations. For instance, when a model generates a response, linking back to its source allows users to verify the claims made.
Conclusion
AI hallucinations are an intrinsic part of how generative models function today, and such a side-effect would continue to occur until foundational changes are made in how models are trained and deployed. For the time being, developers, companies, and users must approach AI-generated content with caution. LLMs are, fundamentally, word predictors, brilliant but fallible. Recognising their limitations is the first step in navigating the misinformation dilemma they pose.
References
- https://www.eweek.com/news/ai-hallucinations-increase/
- https://www.resilience.org/stories/2025-05-11/better-ai-has-more-hallucinations/
- https://www.ekathimerini.com/nytimes/1269076/ai-is-getting-more-powerful-but-its-hallucinations-are-getting-worse/
- https://techcrunch.com/2025/05/08/asking-chatbots-for-short-answers-can-increase-hallucinations-study-finds/
- https://en.as.com/latest_news/is-chatgpt-having-robot-dreams-ai-is-hallucinating-and-producing-incorrect-information-and-experts-dont-know-why-n/
- https://www.newscientist.com/article/2479545-ai-hallucinations-are-getting-worse-and-theyre-here-to-stay/
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2025/05/06/why-ai-hallucinations-are-worse-than-ever/
- https://towardsdatascience.com/how-i-deal-with-hallucinations-at-an-ai-startup-9fc4121295cc/
- https://www.informationweek.com/machine-learning-ai/getting-a-handle-on-ai-hallucinations

Introduction
As we delve deeper into the intricate, almost esoteric digital landscape of the 21st century, we are confronted by a new and troubling phenomenon that threatens the very bastions of our personal security. This is not a mere subplot in some dystopian novel but a harsh and palatable reality firmly rooted in today's technologically driven society. We must grapple with the consequences of the alarming evolution of cyber threats, particularly the sophisticated use of artificial intelligence in creating face swaps—a technique now cleverly harnessed by nefarious actors to undermine the bedrock of biometric security systems.
What is GoldPickaxe?
It was amidst the hum of countless servers and data centers that the term 'GoldPickaxe' began to echo, sending shivers down the spines of cybersecurity experts. Originating from the intricate web spun by a group of Chinese hackers as reported in Dark Reading. GoldPickaxe represents the latest in a long lineage of digital predators. It is an astute embodiment of the disguise, blending into the digital environment as a seemingly harmless government service app. But behind its innocuous facade, it bears the intent to ensnare and deceive, with the elderly demographic being especially susceptible to its trap.
Victims, unassuming and trustful, are cajoled into revealing their most sensitive information: phone numbers, private details, and, most alarmingly, their facial data. These virtual reflections, intended to be the safeguard of one's digital persona, are snatched away and misused in a perilous transformation. The attackers harness such biometric data, feeding it into the arcane furnaces of deepfake technology, wherein AI face-swapping crafts eerily accurate and deceptive facsimiles. These digital doppelgängers become the master keys, effortlessly bypassing the sentinel eyes of facial recognition systems that lock the vaults of Southeast Asia's financial institutions.
Through the diligent and unyielding work of the research team at Group-IB, the trajectory of one victim's harrowing ordeal—a Vietnamese individual pilfered of a life-altering $40,000—sheds light on the severity of this technological betrayal. The advancements in deep face technology, once seen as a marvel of AI, now present a clear and present danger, outpacing the mechanisms meant to deter unauthorized access, and leaving the unenlightened multitude unaware and exposed.
Adding weight to the discussion, experts, a potentate in biometric technology, commented with a somber tone: 'This is why we see face swaps as a tool of choice for hackers. It gives the threat actor this incredible level of power and control.' This chilling testament to the potency of digital fraudulence further emphasizes that even seemingly impregnable ecosystems, such as that of Apple’s, are not beyond the reach of these relentless invaders.
New Threat
Emerging from this landscape is the doppelgänger of GoldPickaxe specifically tailored for the iOS landscape—GoldDigger's mutation into GoldPickaxe for Apple's hallowed platform is nothing short of a wake-up call. It engenders not just a single threat but an evolving suite of menaces, including its uncanny offspring, 'GoldDiggerPlus,' which is wielding the terrifying power to piggyback on real-time communications of the affected devices. Continuously refined and updated, these threats become chimeras, each iteration more elusive, more formidable than its predecessor.
One ingenious and insidious tactic exploited by these cyber adversaries is the diversionary use of Apple's TestFlight, a trusted beta testing platform, as a trojan horse for their malware. Upon clampdown by Apple, the hackers, exhibiting an unsettling level of adaptability, inveigle users to endorse MDM profiles, hitherto reserved for corporate device management, thereby chaining these unknowing participants to their will.
How To Protect
Against this stark backdrop, the question of how one might armor oneself against such predation looms large. It is a question with no simple answer, demanding vigilance and proactive measures.
General Vigilance : Aware of the Trojan's advance, Apple is striving to devise countermeasures, yet individuals can take concrete steps to safeguard their digital lives.
Consider Lockdown Mode: It is imperative to exhibit discernment with TestFlight installations, to warily examine MDM profiles, and seriously consider embracing the protective embrace of Lockdown Mode. Activating Lockdown Mode on an iPhone is akin to drawing the portcullis and manning the battlements of one's digital stronghold. The process is straightforward: a journey to the settings menu, a descent into privacy and security, and finally, the sanctification of Lockdown Mode, followed by a device restart. It is a curtailment of convenience, yes, but a potent defense against the malevolence lurking in the unseen digital thicket.
As 'GoldPickaxe' insidiously carves its path into the iOS realm—a rare and unsettling occurrence—it flags the possible twilight of the iPhone's vaunted reputation for tight security. Should these shadow operators set their sights beyond Southeast Asia, angling their digital scalpels towards the U.S., Canada, and other English-speaking enclaves, the consequences could be dire.
Conclusion
Thus, it is imperative that as digital citizens, we fortify ourselves with best practices in cybersecurity. Our journey through cyberspace must be cautious, our digital trails deliberate and sparse. Let the specter of iPhone malware serve as a compelling reason to arm ourselves with knowledge and prudence, the twin guardians that will let us navigate the murky waters of the internet with assurance, outwitting those who weave webs of deceit. In heeding these words, we preserve not only our financial assets but the sanctity of our digital identities against the underhanded schemes of those who would see them usurped.
References
- https://www.timesnownews.com/technology-science/new-ios-malware-stealing-face-id-data-bank-infos-on-iphones-how-to-protect-yourself-article-107761568
- https://www.darkreading.com/application-security/ios-malware-steals-faces-defeat-biometrics-ai-swaps
- https://www.tomsguide.com/computing/malware-adware/first-ever-ios-trojan-discovered-and-its-stealing-face-id-data-to-break-into-bank-accounts

Introduction
Insurance companies hold a huge amount of sensitive data. Medical history, bank account numbers, identity proofs, years of claims records — all of it sits on insurer servers, waiting. That makes the sector an easy target. India saw close to 370 million malware attacks in a single recent year. Banking, financial services and insurance firms bore the brunt of it. That got the attention of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI). On 6 April 2026, it released a new set of Information and Cyber Security Guidelines. These replace the old 2023 rules and ask insurers to take much stronger responsibility for protecting their systems, and their customers' data.
Who Must Follow These New Rules
The updated guidelines are not limited to large insurance companies alone. They apply to life, general and health insurers. They also apply to foreign reinsurance branches operating in India, and to intermediaries such as brokers, corporate agents, web aggregators and third-party administrators. Insurance repositories and the Insurance Information Bureau of India fall within scope too. Individual insurance agents, point-of-sale persons and surveyors are not covered directly. But insurers must still make sure these people follow a basic security framework approved by their board. Foreign reinsurance branches get a little more room — they can depart from a specific rule, but only if they can justify it properly to the regulator. Why cast such a wide net in the first place? Because breaches rarely start at the big insurer with the well-staffed Information Technology (IT) team. They start with the small broker or corporate agent who never got around to updating a password policy.
A Stronger Role for the Boardroom
An Independent CISO (Chief Information Security Officer)
The clearest change sits right at the top. A Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) can no longer report to the Head of Information Technology (IT). Nor can the CISO (Chief Information Security Officer) be handed sales targets or any other business goal. Why does this matter so much? Picture a CISO (Chief Information Security Officer) who answers to the same person pushing hard for a product launch next week. Flagging a serious vulnerability suddenly becomes an awkward, career-risking conversation. The IRDAI (Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India) has simply removed that awkwardness by rule.
More Frequent Oversight
The Information Security Risk Management Committee used to meet only twice a year. Now it must meet at least once every quarter. A new Information Technology (IT) Steering Committee has also been set up to handle day-to-day technology decisions. This frees the risk committee to focus purely on oversight. There's also a new seat at the table: at least one outside cybersecurity expert must now join the Risk Management Committee. Someone with no stake in internal politics, no department to protect, just technical judgement.
Faster Action When Something Goes Wrong
A Six-Hour Reporting Deadline
No system is completely safe from attack. So the guidelines also focus heavily on how insurers respond once something goes wrong. Every cybersecurity incident now has to reach the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team within six hours of being spotted, with the IRDAI (Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India) and other regulators looped in at the same time. Six hours is a tight deadline. It means insurers need detection and escalation systems that work round the clock, not just during office hours.
Testing and Exceptions
Business continuity and disaster recovery plans must be tested at least once a year, and not through some comfortable, pre-planned shutdown either — the test has to feel like a real disaster. Exceptions to security policy are also handled with far more discipline now. A short exception of up to three months can be approved by the CISO (Chief Information Security Officer) alone. One lasting between three months and a year needs sign-off from the risk committee. Anything longer needs approval from the board itself. Gaps found during audits must be closed within twelve months, with the board tracking progress at every stage.
Looking Ahead to Tomorrow's Risks
The guidelines do not stop at today's threats. More insurers are moving their operations to the cloud. So the rules now demand stronger contracts with cloud vendors, and a clear plan for what happens to customer data once a vendor relationship ends. Third-party risk gets close attention too. Many security breaches in the financial sector start with a vendor, not with the insurer's own systems. Before hiring any vendor, insurers must now check their security properly. Every contract must include audit rights and a clause requiring the vendor to report incidents. One of the most forward-looking additions is early preparation for a post-quantum world. Insurers must keep a clear list of their cryptographic assets. In simple terms, this is a map of where and how encryption is used across their systems. It helps them get ready once stronger encryption standards become necessary. Quantum computers capable of breaking today's encryption are still some years away, by most estimates. Mapping out those cryptographic assets now is a lot cheaper than scrambling to do it after the threat has already landed.
Conclusion
Where does all this leave things? Cybersecurity in Indian insurance isn't a server-room problem anymore — it sits squarely in the boardroom now. Directors now own this risk, not just Information Technology (IT) managers tucked away in a basement office. Policyholders benefit too, since their data now sits behind stronger locks, watched more closely and reported on far more often than before. Insurers who treat this as a paperwork exercise will struggle to keep up. Those who actually build these habits into daily operations will likely spend less time firefighting breaches five years from now, and more time competing on service and price instead.
References
3. Medianama, 'IRDAI Updates Cybersecurity Rules, Mandates DPDP Compliance', April 2026.
4. DSCI, brief on IRDAI's Information and Cyber Security Guidelines, 2026, April 2026.
7. Deloitte India, 'IRDAI Tightens Cyber Net: Wake-up Call for Insurers'.