#FactCheck: Beware of Fake Emails Distributing Fraudulent e-PAN Cards

Introduction 

Prebunking is a technique that shifts the focus from directly challenging falsehoods or telling people what they need to believe to understanding how people are manipulated and misled online to begin with. It is a growing field of research that aims to help people resist persuasion by misinformation. Prebunking, or "attitudinal inoculation," is a way to teach people to spot and resist manipulative messages before they happen.  The crux of the approach is rooted in taking a step backwards and nipping the problem in the bud by deepening our understanding of it, instead of designing redressal mechanisms to tackle it after the fact. It has been proven effective in helping a wide range of people build resilience to misleading information.

Prebunking is a psychological strategy for countering the effect of misinformation with the goal of assisting individuals in identifying and resisting deceptive content, hence increasing resilience against future misinformation. Online manipulation is a complex issue, and multiple approaches are needed to curb its worst effects. Prebunking provides an opportunity to get ahead of online manipulation, providing a layer of protection before individuals encounter malicious content. Prebunking aids individuals in discerning and refuting misleading arguments, thus enabling them to resist a variety of online manipulations. 

Prebunking builds mental defenses for misinformation by providing warnings and counterarguments before people encounter malicious content. Inoculating people against false or misleading information is a powerful and effective method for building trust and understanding along with a personal capacity for discernment and fact-checking. Prebunking teaches people how to separate facts from myths by teaching them the importance of thinking in terms of ‘how you know what you know’ and consensus-building. Prebunking uses examples and case studies to explain the types and risks of misinformation so that individuals can apply these learnings to reject false claims and manipulation in the future as well. 

How Prebunking Helps Individuals Spot Manipulative Messages

Prebunking helps individuals identify manipulative messages by providing them with the necessary tools and knowledge to recognize common techniques used to spread misinformation. Successful prebunking strategies include;

1. Warnings;
2. Preemptive Refutation: It explains the narrative/technique and how particular information is manipulative in structure. The Inoculation treatment messages typically include 2-3 counterarguments and their refutations. An effective rebuttal provides the viewer with skills to fight any erroneous or misleading information they may encounter in the future.
3. Micro-dosing: A weakened or practical example of misinformation that is innocuous. 

All these alert individuals to potential manipulation attempts. Prebunking also offers weakened examples of misinformation, allowing individuals to practice identifying deceptive content. It activates mental defenses, preparing individuals to resist persuasion attempts. Misinformation can exploit cognitive biases: people tend to put a lot of faith in things they’ve heard repeatedly - a fact that malicious actors manipulate by flooding the Internet with their claims to help legitimise them by creating familiarity. The ‘prebunking’ technique helps to create resilience against misinformation and protects our minds from the harmful effects of misinformation. 

Prebunking essentially helps people control the information they consume by teaching them how to discern between accurate and deceptive content. It enables one to develop critical thinking skills, evaluate sources adequately and identify red flags. By incorporating these components and strategies, prebunking enhances the ability to spot manipulative messages, resist deceptive narratives, and make informed decisions when navigating the very dynamic and complex information landscape online.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations

• Preventing and fighting misinformation necessitates joint efforts between different stakeholders. The government and policymakers should sponsor prebunking initiatives and information literacy programmes to counter misinformation and adopt systematic approaches. Regulatory frameworks should encourage accountability in the dissemination of online information on various platforms. Collaboration with educational institutions, technological companies and civil society organisations can assist in the implementation of prebunking techniques in a variety of areas.
• Higher educational institutions should support prebunking and media literacy and offer professional development opportunities for educators, and scholars by working with academics and professionals on the subject of misinformation by producing research studies on the grey areas and challenges associated with misinformation.
• Technological companies and social media platforms should improve algorithm transparency, create user-friendly tools and resources, and work with fact-checking organisations to incorporate fact-check labels and tools.
• Civil society organisations and NGOs should promote digital literacy campaigns to spread awareness on misinformation and teach prebunking strategies and critical information evaluation. Training programmes should be available to help people recognise and resist deceptive information using prebunking tactics. Advocacy efforts should support legislation or guidelines that support and encourage prebunking efforts and promote media literacy as a basic skill in the digital landscape. 
• Media outlets and journalists including print & social media should follow high journalistic standards and engage in fact-checking activities to ensure information accuracy before release. Collaboration with prebunking professionals, cyber security experts, researchers and advocacy analysts can result in instructional content and initiatives that promote media literacy, prebunking strategies and misinformation awareness.

Final Words

The World Economic Forum's Global Risks Report 2024 identifies misinformation and disinformation as the top most significant risks for the next two years. Misinformation and disinformation are rampant in today’s digital-first reality, and the ever-growing popularity of social media is only going to see the challenges compound further. It is absolutely imperative for all netizens and stakeholders  to adopt proactive approaches to counter the growing problem of misinformation. Prebunking is a powerful problem-solving tool in this regard because it aims at ‘protection through prevention’ instead of limiting the strategy to harm reduction and redressal.  We can draw parallels with the concept of vaccination or inoculation, reducing the probability of a misinformation infection. Prebunking exposes us to a weakened form of misinformation and provides ways to identify it, reducing the chance false information takes root in our psyches.

The most compelling attribute of this approach is that the focus is not only on preventing damage but also creating widespread ownership and citizen participation in the problem-solving process. Every empowered individual creates an additional layer of protection against the scourge of misinformation, not only making safer choices for themselves but also lowering the risk of spreading false claims to others.  

References

• [1] https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_Global_Risks_Report_2024.pdf
• [2] https://prebunking.withgoogle.com/docs/A_Practical_Guide_to_Prebunking_Misinformation.pdf
• [3] https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/17634/3565

‍

Introduction

The Indian government has developed the National Cybersecurity Reference Framework (NCRF) to provide an implementable measure for cybersecurity, based on existing legislations, policies, and guidelines. The National Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Centre is responsible for the framework. The government is expected to recommend enterprises, particularly those in critical sectors like banking, telecom, and energy, to use only security products and services developed in India. The NCRF aims to ensure that cybersecurity is protected and that the use of made-in-India products is encouraged to safeguard cyber infrastructure. The Centre is expected to emphasise the significant progress in developing indigenous cybersecurity products and solutions.

National Cybersecurity Reference Framework (NCRF)

The Indian government has developed the National Cybersecurity Reference Framework (NCRF), a guideline that sets the standard for cybersecurity in India. The framework focuses on critical sectors and provides guidelines to help organisations develop strong cybersecurity systems. It can serve as a template for critical sector entities to develop their own governance and management systems. The government has identified telecom, power, transportation, finance, strategic entities, government entities, and health as critical sectors.

The NCRF is non-binding in nature, meaning its recommendations will not be binding. It recommends enterprises allocate at least 10% of their total IT budget towards cybersecurity, with monitoring by top-level management or the board of directors. The framework may suggest that national nodal agencies evolve platforms and processes for machine-processing data from different sources to ensure proper audits and rate auditors based on performance.

Regulators overseeing critical sectors may have greater powers to set rules for information security and define information security requirements to ensure proper audits. They also need an effective Information Security Management System (ISMS) instance to access sensitive data and deficiencies related to operations in the critical sector. The policy is based on a Common but Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR) approach, recognising that different organisations have varying levels of cybersecurity needs and responsibilities.

India faces a barrage of cybersecurity-related incidents, such as the high-profile attack on AIIMS Delhi in 2022. Many ministries feel hamstrung by the lack of an overarching framework on cybersecurity when formulating sector-specific legislation. In recent years, threat actors backed by nation-states and organised cyber-criminal groups have attempted to target the critical information infrastructure (CII) of the government and enterprises. The current guiding framework on cybersecurity for critical infrastructure in India comes from the National Cybersecurity Policy of 2013. From 2013 to 2023, the world has evolved significantly due to the emergence of new threats necessitating the development of new strategies.

Significance in the realm of Critical Infrastructure  

India faces numerous cybersecurity incidents due to a lack of a comprehensive framework.  Critical Information Infrastructure like banking, energy, healthcare, telecommunications, transportation, strategic enterprises, and government enterprises are most targeted by threat actors, including nation-states and cybercriminals. These critical information sectors especially by their vary nature as they hold sensitive data make them prime targets for cyber threats and attacks. Cyber-attacks can compromise patient privacy, disrupt services, compromise control systems, pose safety risks, and disrupt critical services. Hence it is of paramount importance to come up with NCRF which can potentially address the emerging issues by providing sector-specific guidelines.

The Indian government is considering promoting the use of made-in-India products to enhance Cyber Infrastructure

India is preparing to recommend the use of domestically developed cybersecurity products and services, particularly for critical sectors like banking, telecom, and energy, to enhance national security in the face of escalating cybersecurity threats. The initiative aims to enhance national security in response to increasing cybersecurity threats.

Conclusion

Promoting locally made cybersecurity products and services in important industries shows India's commitment to strengthening national security. A step of coming up with the National Cybersecurity Reference Framework (NCRF) which outlines duties, responsibilities, and recommendations for organisations and regulators shows the critical step towards a comprehensive cybersecurity policy framework which is a need of the hour. The government underscoring made-in-India solutions and allocating cybersecurity resources underlines its determination to protect the country's cyber infrastructure in light of increasing cyber threats & attacks.  The NCRF is expected to help draft sector-specific guidelines on cyber security.

References

• https://indianexpress.com/article/business/market/overhaul-of-cybersecurity-framework-to-safeguard-cyber-infra-govt-may-push-use-of-made-in-india-products-9133687/
• https://vajiramandravi.com/upsc-daily-current-affairs/mains-articles/national-cybersecurity-reference-framework-ncrf/
• https://m.toppersnotes.com/current-affairs/blog/to-push-cyber-infra-govt-may-push-use-of-made-in-india-products-DxQP
• https://appkida.in/overhaul-of-cybersecurity-framework-in-2024/

‍

Introduction

Recently, a Consultation Paper on Regulatory Mechanisms for Over-The-Top (OTT) Communication Services was published by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI). The paper explores several OTT regulation-related challenges and solicits input from stakeholders on a suggested regulatory framework. We’ll summarise the paper’s main conclusions in this blog.

Structure of the Paper

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s Consultation Paper on Regulatory Mechanism for Over-The-Top (OTT) Communication Services and Selective Banning of OTT Services intends to solicit comments and recommendations from stakeholders about the regulation of OTT services in India. The paper is broken up into five chapters that cover the introduction and background, issues with regulatory mechanisms for OTT communication services, issues with the selective banning of OTT services, a summary of the issues for consultation, and an overview of international practices on the topic. Written comments from interested parties are requested and may be sent electronically to the Advisor (Networks, Spectrum and Licencing) at TRAI. These comments will also be posted on the TRAI website.

Overview of the Paper

• Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

• The first chapter of the essay introduces the subject of OTT communication services and argues why regulatory frameworks are necessary. The chapter also gives a general outline of the topics and the paper’s organisation that will be covered in the following chapters.

• Chapter 2: Examination of the Issues Related to Regulatory Mechanism for Over-The-Top Communication Services

• The second chapter of the essay looks at the problems with OTT communication service regulation. It talks about the many kinds of OTT services and how they affect the conventional telecom sector. The chapter also looks at the regulatory issues raised by OTT services and the various strategies used by various nations to address them.

• Chapter 3: Examination of the Issues Related to Selective Banning of OTT Services

• The final chapter of the essay looks at the problems of selectively outlawing OTT services. It analyses the justifications for government restrictions on OTT services as well as the possible effects of such restrictions on consumers and the telecom sector. The chapter also looks at the legal and regulatory structures that determine how OTT services are prohibited in various nations.

• Chapter 4: International Practices

• An overview of global OTT communication service best practices is given in the paper’s fourth chapter. It talks about the various regulatory strategies used by nations throughout the world and how they affect consumers and the telecom sector. The chapter also looks at the difficulties regulators encounter when trying to create efficient regulatory frameworks for OTT services.

• Chapter 5: Issues for Consultation

• This chapter is the spirit of the consultation paper as it covers the points and questions for consultation. This chapter has been classified into two sub-sections – Issues Related to Regulatory Mechanisms for OTT Communication Services and Issues Related to the Selective Banning of OTT Services. The inputs will be entirely focused on these sub headers, and the scope, extent, and ambit of the consultation paper rests on these questions and necessary inputs.

Conclusion

An important publication that aims to address the regulatory issues raised by OTT services is the Consultation Paper on Regulatory Mechanisms for Over-The-Top Communication Services. The paper offers a thorough analysis of the problems with OTT service regulation and requests input from stakeholders on the suggested regulatory structure. In order to make sure that the regulatory framework is efficient and advantageous for everyone, it is crucial for all stakeholders to offer their opinion on the document.