#FactCheck: Viral AI image shown as AI -171 caught fire after collision

Introduction

‍

In today’s hyper-connected world, information spreads faster than ever before. But while much attention is focused on public platforms like Facebook and Twitter, a different challenge lurks in the shadows: misinformation circulating on encrypted and closed-network platforms such as WhatsApp and Telegram. Unlike open platforms where harmful content can be flagged in public, private groups operate behind a digital curtain. Here, falsehoods often spread unchecked, gaining legitimacy because they are shared by trusted contacts. This makes encrypted platforms a double-edged sword. It is essential for privacy and free expression, yet uniquely vulnerable to misuse.

As Prime Minister Narendra Modi rightly reminded,

‍

‍“Think 10 times before forwarding anything,” warning that even a “single fake news has the capability to snowball into a matter of national concern.”

‍

The Moderation Challenge with End-to-End Encryption

‍

Encrypted messaging platforms were built to protect personal communication. Yet, the same end-to-end encryption that shields users’ privacy also creates a blind spot for moderation. Authorities, researchers, and even the platforms themselves cannot view content circulating in private groups, making fact-checking nearly impossible.

Trust within closed groups makes the problem worse. When a message comes from family, friends, or community leaders, people tend to believe it without questioning and quickly pass it along. Features like large group chats, broadcast lists, and “forward to many” options further speed up its spread. Unlike open networks, there is no public scrutiny, no visible counter-narrative, and no opportunity for timely correction.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, false claims about vaccines spread widely through WhatsApp groups, undermining public health campaigns. Even more alarming, WhatsApp rumors about child kidnappers and cow meat in India triggered mob lynchings, leading to the tragic loss of life.

Encrypted platforms, therefore, represent a unique challenge: they are designed to protect privacy, but, unintentionally, they also protect the spread of dangerous misinformation.

‍

Approaches to Curbing Misinformation on End-to-End Platforms

‍

• Regulatory: Governments worldwide are exploring ways to access encrypted data on messaging platforms, creating tensions between the right to user privacy and crime prevention. Approaches like traceability requirements on WhatsApp, data-sharing mandates for platforms in serious cases, and stronger obligations to act against harmful viral content are also being considered.
• Technological Interventions: Platforms like WhatsApp have introduced features such as “forwarded many times” labels and limits on mass forwarding. These tools can be expanded further by introducing AI-driven link-checking and warnings for suspicious content.

• Community-Based Interventions: Ultimately, no regulation or technology can succeed without public awareness. People need to be inoculated against misinformation through pre-bunking efforts and digital literacy campaigns. Fact-checking websites and tools also have to be taught.

‍

Best Practices for Netizens

‍

Experts recommend simple yet powerful habits that every user can adopt to protect themselves and others. By adopting these, ordinary users can become the first line of defence against misinformation in their own communities:

• Cross-Check Before Forwarding: Verify claims from trusted platforms & official sources.
• Beware of Sensational Content: Headlines that sound too shocking or dramatic probably need checking. Consult multiple sources for a piece of news. If only one platform/ channel is carrying sensational news, it is likely to be clickbait or outright false.
• Stick to Trusted News Sources: Verify news through national newspapers and expert commentary. Remember, not everything on the internet/television is true.
• Look Out for Manipulated Media: Now, with AI-generated deepfakes, it becomes more difficult to tell the difference between original and manipulated media. Check for edited images, cropped videos, or voice messages without source information. Always cross-verify any media received.
• Report Harmful Content: Report misinformation to the platform it is being circulated on and PIB’s Fact Check Unit.

‍

Conclusion

‍

In closed, unmonitored groups, platforms like WhatsApp and Telegram often become safe havens where people trust and forward messages from friends and family without question. Once misinformation takes root, it becomes extremely difficult to challenge or correct, and over time, such actions can snowball into serious social, economic and national concerns.

Preventing this is a matter of shared responsibility. Governments can frame balanced regulations, but individuals must also take initiative: pause, think, and verify before sharing. Ultimately, the right to privacy must be upheld, but with reasonable safeguards to ensure it is not misused at the cost of societal trust and safety.

‍

References

‍

• India WhatsApp ‘child kidnap’ rumours claim two more victims (BBC) The people trying to fight fake news in India (BBC)
• Press Information Bureau – PIB Fact Check
• Brookings Institution – Encryption and Misinformation Report (2021)
• Curtis, T. L., Touzel, M. P., Garneau, W., Gruaz, M., Pinder, M., Wang, L. W., Krishna, S., Cohen, L., Godbout, J.-F., Rabbany, R., & Pelrine, K. (2024). Veracity: An Open-Source AI Fact-Checking System. arXiv.
• NDTV – PM Modi cautions against fake news (2022)
• Times of India – Govt may insist on WhatsApp traceability (2019)
• Medianama – Telegram refused to share ISIS channel data (2019)

‍

Executive Summary:

‍

Recently, our team came across a widely circulated post on X (formerly Twitter), claiming that the Indian government would abolish paper currency from February 1 and transition entirely to digital money. The post, designed to resemble an official government notice, cited the absence of advertisements in Kerala newspapers as supposed evidence—an assertion that lacked any substantive basis

‍

‍

Claim:

‍

The Indian government will ban paper currency from February 1, 2025, and adopt digital money as the sole legal tender to fight black money.

‍

‍

‍

Fact Check:

‍

The claim that the Indian government will ban paper currency and transition entirely to digital money from February 1 is completely baseless and lacks any credible foundation. Neither the government nor the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has made any official announcement supporting this assertion.

Furthermore, the supposed evidence—the absence of specific advertisements in Kerala newspapers—has been misinterpreted and holds no connection to any policy decisions regarding currency

During our research, we found that this was the prediction of what the newspaper from the year 2050 would look like and was not a statement that the notes will be banned and will be shifted to digital currency.

Such a massive change would necessitate clear communication to the public, major infrastructure improvements, and precise policy announcements which have not happened. This false rumor has widely spread on social media without even a shred of evidence from its source, which has been unreliable and is hence completely false.

We also found a clip from a news channel to support our research by asianetnews on Instagram. 

‍

‍

‍

We found that the event will be held in Jain Deemed-to-be University, Kochi from 25th January to 1st February. After this advertisement went viral and people began criticizing it, the director of "The Summit of Future 2025" apologized for this confusion. According to him, it was a fictional future news story with a disclaimer, which was misread by some of its readers.

‍

The X handle of Summit of Future 2025 also posted a video of the official statement from Dr Tom.

‍

‍

‍

Conclusion:

‍

The claim that the Indian government will discontinue paper currency by February 1 and resort to full digital money is entirely false. There's no government announcement nor any evidence to support it. We would like to urge everyone to refer to standard sources for accurate information and be aware to avoid misinformation online.

• Claim: India to ban paper currency from February 1, switching to digital money.
• Claimed On: X (Formerly Known As Twitter)
• Fact Check: False and Misleading

Introduction

In the sprawling online world, trusted relationships are frequently taken advantage of by cybercriminals seeking to penetrate guarded systems. The Watering Hole Attack is one advanced method, which focuses on a user’s ecosystem by compromising the genuine sites they often use. This attack method is different from phishing or direct attacks as it quietly exploits the everyday browsing of the target to serve malicious content. The quiet and exact nature of watering hole attacks makes them prevalent amongst Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) groups, especially in conjunction with state-sponsored cyber-espionage operations.

‍

What Qualifies as a Watering Hole Attack?  

A Watering Hole Attack targets and infects a trusted website. The targeted website is one that is used by a particular organization or community, such as a specific industry sector. This type of cyberattack is analogous to the method of attack used by animals and predators waiting by the water’s edge for prey to drink. Attackers prey on their targets by injecting malicious code, such as an exploit kit or malware loader, into websites that are popular with their victims. These victims are then infected when they visit said websites unknowingly. This opens as a gateway for attackers to infiltrate corporate systems, harvest credentials, and pivot across internal networks. 

‍

How Watering Hole Attacks Unfold

The attack lifecycle usually progresses as follows:

• Reconnaissance - Attackers gather intelligence on the websites frequented by the target audience, including specialized communities, partner websites, or local news sites.  
• Website Exploitation - Through the use of outdated CMS software and insecure plugins, attackers gain access to the target website and insert malicious code such as JS or iframe redirections.  
• Delivery and Exploitation - The visitor’s browser executes the malicious code injected into the page. The code might include a redirection payload which sends the user to an exploit kit that checks the user’s browser, plugins, operating system, and other components for vulnerabilities.  
• Infection and Persistence - The infected system malware such as RATs, keyloggers, or backdoors. These enable lateral and long-term movements within the organisation for espionage.  
• Command and Control (C2) - For further instructions, additional payload delivery, and stolen data retrieval, infected devices connect to servers managed by the attackers.

‍

Key Features of Watering Hole Attacks  

• Indirect Approach: Instead of going after the main target, attackers focus on sites that the main target trusts.  
• Supply-Chain-Like Impact: An infected industry portal can affect many companies at the same time.  
• Low Profile: It is difficult to identify since the traffic comes from real websites.  
• Advanced Customization: Exploit kits are known to specialize in making custom payloads for specific browsers or OS versions to increase the chance of success.  

‍

Why Are These Attacks Dangerous?  

Worming hole attacks shift the battlefield to new grounds in cyber warfare on the web. They eliminate the need for firewalls, email shields, and other security measures because they operate on the traffic to and from real, trusted websites. When the attacks work as intended, the following consequences can be expected:  

• Stealing Credentials: Including privileged accounts and VPN credentials.  
• Espionage: Theft of intellectual property, defense blueprints, or government confidential information.  
• Supply Chain Attacks: Resulting in a series of infections among related companies.  
• Zero-Day Exploits: Including automated attacks using zero-day exploits for full damage.

‍

Incidents of Primary Concern  

The implications of watering hole attacks have been felt in the real world for quite some time. An example from 2019 reveals this, where a known VoIP firm’s site was compromised and used to spread data-stealing malware to its users. Likewise, in 2014, the Operation Snowman campaign—which seems to have a state-backed origin—attempted to infect users of a U.S. veterans’ portal in order to gain access to visitors from government, defense, and related fields. Rounding up the list, in 2021, cybercriminals attacked regional publications focusing on energy, using the publications to spread malware to company officials and engineers working on critical infrastructure, as well as to steal data from their systems. These attacks show the widespread and dangerous impact of watering hole attacks in the world of cybersecurity.

‍

Detection Issues  

Due to the following reasons, traditional approaches to security fail to detect watering hole attacks:  

• Use of Authentic Websites: Attacks involving trusted and popular domains evade detection via blacklisting.  
• Encrypted Traffic: Delivering payloads over HTTPS conceals malicious scripts from being inspected at the network level.  
• Fileless Methods: Using in-memory execution is a modern campaign technique, and detection based on signatures is futile.

‍

Mitigation Strategies

To effectively neutralize the threat of watering hole attacks, an organization should implement a defense-in-depth strategy that incorporates the following elements:

1. Patch Management and Hardening - 

• Conduct routine updates on operating systems, web browsers, and extensions to eliminate exploit opportunities. 
• Either remove or reduce the use of high-risk elements such as Flash and Java, if feasible. 

2. Network Segmentation - Minimize lateral movement by isolating critical systems from the general user network.
3. Behavioral Analytics - Implement Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) tools to oversee unusual behaviors on processes—for example, script execution or dubious outgoing connections. 
4. DNS Filtering and Web Isolation - Implement DNS-layer security to deny access to known malicious domains and use browser isolation for dangerous sites. 
5. Threat Intelligence Integration - Track watering hole threats and campaigns for indicators of compromise (IoCs) on advisories and threat feeds.
6. Multi-Layer Email and Web Security - Use web gateways integrated with dynamic content scanning, heuristic analysis, and sandboxing. 
7. Zero Trust Architecture - Apply least privilege access, require device attestation, and continuous authentication for accessing sensitive resources.

‍

Incident Response Best Practices 

• Forensic Analysis: Check affected endpoints for any mechanisms set up for persistence and communication with C2 servers. 
• Log Review: Look through proxy, DNS, and firewall logs to detect suspicious traffic. 
• Threat Hunting: Search your environment for known Indicators of Compromise (IoCs) related to recent watering hole attacks. 
• User Awareness Training: Help employees understand the dangers related to visiting external industry websites and promote safe browsing practices. 

‍

The Immediate Need for Action

The adoption of cloud computing and remote working models has significantly increased the attack surface for watering hole attacks. Trust and healthcare sectors are increasingly targeted by nation-state groups and cybercrime gangs using this technique. Not taking action may lead to data leaks, legal fines, and break-ins through the supply chain, which damage the trustworthiness and operational capacity of the enterprise.

‍

Conclusion  

Watering hole attacks demonstrate how phishing attacks evolve from a broad attack to a very specific, trust-based attack. Protecting against these advanced attacks requires the zero-trust mindset, adaptive defenses, and continuous monitoring, which is multicentral security. Advanced response measures, proactive threat intelligence, and detection technologies integration enable organizations to turn this silent threat from a lurking predator to a manageable risk.

‍

References

• https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/watering-hole-attack
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watering_hole_attack
• https://www.proofpoint.com/us/threat-reference/watering-hole
• https://www.techtarget.com/searchsecurity/definition/watering-hole-attack

‍