#FactCheck: Viral video blast of fuel tank in UAE Al Hariyah Port portray as Russia-Ukraine Conflict
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
Related Blogs

What Is a VPN and its Significance
A Virtual Private Network (VPN) creates a secure and reliable network connection between a device and the internet. It hides your IP address by rerouting it through the VPN’s host servers. For example, if you connect to a US server, you appear to be browsing from the US, even if you’re in India. It also encrypts the data being transferred in real-time so that it is not decipherable by third parties such as ad companies, the government, cyber criminals, or others.
All online activity leaves a digital footprint that is tracked for data collection, and surveillance, increasingly jeopardizing user privacy. VPNs are thus a powerful tool for enhancing the privacy and security of users, businesses, governments and critical sectors. They also help protect users on public Wi-Fi networks ( for example, at airports and hotels), journalists, activists and whistleblowers, remote workers and businesses, citizens in high-surveillance states, and researchers by affording them a degree of anonymity.
What VPNs Do and Don’t
- What VPNs Can Do:
- Mask your IP address to enhance privacy.
- Encrypt data to protect against hackers, especially on public Wi-Fi.
- Bypass geo-restrictions (e.g., access streaming content blocked in India).
- What VPNs Cannot Do:
- Make you completely anonymous and protect your identity (websites can still track you via cookies, browser fingerprinting, etc.).
- Protect against malware or phishing.
- Prevent law enforcement from tracing you if they have access to VPN logs.
- Free VPNs usually even share logs with third parties.
VPNs in the Context of India’s Privacy Policy Landscape
In April 2022, CERT-In (Computer Emergency Response Team- India) released Directions under Section 70B (6) of the Information Technology (“IT”) Act, 2000, mandating VPN service providers to store customer data such as “validated names of subscribers/customers hiring the services, period of hire including dates, IPs allotted to / being used by the members, email address and IP address and time stamp used at the time of registration/onboarding, the purpose for hiring services, validated address and contact numbers, and the ownership pattern of the subscribers/customers hiring services” collected as part of their KYC (Know Your Customer) requirements, for a period of five years, even after the subscription has been cancelled. While this directive was issued to aid with cybersecurity investigations, it undermines the core purpose of VPNs- anonymity and privacy. It also gave operators very little time to carry out compliance measures.
Following this, operators such as NordVPN, ExpressVPN, ProtonVPN, and others pulled their physical servers out of India, and now use virtual servers hosted abroad (e.g., Singapore) with Indian IP addresses. While the CERT-In Directions have extra-territorial applicability, virtual servers are able to bypass them since they physically operate from a foreign jurisdiction. This means that they are effectively not liable to provide user information to Indian investigative agencies, beating the whole purpose of the directive. To counter this, the Indian government could potentially block non-compliant VPN services in the future. Further, there are concerns about overreach since the Directions are unclear about how long CERT-In can retain the data it acquires from VPN operators, how it will be used and safeguarded, and the procedure of holding VPN operators responsible for compliance.
Conclusion: The Need for a Privacy-Conscious Framework
The CERT-In Directions reflect a governance model which, by prioritizing security over privacy, compromises on safeguards like independent oversight or judicial review to balance the two. The policy design renders a lose-lose situation because virtual VPN services are still available, while the government loses oversight. If anything, this can make it harder for the government to track suspicious activity. It also violates the principle of proportionality established in the landmark privacy judgment, Puttaswamy v. Union of India (II) by giving government agencies the power to collect excessive VPN data on any user. These issues underscore the need for a national-level, privacy-conscious cybersecurity framework that informs other policies on data protection and cybercrime investigations. In the meantime, users who use VPNs are advised to choose reputable providers, ensure strong encryption, and follow best practices to maintain online privacy and security.
References
- https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/definitions/what-is-a-vpn
- https://internetfreedom.in/top-secret-one-year-on-cert-in-refuses-to-reveal-information-about-compliance-notices-issued-under-its-2022-directions-on-cybersecurity/#:~:text=tl;dr,under%20this%20new%20regulatory%20mandate.
- https://www.wired.com/story/vpn-firms-flee-india-data-collection-law/#:~:text=Starting%20today%2C%20the%20Indian%20Computer,years%2C%20even%20after%20they%20have

Introduction
On 20th March 2024, the Indian government notified the Fact Check Unit (FCU) under the Press Information Bureau (PIB) of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting as the Fact Check Unit (FCU) of the Central Government. This PIB FCU is notified under the provisions of Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules 2023 (IT Amendment Rules 2023).
However, the next day, on 21st March 2024, the Supreme Court stayed the Centre's decision. The IT Amendment Rules of 2023 provide that the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) can notify a fact-checking body to identify and tag what it considers fake news with respect to any activity of the Centre. The stay will be in effect till the Bombay High Court finally decides the challenges to the IT Rules amendment 2023.
The official notification dated 20th March 2024 read as follows:
“In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (v) of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of rule 3 of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, the Central Government hereby notifies the Fact Check Unit under the Press Information Bureau of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting as the fact check unit of the Central Government for the purposes of the said sub-clause, in respect of any business of the Central Government.”
Impact of the notification
The impact of notifying PIB’s FCU under Rule 3(1)(b)(v)will empower the PIB’s FCU to issue direct takedown directions to the concerned Intermediary. Any information posted on social media in relation to the business of the central government that has been flagged as fake or false by the FCU has to be taken down by the concerned intermediary. If it fails to do so, it will lose the 'safe harbour' immunity against legal proceedings arising out of such information posted offered under Section 79 of IT Act, 2000.
Safe harbour provision u/s 79 of IT Act, 2000
Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000 serves as a safe harbour provision for intermediaries. The provision states that "an intermediary shall not be liable for any third-party information, data, or communication link made available or hosted by him". However, it is notable that this legal immunity cannot be granted if the intermediary "fails to expeditiously" take down a post or remove a particular content after the government or its agencies flag that the information is being used unlawfully. Furthermore, intermediaries are obliged to observe due diligence on their platforms.
Rule 3 (1)(b)(v) Under IT Amendment Rules 2023
Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of The Information Technology(Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 [updated as on 6.4.2023] provides that all intermediaries [Including a social media intermediary, a significant social media intermediary and an online gaming intermediary], are required to make "reasonable efforts” or perform due diligence to ensure that their users do not "host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, store, update or share” any information that “deceives or misleads the addressee about the origin of the message or knowingly and intentionally communicates any misinformation or information which is patently false and untrue or misleading in nature or, in respect of any business of the Central Government, is identified as fake or false or misleading by such fact check unit of the Central Government as the Ministry may, by notification published in the Official Gazette, specify”.
PIB - FCU
The PIB - Fact Check Unit(FCU) was established in November 2019 to prevent the spread of fake news and misinformation about the Indian government. It also provides an accessible platform for people to report suspicious or questionable information related to the Indian government. This FCU is responsible for countering misinformation on government policies, initiatives, and schemes. The FCU is tasked with addressing misinformation about government policies, initiatives, and schemes, either directly (Suo moto) or through complaints received. On 20th March 2024,via a gazetted notification, the Centre notified the Press Information Bureau's fact-check unit (FCU) as the nodal agency to flag fake news or misinformation related to the central government. However, The Supreme Court stayed the Centre's notification of the Fact-Check Unit under IT Amendment Rules 2023.
Concerns with IT Amendment Rules 2023
The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology(MeitY) amended the IT Rules of 2021. The ‘Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023’ (IT Amendment Rules 2023) were notified by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology on 6 April 2023. The rules introduced new provisions to establish a fact-checking unit with respect to “any business of the central government” and also made other provisions pertaining to online gaming.
The Constitutional validity of IT Amendment Rules 2023 has been challenged through a writ petition challenging the IT Rules 2023 in the Bombay High Court. The contention is that the rules raise "serious constitutional questions," and Rule 3(1)(b)(v), as amended in 2023, impacts the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression would fall for analysis by the High Court.
Supreme Court Stays Setting up of FCU
A bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandra Hud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra convened to hear Special Leave Petitions filed by Kunal Kamra, the Editors Guild of India and the Association of Indian Magazines challenging the refusal of the Bombay High Court to stay the implementation of the IT Rules 2023. The Supreme Court has stayed the Union's notification of the Fact-Check Unit under the IT Amendment Rules 2023, pending the Bombay High Court's decision on the challenges to the IT Rules Amendment 2023.
Emphasizing Freedom of Speech in the Democratic Environment
The advent of advanced technology has also brought with it a new generation of threats and concerns: the misuse of said technology in the form of deepfakes and misinformation is one of the most pressing concerns plaguing society today. This realization has informed the critical need for stringent regulatory measures. The government is rightly prioritizing the need to immediately address digital threats, but there must be a balance between our digital security policies and the need to respect free speech and critical thinking. The culture of open dialogue is the bedrock of democracy. The ultimate truth is shaped through free trade in ideas within a competitive marketplace of ideas. The constitutional scheme of democracy places great importance on the fundamental value of liberty of thought and expression, which has also been emphasized by the Supreme Court in its various judgements.
The IT Rules, 2023,provide for creating a "fact check unit" to identify fake or false or misleading information “in relation to any business of the central government "This move raised concerns within the media fraternity, who argued that the determination of fake news cannot be placed solely in the hands of the government. It is also worth noting that if users post something illegal, they can still be punished under laws that already exist in the country.
We must take into account that freedom of speech under Article 19 of the Constitution is not an absolute right. Article 19(2) imposes restrictions on the Right to Freedom of Speech and expression. Hence, there has to be a balance between regulatory measures and citizens' fundamental rights.
Nowadays, the term ‘fake news’ is used very loosely. Additionally, there is a dearth of clearly established legal parameters that define what amounts to fake or misleading information. Clear definitions of the terms should be established to facilitate certainty as to what content is ‘fake news’ and what content is not. Any such restriction on speech must align with the exceptions outlined in Article19(2) of the Constitution.
Conclusion
Through a government notification, PIB - FCU was intended to act as a government-run fact-checking body to verify any information about the Central Government. However, the apex court of India stayed the Centre's notification. Now, the matter is sub judice, and we hope for the judicial analysis of the validity of IT Amendment Rules 2023.
Notably, the government is implementing measures to combat misinformation in the digital world, but it is imperative that we strive for a balance between regulatory checks and individual rights. As misinformation spreads across all sectors, a centralised approach is needed in order to tackle it effectively. Regulatory reforms must take into account the crucial roleplayed by social media in today’s business market: a huge amount of trade and commerce takes place online or is informed by digital content, which means that the government must introduce policies and mechanisms that continue to support economic activity. Collaborative efforts between the government and its agencies, technological companies, and advocacy groups are needed to deal with the issue better at a higher level.
References
- https://egazette.gov.in/(S(xzwt4b4haaqja32xqdiksbju))/ViewPDF.aspx
- https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2015792
- https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/govt-notifies-fact-checking-unit-under-pib-to-check-fake-news-misinformation-related-to-centre/articleshow/108653787.cms?from=mdr
- https://www.epw.in/journal/2023/43/commentary/it-amendment-rules-2023.html#:~:text=The%20Information%20Technology%20Amendment%20Rules,to%20be%20false%20or%20misleading
- https://www.livelaw.in/amp/top-stories/supreme-court-kunal-kamra-editors-guild-notifying-fact-check-unit-it-rules-2023-252998
- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/21/india-top-court-stays-government-move-to-form-fact-check-unit-under-it-laws
- https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Information%20Technology 28Intermediary%20Guidelines%20and%20Digital% 20Media%20Ethics%20Code%29%20Rules%2C%202021%20%28updated%2006.04.2023%29-.pdf
- 2024 SCC On Line Bom 360

Executive Summary
A viral video allegedly featuring cricketer Virat Kohli endorsing a betting app named ‘Aviator’ is being shared widely across the social platform. CyberPeace Research Team’s Investigations revealed that the same has been made using the deepfake technology. In the viral video, we found some potential anomalies that can be said to have been created using Synthetic Media, also no genuine celebrity endorsements for the app exist, we have also previously debunked such Deep Fake videos of cricketer Virat Kohli regarding the misuse of deep fake technology. The spread of such content underscores the need for social media platforms to implement robust measures to combat online scams and misinformation.

Claims:
The claim made is that a video circulating on social media depicts Indian cricketer Virat Kohli endorsing a betting app called "Aviator." The video features an Indian News channel named India TV, where the journalist reportedly endorses the betting app followed by Virat Kohli's experience with the betting app.

Fact Check:
Upon receiving the news, we thoroughly watched the video and found some featured anomalies that are usually found in regular deep fake videos such as the lip sync of the journalist is not proper, and if we see it carefully the lips do not match with the audio that we can hear in the Video. It’s the same case when Virat Kohli Speaks in the video.

We then divided the video into keyframes and reverse searched one of the frames from the Kohli’s part, we found a video similar to the one spread, where we could see Virat Kohli wearing the same brown jacket in that video, uploaded on his verified Instagram handle which is an ad promotion in collaboration with American Tourister.

After going through the entire video, it is evident that Virat Kohli is not endorsing any betting app, rather he is talking about an ad promotion collaborating with American Tourister.
We then did some keyword searches to see if India TV had published any news as claimed in the Viral Video, but we didn’t find any credible source.
Therefore, upon noticing the major anomalies in the video and doing further analysis found that the video was created using Synthetic Media, it's a fake and misleading one.
Conclusion:
The video of Virat Kohli promoting a betting app is fake and does not actually feature the celebrity endorsing the app. This brings up many concerns regarding how Artificial Intelligence is being used for fraudulent activities. Social media platforms need to take action against the spread of fake videos like these.
Claim: Video surfacing on social media shows Indian cricket star Virat Kohli promoting a betting application known as "Aviator."
Claimed on: Facebook
Fact Check: Fake & Misleading