#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
%20(1).webp)
Introduction
The Central Electricity Authority (CEA) has released the Draft Central Electricity Authority (Cyber Security in Power Sector) Regulations, 2024, inviting ‘comments’ from stakeholders, including the general public, which are to be submitted by 10 September 2024. The new regulation is intended to make India’s power sector more cyber-resilient and responsive to counter emerging cyber threats and safeguard the nation's power infrastructure.
Key Highlights of the CEA’s New (Cyber Security in Power Sector) Regulations, 2024
- Central Electricity Authority has framed the ‘Cyber Security in Power Sector Regulations, 2024’ in the exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of 177 of the Electricity Act, 2003 in order to make regulations for measures relating to Cyber Security in the power sector.
- The scope of the regulation entails that these regulations will be applicable to all Responsible Entities, Regional Power Committees, Appropriate Commission, Appropriate Government and Associated Power Sector Government Organizations, and Training Institutes recognized by the Authority, Authority and Vendors.
- One key aspect of the proposed regulation is the establishment of a dedicated Computer Security Incident Response Team (CSIRT) for the power sector. This team will coordinate a unified cyber defense strategy throughout the sector, establishing security frameworks, and serving as the main agency for handling incident response and recovery. The CSIRT will also be responsible for creating/developing Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), security policies, and best practices for incident response activities in consultation with CERT-In and NCIIPC. The detailed roles and responsibilities of CSIRT are outlined under Chapter 2 of the said regulations.
- All responsible entities in the power sector as mentioned under the scope of the regulation, are mandated to appoint a Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) and an alternate CISO, who need to be Indian nationals and who are senior management employees. The regulations specify that these officers must directly report to the CEO/Head of the Responsible Entity. Thus emphasizing the critical nature of CISO’s roles in safeguarding the nation’s power grid sector assets.
- All Responsible Entities shall establish an Information Security Division (ISD) dedicated to ensuring Cyber Security, headed by the CISO and remain operational around the clock. The schedule under regulation entails that the minimum workforce required for setting up an ISD is 04 (Four) officers including CISO and 04 officers/officials for shift operations. Sufficient workforce and infrastructure support shall be ensured for ISD. The detailed functions and responsibilities of ISD are outlined under Chapter 5 regulation 10. Furthermore, the ISD shall be manned by sufficient numbers of officers, having valid certificates of successful completion of domain-specific Cyber Security courses.
- The regulation obliged the entities to have a defined, documented and maintained Cyber Security Policy which is approved by the Board or Head of the entity. The regulation also obliged the entities to have a Cyber Crisis Management Plan (CCMP) approved by the higher management.
- As regards upskilling and empowerment the regulation advocates for organising or conducting periodic Cyber Security awareness programs and Cyber Security exercises including mock drills and tabletop exercises.
CyberPeace Policy Outlook
CyberPeace Policy & Advocacy Vertical has submitted its detailed recommendations on the proposed ‘Cyber Security in Power Sector Regulations, 2024’ to the Central Electricity Authority, Government of India. We have advised on various aspects within the regulation including harmonisation of these regulations with other rules as issued by CERT-In and NCIIPC, at present. As this needs to be clarified which set of guidelines will supersede in case of any discrepancy that may arise. Additionally, we advised on incorporating or making modifications to specific provisions under the regulation for a more robust framework. We have also emphasized legal mandates and penalties for non-compliance with cybersecurity, so as to make sure that these regulations do not only act as guiding principles but also provide stringent measures in case of non-compliance.
References:
Introduction
We inhabit an era where digital connectivity, while empowering, has also unleashed a relentless tide of cyber vulnerabilities, where personal privacy is constantly threatened, and crimes like sextortion are the perfect example of the sinister side of our hyperconnected world. Social media platforms, instant messaging apps, and digital content-sharing tools have all grown rapidly, changing how people communicate with one another and making it harder to distinguish between the private and public domains. The rise of sophisticated cybercrimes that use the very tools meant to connect us is the price paid for this unparalleled convenience. Sextortion, a portmanteau of “sex’ and “extortion”, stands out among them as a particularly pernicious kind of internet exploitation. Under the threat of disclosing their private information, photos, or videos, people are forced to engage in sexual behaviours or provide intimate content. Sextortion’s psychological component is what makes it particularly harmful, it feeds on social stigma, shame, and fear, which discourage victims from reporting the crime and feed the cycle of victimisation and silence. This cybercrime targets vulnerable people from all socioeconomic backgrounds and is not limited by age, gender, or location.
The Economy of Shame: Sextortion as a Cybercrime Industry
A news report from June 03, 2025, reveals a sextortion racket busted in Delhi, where a money trail of over Rs. 5 crore was identified by different teams of the Crime branch. From synthetic financial identities to sextortion and other cyber frauds, a recipe for a sophisticated cybercrime chain was found. To believe this is an aberration is to overlook the reality that it is symptomatic of a much wider and largely uncharted criminal framework. According to the FBI’s 2024 IC3 report, “extortion (including sextortion)” has skyrocketed to 86,415 complaints with losses of $143 million reported in the United States (US) alone. This indicates that coercive image-based threats are no longer an isolated cybercrime but an everyday occurrence. Sextortion is no longer an isolated cybercrime; it has metamorphosed into a systematic, industrialised criminal enterprise. Another news report dated 19th July, 2025, where Delhi Police has detained four people suspected of participating in a sextortion scheme that targeted a resident of the Bhagwanpur Khera neighbourhood of Shahdara. The suspected people were allegedly arrested on a complaint wherein the victim was manipulated and fell prey to a dating site.
The threat is amplified by the usage of deepfake technology, which allows offenders to create obscene content that looks believable. The approach, which relies on the stigma attached to sexual imagery in conservative societies like India, is that victims frequently give in to requests out of fear of damaging their reputations. The combination of cybercrime and cutting-edge technology highlights the lopsided power that criminals possess, leaving victims defenceless and law enforcement unable to keep up.
Legal Remedies and the Evolving Battle Against Sextortion
Given the complexity of these crimes, India has recognised sextortion and similar cyber-enabled financial crimes under a number of legal frameworks. A change to recognising cyber-enabled sexual exploitation as an organised criminal business is shown by the introduction of specific provisions like Section 111 in the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which classifies organised cybercrimes including extortion and frauds which fall under its expansive interpretation, as a serious offence. Similarly, Section 318 (2) criminalises cheating with a maximum sentence of three years in prison or a fine, whereas Section 336 (2) makes digital forgery a crime with a maximum sentence with a maximum sentence of two years in prison or a fine. In addition to these regulations, cheating by personation through computer resources is punishable by the Information Technology Act, 2000, specifically Section 66D, which carries a maximum sentence of three years in prison and a maximum fine of Rs. 1 lakh. Due to issues with attribution, cross-border jurisdiction, and the discreet nature of digital evidence, enforcement is still inconsistent even with current statutory restrictions.
The government and its agencies recognise that laws achieve real impact only when backed by awareness initiatives and accessible, localised mechanisms for redressal. Several Indian states and the Department of Telecommunications launched numerous campaigns to educate the public about and safeguard their mobile communication assets against identity theft, financial fraud, and cyberscams. Initiatives like Cyber Saathi Initiative and Cyber Dost by MHA, with the goal of improving forensic and victim reporting skills.
Conclusion
At CyberPeace, we understand that the best defence against online abuse is prevention. Our goal is to provide people with the information and resources to identify, avoid and report sextortion attempts like CyberPeace Helpline and organise awareness campaigns on safe digital habits. In order to remain updated with the constantly looming danger, our research and policy advocacy also focus on developing more robust legal and technological safeguards.
To every reader: think before you share, secure your accounts, and never let shame silence you. If you or someone you know becomes a victim, report it immediately, help is available, and justice is possible. Together we can reclaim the internet as a space of trust, not terror.
References
- https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/delhi-police-busts-sextortion-cyberfraud-rackets-6-held-101748959601825.html
- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/delhi-police-arrests-four-for-sextortion-and-blackmail-in-shahdara/articleshow/122767656.cms
- https://cdn.ncw.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/CyberSaheli.pdf
.webp)
Introduction
Social media platforms have begun to shape the public understanding of history in today’s digital landscape. You may have encountered videos, images, and posts that claim to reveal an untold story about our past. For example, you might have seen a post on your feed that has a painted or black and white image of a princess and labelled as "the most beautiful princess of Rajasthan who fought countless wars but has been erased from history.” Such emotionally charged narratives spread quickly, without any academic scrutiny or citation. Unfortunately, the originator believes it to be true.
Such unverified content may look harmless. But it profoundly contributes to the systematic distortion of historical information. Such misinformation reoccurs on feeds and becomes embedded in popular memory. It misguides the public discourse and undermines the scholarly research on the relevant topic. Sometimes, it also contributes to communal outrage and social tensions. It is time to recognise that protecting the integrity of our cultural and historical narratives is not only an academic concern but a legal and institutional responsibility. This is where the role of the Ministry of Culture becomes critical.
Pseudohistorical News Information in India
Fake news and misinformation are frequently disseminated via images, pictures, and videos on various messaging applications, which is referred to as “WhatsApp University” in a derogatory way. WhatsApp has become India’s favourite method of communication, while users have to stay very conscious about what they are consuming from forwarded messages. Academic historians strive to understand the past in its context to differentiate it from the present, whereas pseudo-historians try to manipulate history to satisfy their political agendas. Unfortunately, this wave of pseudo-history is expanding rapidly, with platforms like 'WhatsApp University' playing a significant role in amplifying its spread. This has led to an increase in fake historical news and paid journalism. Unlike pseudo-history, academic history is created by professional historians in academic contexts, adhering to strict disciplinary guidelines, including peer review and expert examination of justifications, assertions, and publications.
How to Identify Pseudo-Historic Misinformation
1. Lack of Credible Sources: There is a lack of reliable primary and secondary sources. Instead, pseudohistorical works depend on hearsay and unreliable eyewitness accounts.
2. Selective Use of Evidence: Misinformative posts portray only those facts that support their argument and minimise the facts which is contradictory to their assertions.
3. Incorporation of Conspiracy Theories: They often include conspiracy theories, which postulate secret groups, repressed knowledge. They might mention that evil powers influenced the historical events. Such hypotheses frequently lack any supporting data.
4. Extravagant Claims: Pseudo-historic tales sometimes present unbelievable assertions about historic persons or events.
5. Lack of Peer Review: Such work is generally never published on authentic academic platforms. You would not find them on platforms like LinkedIn, but on platforms like Instagram and Facebook, as they do not pitch for academic publications. Authentic historical research is examined by subject-matter authorities.
6. Neglect of Established Historiographical Methods: Such posts lack knowledge of a recognised methodology and procedures, like the critical study of sources.
7. Ideologically Driven Narratives: Political, communal, ideological, and personal opinions are prioritised in such posts. The author has a prior goal, instead of finding the truth.
8. Exploitation of Gaps in the Historical Record: Pseudo-historians often use missing or unclear parts of history to suggest that regular historians are hiding important secrets. They make the story sound more mysterious than it is.
9. Rejection of Scholarly Consensus: Pseudo-historians often reject the views of experts and historians, choosing instead to believe and promote their strange ideas.
10. Emphasis on Sensationalism: Pseudo-historical works may put more emphasis on sensationalism than academic rigour to pique public interest rather than offer a fair and thorough account of the history.
Legal and Institutional Responsibility
Public opinion is the heart of democracy. It should not be affected by any misinformation or disinformation. Vested interests cannot be allowed to sabotage this public opinion. Specifically, when it concerns academia, it cannot be shared unverified without any fact-checking. Such unverified claims can be called out, and action can be taken only if the authorities take over the charge. In India, the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) regulates the historical academia. As per the official website, their stated aim is to “take all such measures as may be found necessary from time to time to promote historical research and its utilisation in the country,”. However, it is now essential to modernise the functioning of the ICHR to meet the demands of the digital era. Concerned authorities can run campaigns and awareness programmes to question the validity and research of such misinformative posts. Just as there are fact-checking mechanisms for news, there must also be an institutional push to fact-check and regulate historical content online. The following measures can be taken by authorities to strike down such misinformation online:
- Launch a nationwide awareness campaign about historical misinformation.
- Work with scholars, historians, and digital platforms to promote verified content.
- Encourage social media platforms to introduce fact-check labels for historical posts.
- Consider legal frameworks that penalise the deliberate spread of false historical narratives.
History is part of our national heritage, and preserving its accuracy is a matter of public interest. Misinformation and pseudo-history are a combination that misleads the public and weakens the foundation of shared cultural identity. In this digital era, false narratives spread rapidly, and it is important to promote critical thinking, encourage responsible academic work, and ensure that the public has access to accurate and well-researched historical information. Protecting the integrity of history is not just the work of historians — it is a collective responsibility that serves the future of our democracy.
References:
- https://kuey.net/index.php/kuey/article/view/4091
- https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-news-editorials/social-media-and-the-menace-of-false-information
