#FactCheck-Viral Video of Monkey Saving Child Hanging From Balcony Is AI-Generated

Introduction

The digital realm is evolving at a rapid pace, revolutionising cyberspace at a breakneck speed. However, this dynamic growth has left several operational and regulatory lacunae in the fabric of cyberspace, which are exploited by cybercriminals for their ulterior motives. One of the threats that emerged rapidly in 2024 is proxyjacking, in which vulnerable systems are exploited by cyber criminals to sell their bandwidth to third-party proxy servers. This cyber threat poses a significant threat to organisations and individual servers. 

Proxyjacking is a kind of cyber attack that leverages legit bandwidth sharing services such as Peer2Profit and HoneyGain. These are legitimate platforms but proxyjacking occurs when such services are exploited without user consent. These services provide the opportunity to monetize their surplus internet bandwidth by sharing with other users. The model itself is harmless but provides an avenue for numerous cyber hostilities.  The participants install net-sharing software and add the participating system to the proxy network, enabling users to route their traffic through the system. This setup intends to enhance privacy and provide access to geo-locked content. 

The Modus Operandi

These systems are hijacked by cybercriminals, who sell the bandwidth of infected devices. This is achieved by establishing Secure Shell (SSH) connections to vulnerable servers. While hackers rarely use honeypots to render elaborate scams, the technical possibility of them doing so cannot be discounted. Cowrie Honeypots, for instance, are engineered to emulate UNIX systems. Attackers can use similar tactics to gain unauthorized access to poorly secured systems. Once inside the system, attackers utilise legit tools such as public docker images to take over proxy monetization services. These tools are undetectable to anti-malware software due to being genuine software in and of themselves. Endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools also struggle with the same threats.

The Major Challenges 

Limitation Of Current Safeguards – current malware detection software is unable to distinguish between malicious and genuine use of bandwidth services, as the nature of the attack is not inherently malicious. 

Bigger Threat Than Crypto-Jacking – Proxyjacking poses a bigger threat than cryptojacking, where systems are compromised to mine crypto-currency. Proxyjacking uses minimal system resources rendering it more challenging to identify. As such, proxyjacking offers perpetrators a higher degree of stealth because it is a resource-light technique, whereas cryptojacking can leave CPU and GPU usage footprints.

Role of Technology in the Fight Against Proxyjacking

Advanced Safety Measures- Implementing advanced safety measures is crucial in combating proxyjacking. Network monitoring tools can help detect unusual traffic patterns indicative of proxyjacking. Key-based authentication for SSH can significantly reduce the risk of unauthorized access, ensuring that only trusted devices can establish connections. Intrusion Detection Systems and Intrusion Prevention Systems can go a long way towards monitoring unusual outbound traffic.

Robust Verification Processes- sharing services must adopt robust verification processes to ensure that only legitimate users are sharing bandwidth. This could include stricter identity verification methods and continuous monitoring of user activities to identify and block suspicious behaviour. 

Policy Recommendations

Verification for Bandwidth Sharing Services – Mandatory verification standards should be enforced for bandwidth-sharing services, including stringent Know Your Customer (KYC) protocols to verify the identity of users. A strong regulatory body would ensure proper compliance with verification standards and impose penalties. The transparency reports must document the user base, verification processes and incidents. 

Robust SSH Security Protocols – Key-based authentication for SSH across organisations should be mandated, to neutralize the risk of brute force attacks. Mandatory security audits of SSH configuration within organisations to ensure best practices are complied with and vulnerabilities are identified will help. Detailed logging of SSH attempts will streamline the process of identification and investigation of suspicious behaviour. 

Effective Anomaly Detection System – Design a standard anomaly detection system to monitor networks. The industry-wide detection system should focus on detecting inconsistencies in traffic patterns indicating proxy-jacking. Establishing mandatory protocols for incident reporting to centralised authority should be implemented. The system should incorporate machine learning in order to stay abreast with evolving attack methodologies.

Framework for Incident Response – A national framework should include guidelines for investigation, response and remediation to be followed by organisations. A centralized database can be used for logging and tracking all proxy hacking incidents, allowing for information sharing on a real-time basis. This mechanism will aid in identifying emerging trends and common attack vectors. 

Whistleblower Incentives – Enacting whistleblower protection laws will ensure the proper safety of individuals reporting proxyjacking activities. Monetary rewards provide extra incentives and motivate individuals to join whistleblowing programs. To provide further protection to whistleblowers, secure communication channels can be established which will ensure full anonymity to individuals. 

Conclusion

Proxyjacking represents an insidious and complicated threat in cyberspace. By exploiting legitimate bandwidth-sharing services, cybercriminals can profit while remaining entirely anonymous. Addressing this issue requires a multifaceted approach, including advanced anomaly detection systems, effective verification systems, and comprehensive incident response frameworks. These measures of strong cyber awareness among netizens will ensure a healthy and robust cyberspace. 

References 

• https://gridinsoft.com/blogs/what-is-proxyjacking/
• https://www.darkreading.com/cyber-risk/ssh-servers-hit-in-proxyjacking-cyberattacks
• https://therecord.media/hackers-use-log4j-in-proxyjacking-scheme

‍

Introduction

The judiciary as an institution has always been kept on a pedestal and is often seen as the embodiment of justice. From Dictatorship to Democracy, the judiciary plays a central role; even where the judiciary is controlled, the legitimacy of the policies, in one sense or another, is derived from it. In democracies around the world, the independence and well-being of the judiciary are seen as the barometer of democracy’s strength. In this global age, where technology is omnipresent, it seems the judiciary is no exception. Now more than ever, when the judiciary is at the centre of evaluative focus, it becomes imperative to make the judiciary transparent. Digitisation of the judiciary is not just an administrative reform; it is an extension of constitutionalism into the technological realm, an effort to ensure that justice is accessible, transparent, and efficient. On July 25, which is the International Day on Judicial Well-being, is commemorated every year with a clear message that judicial well-being supports “anti-corruption, access to justice, and sustainable peace.”

Digitisation by Design: Justice in the Age of Transformation

The Prime Minister of India envisioned the future of the Indian legal system in alignment with the digitised world, as when he said, “Technology will integrate police, forensics, jails, and courts, and will speed up their work as well. We are moving towards a justice system that will be fully future-ready,” he said, almost predicting the future. Although there are many challenges in the face of this future, there are various initiatives that ease the transition. To clarify, India is streamlining operations, reducing delays, and enhancing access to justice for all by integrating AI into legal research, case management, judicial procedures, and law enforcement. Machine Learning (ML), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Optical Character Recognition (OCR), and predictive analytics are just a few of the AI-powered technologies that are currently being used to increase crime prevention, automate administrative duties, and improve case monitoring. 

The digitisation of Indian courts is a structural necessity rather than just a question of contemporary convenience. Miscarriages of justice have frequently resulted from the growing backlog of cases, challenges with maintaining records, and the loss of physical files. In the seminal case of State of U.P. v. Abhay Raj Singh, the courts acknowledged that a conviction could be overturned by missing records alone. With millions of legal documents at risk, digitisation becomes a shield against such a collapse and a tool for preserving judicial memory. 

Judicial Digitalisation in India: Institutional Initiatives and Infrastructural Advancements

For centuries, towering bundles of courtroom files stood as dusty monuments to knowledge, sacred, chaotic, and accessible to a select few. But as we now stand in 2025, the physical boundaries of a traditional courtroom have blurred, and the Indian government is actively working towards transforming the legal system. The e-Courts Mission Mode Project is a flagship initiative that aims to utilise Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to modernise and advance the Indian judiciary. This groundbreaking effort, led by the Department of Justice, Government of India, is being carried out in close coordination with the Supreme Court of India’s e-Committee. As a news report suggests, the Supreme Court (SC) held 7.5 lakh hearings through video conferencing between 2020 and 2024, as stated by the Ministry of Law and Justice, responding to a query in the Rajya Sabha on Thursday. Technological tools such as the Supreme Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software (SUVAS), the Case Information Software (CIS), and the Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court’s Efficiency (SUPACE) were established to make all pertinent case facts easily available. In another move, the Registry, SC, in close coordination with IIT, Madras, has created and implemented AI and ML-based technologies that are integrated with the Registry’s electronic filing software. This serves as a statement to the fact that cybersecurity and digital infrastructure are no longer administrative add-ons but essential building blocks for ensuring judicial transparency, efficiency, and resilience. 

E-Governance and Integrity: The Judiciary in Transition

The United Nations recognises the fundamentals of the judiciary’s well-being and how corruption acts like water to the rust and taints the integrity of not a single judge in general but creates a perception of the whole institution. This threat of corruption is recognised by the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), particularly Article 11, which urges the protection of the judiciary’s independence and integrity. Digitisation, while it cannot operate in a vacuum, acts as a structural antidote to corruption by embedding transparency into the fabric of justice delivery as automated registry systems, e-filing, and real-time access to case data drastically reduce discretionary power and the potential for behind-the-scenes manipulation. However, digital systems are only as ethical as the people who design, maintain, and oversee them, bringing their own limitations.

Conclusion: CyberPeace and the Future of Ethical Digital Justice 

The potential of digitalisation resides not just in efficiency but also in equity, as India’s judiciary balances tradition and change. A robust democracy, where justice is lit by code rather than hidden under files, is built on a foundation of an open, accessible, and technologically advanced court. This change is not risk-free, though. Secure justice must also be a component of digital justice. The very values that digitisation seeks to preserve are at risk from algorithmic opacity, data breaches, and insecure technologies. 

Our vision is not just of a digitalised court system but of a digitally just society, one where judicial data is protected, legal processes are democratised, and innovation upholds constitutionalism. Therefore, as a step forward, CyberPeace resolves to support AI upskilling for legal professionals, advocate for secure-by-design court infrastructure, and facilitate dialogue between technologists and judicial actors to build trust in the digital justice ecosystem. CyberPeace is dedicated to cyber transparency, privacy protection, and ethical AI.

References 

1. https://www.un.org/en/observances/judicial-well-being 
2. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2106239 
3. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2106239 
4. https://www.barandbench.com/view-point/facilitating-legal-access-digitalization-of-supreme-court-high-court-records 
5. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2085127 ‍
6. https://www.medianama.com/2024/12/223-supreme-court-seven-lakh-video-conferences-four-year-rajya-sabha/

Introduction:

Welcome to the second edition of our blog on Digital forensics series. In our previous blog we discussed what digital forensics is,  the process followed by the tools, and the subsequent challenges faced in the field. Further, we looked at how the future of Digital Forensics will hold in the current scenario.  Today, we will explore differences between 3 particular similar sounding terms that vary significantly in functionality when implemented: Copying, Cloning and Imaging.

In Digital Forensics, the preservation and analysis of electronic evidence are important for investigations and legal proceedings. Replication of the data and devices is one of the fundamental tasks in this domain, without compromising the integrity of the original evidence. 

Three primary techniques -- copying, cloning, and imaging -- are used for this purpose. Each technique has its own strengths and is applied according to the needs of the investigation.

In this blog, we will examine the differences between copying, cloning and imaging. We will talk about the importance of each technique, their applications and why imaging  is considered the best for forensic investigations.

Copying

Copying means duplicating data or files from one location to another. When one does copying, it implies that one is using standard copy commands. However, when dealing with evidence, it might be hard to use copy only. It is because the standard copy can alter the metadata and change the hidden or deleted data .

 The characteristics of copying include: 

• Speed: copying is simpler and faster,compared to cloning or imaging.
•  Risk: The risk involved in copying is that the metadata might be altered and all the data might be captured.

Cloning

It is the process where the transfer of the entire contents of a hard drive or a storage device is done  on another storage device. This process is known as cloning . This way, the cloning process captures both the active data and the unallocated space and hidden partitions, thus containing the whole structure of the original device. Cloning is generally used at the sector level of the device. Clones can be used as the working copy of a device .

Characteristics of cloning: 

•  bit-for-bit replication: cloning keeps the exact content and the whole structure of the original device. 
• Use cases: cloning is used when it is needed to keep the original device intact for further examination or a legal affair. 
•  Time consuming: Cloning is usually longer in comparison to simple copying since it involves the whole detailed replication. Though it depends on various factors like the size of the storage device, the speed of the devices involved, and the method of cloning.

Imaging:

It is the process of creating a forensic image of a storage device. A forensic image is a replica copy of every bit of data that was on the source device, this including the allocated, unallocated, and the available slack space .

 The image is then used for analysis and investigation, and the original evidence is left untouched. Images can’t be used as the working copies of a device.  Unlike cloning, which produces working copies, forensic images are typically used for analysis and investigation purposes and are not intended for regular use as working copies.

Characteristics of Imaging:

•  Integrity: Imaging ensures the integrity and authenticity of the evidence produced
•  Flexibility: Forensic image replicas can be mounted as a virtual drive to create image-specific mode for analysis of data without affecting the original evidence . 
• Metadata: Imaging captures metadata associated with the data, thus promoting forensic analysis.

Key Differences

• Purpose: Copying is for everyday use but not good for forensic investigations requiring data integrity. Cloning and imaging are made for forensic preservation.
• Depth of Replication: Cloning and imaging captures the entire storage device including hidden, unallocated, and deleted data  whereas copying may miss crucial forensic data.
• Data Integrity: Imaging and cloning keep the integrity of the original evidence thus making them suitable for legal and forensic use. Which is a critical aspect of forensic investigations.
• Forensic Soundness: Imaging is considered the best in digital forensics due to its comprehensive and non-invasive nature.
• Cloning is generally from one hard disk to another, where as imaging creates a compressed file that contains a snapshot of the entire hard drive or a specific partitions

Conclusion

Therefore, copying, cloning, and imaging all deal with duplication of data or storage devices with significant variations, especially in digital forensic. However, for forensic investigations, imaging is the most selected approach due to the correct preservation of the evidence state for any analysis or legal use . Therefore, it is essential for forensic investigators to understand these rigorous differences to avail of real and uncontaminated digital evidence for their investigation and legal argument.

‍