#FactCheck - Viral video attributed to the Australian Prime Minister is AI-generated; claim of cancelling Pakistani visas is false
A video is being shared on social media, falsely attributing it to Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. The video claims that following the Bondi Beach attack, he decided to cancel the visas of Pakistani citizens.
An investigation by the Cyber Peace Foundation revealed that the viral video was created using AI. In the original video, Anthony Albanese was answering questions related to the Climate Change Bill during a press conference. It is important to note that in the attack that took place last Sunday (14 December) at Bondi Beach in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, 15 people were killed. According to Australian police, the attack targeted the Jewish community. New South Wales Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon stated that the two accused involved in the attack were father and son—one aged 50 and the other 24. Media reports identified them as Sajid and Naved Akram.
Claim:
On 14 December 2025, a user on the social media platform X shared a video claiming, “After the attack by a Pakistani Islamic terrorist, the Australian Prime Minister has decided to cancel the visas of all Pakistanis. The whole world is troubled by this community, and in India it is said that Abdul cannot buy a house in a Hindu neighbourhood.”
The link to the related post, its archived version, and screenshots can be seen below:

Investigation:Upon closely examining the viral video, we suspected it to be AI-generated. Subsequently, we scanned the video using the AI detection tool aurigin.ai. According to the results provided by the tool, the video was found to be AI-generated.
Related Blogs

Overview:
‘Kia Connect’ is the application that is used to connect ‘Kia’ cars which allows the user control various parameters of the vehicle through the application on his/her smartphone. The vulnerabilities found in most Kias built after 2013 with but little exception. Most of the risks are derived from a flawed API that deals with dealer relations and vehicle coordination.
Technical Breakdown of Exploitation:
- API Exploitation: The attack uses the vulnerabilities in Kia’s dealership network. The researchers also noticed that, for example, the logs generated while impersonating a dealer and registering on the Kia dealer portal would be sufficient for deriving access tokens needed for next steps.
- Accessing Vehicle Information: The license plate number allowed the attackers to get the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) number of their preferred car. This VIN can then be used to look up more information about the car and is an essential number to determine for the shared car.
- Information Retrieval: Having the VIN number in hand, attackers can launch a number of requests to backends to pull more sensitive information about the car owner, including:
- Name
- Email address
- Phone number
- Geographical address
- Modifying Account Access: With this information, attackers could change the accounts settings to make them a second user on the car, thus being hidden from the actual owner of the account.
- Executing Remote Commands: Once again, it was discovered that attackers could remotely execute different commands on the vehicle, which includes:some text
- Unlocking doors
- Starting the engine
- Monitoring the location of the vehicle in terms of position.
- Honking the horn
Technical Execution:
The researchers demonstrated that an attacker could execute a series of four requests to gain control over a Kia vehicle:
- Generate Dealer Token: The attacker sends an HTTP request in order to create a dealer token.
- Retrieve Owner Information: As indicated using the generated token, they make another request to another endpoint that returns the owner’s email address and phone number.
- Modify Access Permissions: The attacker takes advantage of the leaked information (email address and VIN) of the owner to change between users accounts and make himself the second user.
- Execute Commands: As the last one, they can send commands to perform actions on the operated vehicle.
Security Response and Precautionary Measures for Vehicle Owners
- Regular Software Updates: Car owners must make sure their cars receive updates on the recent software updates provided by auto producers.
- Use Strong Passwords: The owners of Kia Connect accounts should develop specific and complex passwords for their accounts and then update them periodically. They should avoid using numbers like the birth dates, vehicle numbers and simple passwords.
- Enable Multi-Factor Authentication: For security, vehicle owners should turn on the use of the secondary authentication when it is available to protect against unauthorized access to an account.
- Limit Personal Information Sharing: Owners of vehicles should be careful with the details that are connected with the account on their car, like the e-mail or telephone number, sharing them on social networks, for example.
- Monitor Account Activity: It is also important to monitor the account activity because of change or access attempts that are unauthorized. In case of any abnormality or anything suspicious felt while using the car, report it to Kia customer support.
- Educate Yourself on Vehicle Security: Being aware of cyber threats that are connected to vehicles and learning about how to safeguard a vehicle from such threats.
- Consider Disabling Remote Features When Not Needed: If remote features are not needed, then it is better to turn them off, and then turn them on again when needed. This can prove to help diminish the attack vector for would-be hackers.
Industry Implications:
The findings from this research underscore broader issues within automotive cybersecurity:
- Web Security Gaps: Most car manufacturers pay more attention to equipment running in automobiles instead of the safety of the websites that the car uses to operate thereby exposing automobiles that are connected very much to risks.
- Continued Risks: Vehicles become increasingly connected to internet technologies. Auto makers will have to carry cyber security measures in their cars in the future.
Conclusion:
The weaknesses found in Kia’s connected car system are a key concern for Automotive security. Since cars need web connections for core services, suppliers also face the problem of risks and need to create effective safeguards. Kia took immediate actions to tighten the safety after disclosure; however, new threats will emerge as this is a dynamic domain involving connected technology. With growing awareness of these risks, it is now important for car makers not only to put in proper security measures but also to maintain customer communication on how it safeguards their information and cars against cyber dangers. That being an incredibly rapid approach to advancements in automotive technology, the key to its safety is in our capacity to shield it from ever-present cyber threats.
Reference:
- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/auto/cars/hackers-could-unlock-your-kia-car-with-just-a-license-plate-is-yours-safe/articleshow/113837543.cms
- https://www.thedrive.com/news/hackers-found-millions-of-kias-could-be-tracked-controlled-with-just-a-plate-number
- https://www.securityweek.com/millions-of-kia-cars-were-vulnerable-to-remote-hacking-researchers/
- https://news24online.com/auto/kia-vehicles-hack-connected-car-cybersecurity-threat/346248/
- https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/news/2024/09/millions-of-kia-vehicles-were-vulnerable-to-remote-attacks-with-just-a-license-plate-number
- https://informationsecuritybuzz.com/kia-vulnerability-enables-remote-acces/
- https://samcurry.net/hacking-kia

Introduction
The geographical world has physical boundaries, but the digital one has a different architecture and institutions are underprepared when it comes to addressing cybersecurity breaches. Cybercrime, which may lead to economic losses, privacy violations, national security threats and have psycho-social consequences, is forecast to continuously increase between 2024 and 2029, reaching an estimated cost of at least 6.4 trillion U.S. dollars (Statista). As cyber threats become persistent and ubiquitous, they are becoming a critical governance challenge. Lawmakers around the world need to collaborate on addressing this emerging issue.
Cybersecurity Governance and its Structural Elements
Cybersecurity governance refers to the strategies, policies, laws, and institutional frameworks that guide national and international preparedness and responses to cyber threats to governments, private entities, and individuals. Effective cybersecurity governance ensures that digital risks are managed proactively while balancing security with fundamental rights like privacy and internet freedom. It includes, but is not limited to :
- Policies and Legal Frameworks: Laws that define the scope of cybercrime, cybersecurity responsibilities, and mechanisms for data protection. Eg: India’s National Cybersecurity Policy (NCSP) of 2013, Information Technology Act, 2000, and Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, EU’s Cybersecurity Act (2019), Cyber Resilience Act (2024), Cyber Solidarity Act (2025), and NIS2 Directive (2022), South Africa’s Cyber Crimes Act (2021), etc.
- Regulatory Bodies: Government agencies such as data protection authorities, cybersecurity task forces, and other sector-specific bodies. Eg: India’s Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In), Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), Europe’s European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA), and others.
- Public-Private Knowledge Sharing: The sharing of the private sector’s expertise and the government’s resources plays a crucial role in improving enforcement and securing critical infrastructure. This model of collaboration is followed in the EU, Japan, Turkey, and the USA.
- Research and Development: Apart from the technical, the cyber domain also includes military, politics, economy, law, culture, society, and other elements. Robust, multi-sectoral research is necessary for formulating international and regional frameworks on cybersecurity.
Challenges to Cybersecurity Governance
Governments face several challenges in securing cyberspace and protecting critical assets and individuals despite the growing focus on cybersecurity. This is because so far the focus has been on cybersecurity management, which, considering the scale of attacks in the recent past, is not enough. Stakeholders must start deliberating on the aspect of governance in cyberspace while ensuring that this process is multi-consultative. (Savaş & Karataş 2022). Prominent challenges which need to be addressed are:
- Dynamic Threat Landscape: The threat landscape in cyberspace is ever-evolving. Bad actors are constantly coming up with new ways to carry out attacks, using elements of surprise, adaptability, and asymmetry aided by AI and quantum computing. While cybersecurity measures help mitigate risks and minimize damage, they can’t always provide definitive solutions. E.g., the pace of malware development is much faster than that of legal norms, legislation, and security strategies for the protection of information technology (IT). (Efe and Bensghir 2019).
- Regulatory Fragmentation and Compliance Challenges: Different countries, industries, or jurisdictions may enforce varying or conflicting cybersecurity laws and standards, which are still evolving and require rapid upgrades. This makes it harder for businesses to comply with regulations, increases compliance costs, and jeopardizes the security posture of the organization.
- Trans-National Enforcement Challenges: Cybercriminals operate across jurisdictions, making threat intelligence collection, incident response, evidence-gathering, and prosecution difficult. Without cross-border agreements between law enforcement agencies and standardized compliance frameworks for organizations, bad actors have an advantage in getting away with attacks.
- Balancing Security with Digital Rights: Striking a balance between cybersecurity laws and privacy concerns (e.g., surveillance laws vs. data protection) remains a profound challenge, especially in areas of CSAM prevention and identifying terrorist activities. Without a system of checks and balances, it is difficult to prevent government overreach into domains like journalism, which are necessary for a healthy democracy, and Big Tech’s invasion of user privacy.
The Road Ahead: Strengthening Cybersecurity Governance
All domains of human life- economy, culture, politics, and society- occur in digital and cyber environments now. It follows naturally, that governance in the physical world translates into governance in cyberspace. It must be underpinned by features consistent with the principles of openness, transparency, participation, and accountability, while also protecting human rights. In cyberspace, the world is stateless and threats are rapidly evolving with innovations in modern computing. Thus, cybersecurity governance requires a global, multi-sectoral approach utilizing the rules of international law, to chart out problems, and solutions, and carry out detailed risk analyses. (Savaş & Karataş 2022).
References
- https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1280009/cost-cybercrime-worldwide#statisticContainer
- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1365/s43439-021-00045-4#citeas
- https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/cybersecurity-policies#ecl-inpage-cybersecurity-strategy

Introduction
Data Breaches have taken over cyberspace as one of the rising issues, these data breaches result in personal data making its way toward cybercriminals who use this data for no good. As netizens, it's our digital responsibility to be cognizant of our data and the data of one's organization. The increase in internet and technology penetration has made people move to cyberspace at a rapid pace, however, awareness regarding the same needs to be inculcated to maximise the data safety of netizens. The recent AIIMS cyber breach has got many organisations worried about their cyber safety and security. According to the HIPPA Journal, 66% of healthcare organizations reported ransomware attacks on them. Data management and security is the prime aspect of clients all across the industry and is now growing into a concern for many. The data is primarily classified into three broad terms-
- Personal Identified Information (PII) - Any representation of information that permits the identity of an individual to whom the information applies to be reasonably inferred by either direct or indirect means.
- Non-Public Information (NPI) - The personal information of an individual that is not and should not be available to the public. This includes Social Security Numbers, bank information, other personal identifiable financial information, and certain transactions with financial institutions.
- Material Non-Public Information (MNPI) - Data relating to a company that has not been made public but could have an impact on its share price. It is against the law for holders of nonpublic material information to use the information to their advantage in trading stocks.
This classification of data allows the industry to manage and secure data effectively and efficiently and at the same time, this allows the user to understand the uses of their data and its intensity in case of breach of data. Organisations process data that is a combination of the above-mentioned classifications and hence in instances of data breach this becomes a critical aspect. Coming back to the AIIMS data breach, it is a known fact that AIIMS is also an educational and research institution. So, one might assume that the reason for any attack on AIIMS could be either to exfiltrate patient data or could be to obtain hands-on the R & D data including research-related intellectual properties. If we postulate the latter, we could also imagine that other educational institutes of higher learning such as IITs, IISc, ISI, IISERs, IIITs, NITs, and some of the significant state universities could also be targeted. In 2021, the Ministry of Home Affairs through the Ministry of Education sent a directive to IITs and many other institutes to take certain steps related to cyber security measures and to create SoPs to establish efficient data management practices. The following sectors are critical in terms of data protection-
- Health sector
- Financial sector
- Education sector
- Automobile sector
These sectors are generally targeted by bad actors and often data breach from these sectors result in cyber crimes as the data is soon made available on Darkweb. These institutions need to practice compliance like any other corporate house as the end user here is the netizen and his/her data is of utmost importance in terms of protection.Organisations in today's time need to be in coherence to the advancement in cyberspace to find out keen shortcomings and vulnerabilities they may face and subsequently create safeguards for the same. The AIIMS breach is an example to learn from so that we can protect other organisations from such cyber attacks. To showcase strong and impenetrable cyber security every organisation should be able to answer these questions-
- Do you have a centralized cyber asset inventory?
- Do you have human resources that are trained to model possible cyber threats and cyber risk assessment?
- Have you ever undertaken a business continuity and resilience study of your institutional digitalized business processes?
- Do you have a formal vulnerability management system that enumerates vulnerabilities in your cyber assets and a patch management system that patches freshly discovered vulnerabilities?
- Do you have a formal configuration assessment and management system that checks the configuration of all your cyber assets and security tools (firewalls, antivirus management, proxy services) regularly to ensure they are most securely configured?
- Do have a segmented network such that your most critical assets (servers, databases, HPC resources, etc.) are in a separate network that is access-controlled and only people with proper permission can access?
- Do you have a cyber security policy that spells out the policies regarding the usage of cyber assets, protection of cyber assets, monitoring of cyber assets, authentication and access control policies, and asset lifecycle management strategies?
- Do you have a business continuity and cyber crisis management plan in place which is regularly exercised like fire drills so that in cases of exigencies such plans can easily be followed, and all stakeholders are properly trained to do their part during such emergencies?
- Do you have multi-factor authentication for all users implemented?
- Do you have a supply chain security policy for applications that are supplied by vendors? Do you have a vendor access policy that disallows providing network access to vendors for configuration, updates, etc?
- Do you have regular penetration testing of the cyberinfrastructure of the organization with proper red-teaming?
- Do you have a bug-bounty program for students who could report vulnerabilities they discover in your cyber infrastructure and get rewarded?
- Do you have an endpoint security monitoring tool mandatory for all critical endpoints such as database servers, application servers, and other important cyber assets?
- Do have a continuous network monitoring and alert generation tool installed?
- Do you have a comprehensive cyber security strategy that is reflected in your cyber security policy document?
- Do you regularly receive cyber security incidents (including small, medium, or high severity incidents, network scanning, etc) updates from your cyber security team in order to ensure that top management is aware of the situation on the ground?
- Do you have regular cyber security skills training for your cyber security team and your IT/OT engineers and employees?
- Do your top management show adequate support, and hold the cyber security team accountable on a regular basis?
- Do you have a proper and vetted backup and restoration policy and practice?
If any organisation has definite answers to these questions, it is safe to say that they have strong cyber security, these questions should not be taken as a comparison but as a checklist by various organisations to be up to date in regard to the technical measures and policies related to cyber security. Having a strong cyber security posture does not drive the cyber security risk to zero but it helps to reduce the risk and improves the fighting chance. Further, if a proper risk assessment is regularly carried out and high-risk cyber assets are properly protected, then the damages resulting from cyber attacks can be contained to a large extent.