CyberPeace Alert: Rise in Phishing and Malicious Activities Following CrowdStrike Outage

Introduction

Beginning with the premise that the advent of the internet has woven a rich but daunting digital web, intertwining the very fabric of technology with the variegated hues of human interaction, the EU has stepped in as the custodian of this ever-evolving tableau. It is within this sprawling network—a veritable digital Minotaur's labyrinth—that the European Union has launched a vigilant quest, seeking not merely to chart its enigmatic corridors but to instil a sense of order in its inherent chaos.

The Digital Services Act (DSA) is the EU's latest testament to this determined pilgrimage, a voyage to assert dominion over the nebulous realms of cyberspace. In its latest sagacious move, the EU has levelled its regulatory lance at the behemoths of digital indulgence—Pornhub, XVideos, and Stripchat—monarchs in the realm of adult entertainment, each commanding millions of devoted followers.

Applicability of DSA

Graced with the moniker of Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs), these titans of titillation are now facing the complex weave of duties delineated by the DSA, a legislative leviathan whose coils envelop the shadowy expanses of the internet with an aim to safeguard its citizens from the snares and pitfalls ensconced within. Like a vigilant Minotaur, the European Commission, the EU's executive arm, stands steadfast, enforcing compliance with an unwavering gaze.

The DSA is more than a mere compilation of edicts; it encapsulates a deeper, more profound ethos—a clarion call announcing that the wild frontiers of the digital domain shall be tamed, transforming into enclaves where the sanctity of individual dignity and rights is zealously championed. The three corporations, singled out as the pioneers to be ensnared by the DSA's intricate net, are now beckoned to embark on an odyssey of transformation, realigning their operations with the EU's noble envisioning of a safeguarded internet ecosystem.

The Paradigm Shift

In a resolute succession, following its first decree addressing 19 Very Large Online Platforms and Search Engines, the Commission has now ensconced the trinity of adult content purveyors within the DSA's embrace. The act demands that these platforms establish intuitive user mechanisms for reporting illicit content, prioritize communications from entities bestowed with the 'trusted flaggers' title, and elucidate to users the rationale behind actions taken to restrict or remove content. Paramount to the DSA's ethos, they are also tasked with constructing internal mechanisms to address complaints, forthwith apprising law enforcement of content hinting at criminal infractions, and revising their operational underpinnings to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and security of minors.

But the aspirations of the DSA stretch farther, encompassing a realm where platforms are agents against deception and manipulation of users, categorically eschewing targeted advertisement that exploits sensitive profiling data or is aimed at impressionable minors. The platforms must operate with an air of diligence and equitable objectivity, deftly applying their terms of use, and are compelled to reveal their content moderation practices through annual declarations of transparency.

The DSA bestows upon the designated VLOPs an even more intensive catalogue of obligations. Within a scant four months of their designation, Pornhub, XVideos, and Stripchat are mandated to implement measures that both empower and shield their users—especially the most vulnerable, minors—from harms that traverse their digital portals. Augmented content moderation measures are requisite, with critical risk analyses and mitigation strategies directed at halting the spread of unlawful content, such as child exploitation material or the non-consensual circulation of intimate imagery, as well as curbing the proliferation and repercussions of deepfake-generated pornography.

The New Rules

The DSA enshrines the preeminence of protecting minors, with a staunch requirement for VLOPs to contrive their services so as to anticipate and enfeeble any potential threats to the welfare of young internet navigators. They must enact operational measures to deter access to pornographic content by minors, including the utilization of robust age verification systems. The themes of transparency and accountability are amplified under the DSA's auspices, with VLOPs subject to external audits of their risk assessments and adherence to stipulations, the obligation to maintain accessible advertising repositories, and the provision of data access to rigorously vetted researchers.

Coordinated by the Commission in concert with the Member States' Digital Services Coordinators, vigilant supervision will be maintained to ensure the scrupulous compliance of Pornhub, Stripchat, and XVideos with the DSA's stringent directives. The Commission's services are poised to engage with the newly designated platforms diligently, affirming that initiatives aimed at shielding minors from pernicious content, as well as curbing the distribution of illegal content, are effectively addressed.

The EU's monumental crusade, distilled into the DSA, symbolises a pledge—a testament to its steadfast resolve to shepherd cyberspace, ensuring the Minotaur of regulation keeps the bedlam at a manageable compass and the sacrosanctity of the digital realm inviolate for all who meander through its infinite expanses. As we cast our gazes toward February 17, 2024—the cusp of the DSA's comprehensive application—it is palpable that this legislative milestone is not simply a set of guidelines; it stands as a bold, unflinching manifesto. It beckons the advent of a novel digital age, where every online platform, barring small and micro-enterprises, will be enshrined in the lofty ideals imparted by the DSA.

Conclusion

As we teeter on the edge of this nascent digital horizon, it becomes unequivocally clear: the European Union's Digital Services Act is more than a mundane policy—it is a pledge, a resolute statement of purpose, asserting that amid the vast, interwoven tapestry of the internet, each user's safety, dignity, and freedoms are enshrined and hold the intrinsic significance meriting the force of the EU's legislative guard. Although the labyrinth of the digital domain may be convoluted with complexity, guided by the DSA's insightful thread, the march toward a more secure, conscientious online sphere forges on—resolute, unerring, one deliberate stride at a time.

References

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_6763https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/three-of-the-biggest-porn-sites-must-verify-ages-under-eus-new-digital-law-1566874.html

Introduction

The information of hundreds of thousands of Indians who received the COVID vaccine was Leaked in a significant data breach and posted on a Telegram channel. Numerous reports claim that sensitive information, including a person’s phone number, gender, ID card details, and date of birth, leaked over Telegram. It could be obtained by typing a person’s name into a Telegram bot.

What really happened?

The records pertaining to the mobile number registered in the CoWin portal are accessible on the Malayalam news website channel. It is also feasible to determine which vaccination was given and where it was given.

According to The Report, the list of individuals whose data was exposed includes BJP Tamil Nadu president K Annamalai, Congress MP Karti Chidambaram, and former BJP union minister for health Harsh Vardhan. Telangana’s minister of information and communication technology, Kalvakuntla Taraka Rama Rao, is also on the list.

MEITY stated in response to the data leak, “It is old data, we are still confirming it. We have requested a report on the matter.

After the media Report, the bot was disabled, but experts said the incident raised severe issues because the information might be used for identity theft, phishing emails, con games, and extortion calls. The Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In), the government’s nodal body, has opened an investigation into the situation

The central government declared the data breach reports regarding the repository of beneficiaries against Covid to be “mischievous in nature” on Monday and claimed the ‘bot’ that purportedly accessed the confidential data was not directly accessing the CoWIN database.

According to the first complaint by CERT-In, the government’s cybersecurity division, the government claimed the bot might be displaying information from “previously stolen data.” Reports.

The health ministry refuted the claim, asserting that no bots could access the information without first verifying with a one-time password.

“It is made clear that all of these rumours are false and malicious. The health ministry’s CoWIN interface is entirely secure and has sufficient data privacy protections. The security of the data on the CoWIN portal is being ensured in every way possible, according to a statement from the health ministry.

Meity said the CoWin program or database was not directly compromised, and the shared information appeared to be taken from a previous intrusion. But the hack again highlights the growing danger of cyber assaults, particularly on official websites.‍

Recent cases of data leak

Dominos India 2021– Dominos India, a division of Jubilant FoodWorks, faced a cyberattack on May 22, 2021, which led to the disclosure of information from 180 million orders. The breach exposed order information, email addresses, phone numbers, and credit card information. Although Jubilant FoodWorks acknowledged a security breach, it refuted any illegal access to financial data.

Air India – A cyberattack that affected Air India in May 2021 exposed the personal information of about 4.5 million customers globally. Personal information recorded between August 26, 2011, and February 3, 2021, including names, dates of birth, contact information, passport information, ticket details, frequent flyer information from Star Alliance and Air India, and credit card information, were exposed in the breach.

Bigbasket – BigBasket, an online supermarket, had a data breach in November 2020, compromising the personal information of approximately 20 million consumers. Email IDs, password hashes, PINs, phone numbers, addresses, dates of birth, localities, and IP addresses were among the information released from an insecure database containing over 15 GB of customer data. BigBasket admitted to the incident and reported it to the Bengaluru Cyber Crime Department.

Unacademy – Unacademy, an online learning platform, experienced a data breach in May 2020, compromising the email addresses of approximately 11 million subscribers. While no sensitive information, such as financial data or passwords, was compromised, user data, including IDs, passwords, date joined, last login date, email IDs, names, and user credentials, was. The breach was detected when user accounts were uncovered for sale on the dark web.

2022 Card Data- Cybersecurity researchers from AI-driven Singapore-based CloudSEK found a threat actor offering a database of 1.2 million cards for free on a Dark Web forum for crimes on October 12, 2022. This came after a second problem involving 7.9 million cardholder records that were reported on the BidenCash website. This comprised information pertaining to State Bank of India (SBI) clients. And other well-known companies were among those targeted in high-profile data breach cases that have surfaced in recent years.

Conclusion

Data breach cases are increasing daily, and attackers are mainly attacking the healthcare sectors and health details as they can easily find personal details. This recent CoWIN case has compromised thousands of people’s data. The All-India Institute of Medical Sciences’ systems were compromised by hackers a few months ago. Over 95% of adults have had their vaccinations, according to the most recent data, even if the precise number of persons impacted by the CoWin privacy breach could not be determined.

Executive Summary:

A misleading video has been widely shared online, falsely portraying Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru stating that he was not involved in the Indian independence struggle and he even opposed it. The video is a manipulated excerpt from Pandit Nehru’s final major interview in 1964 with American TV host Arnold Mich. The original footage available on India’s state broadcaster Prasar Bharati’s YouTube channel shows Pandit Nehru discussing about Muhammad Ali Jinnah, stating that Jinnah did not participate in the independence movement and opposed it. The viral video falsely edits Pandit Nehru’s comments to create a false narrative, which has been debunked upon reviewing the full, unedited interview.

Claims:

In the viral video, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru states that he was not involved in the fight for Indian independence and even opposed it.

‍

‍

Fact check:

Upon receiving the posts, we thoroughly checked the video and then we divided the video into keyframes using the inVid tool. We reverse-searched one of the frames of the video. We found a video uploaded by Prasar Bharati Archives official YouTube channel on 14 May 2019.

The description of the video reads, “Full video recording of what was perhaps Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's last significant interview to American TV Host Arnold Mich Jawaharlal Nehru's last TV Interview - May 1964e his death. Another book by Chandrika Prasad provides a date of 18th May 1964  when the interview was aired in New York, this is barely a few days before the death of Pandit Nehru on 27th May 1964.”

On reviewing the full video, we found that the viral clip of Pandit Nehru runs from 14:50 to 15:45. In this portion, Pandit Nehru is speaking about Muhammad Ali Jinnah, a key leader of the Muslim League.

At the timestamp 14:34, the American TV interviewer Arnold Mich says, “You and Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Jinnah, you were all involved at that point of Independence and then partition in the fight for Independence of India from the British domination.” Pandit Nehru replied, “Mr. Jinnah was not involved in the fight for independence at all. In fact, he opposed it. Muslim League was started in about 1911 I think. It was started really by the British encouraged by them so as to create factions, they did succeed to some extent. And ultimately there came the partition.” 

Upon thoroughly analyzing we found that the viral video is an edited version of the real video to misrepresent the actual context of the video.

We also found the same interview uploaded on a Facebook page named Nehru Centre for Social Research on 1 December 2021.

Hence, the viral claim video is misleading and fake.

Hence, the viral video is fake and misleading and netizens must be careful while believing in such an edited video.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the viral video claiming that Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru stated that he was not involved in the Indian independence struggle is found to be falsely edited. The original footage reveals that Pandit Nehru was referring to Muhammad Ali Jinnah's participation in the struggle, not his own. This explanation debunks the false story conveyed by the manipulated video.

• Claim:  Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru stated that he was not involved in the struggle for Indian independence and even he opposed it.
• Claimed on: YouTube, LinkedIn, Facebook, X (Formerly known as Twitter)
• Fact Check: Fake & Misleading

‍