Delhi High Court Directs Centre to Nominate Members for Deepfake Committee
The Delhi High Court vide order dated 21st November 2024 directed the Centre to nominate members for a committee constituted to examine the issue of deepfakes. The court was informed by the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) that a committee had been formed on 20 November 2024 on deepfake matters. The Delhi High Court passed an order while hearing two writ petitions against the non-regulation of deepfake technology in the country and the threat of its potential misuse. The Centre submitted that it was actively taking measures to address and mitigate the issues related to deepfake technology. The court directed the central government to nominate the members within a week.
The court further stated that the committee shall examine and take into consideration the suggestions filed by the petitioners and consider the regulations as well as statutory frameworks in foreign countries like the European Union. The court has directed the committee to invite the experiences and suggestions of stakeholders such as intermediary platforms, telecom service providers, victims of deepfakes, and websites which provide and deploy deepfakes. The counsel for the petitioners stated that delay in the creation, detection and removal of deepfakes is causing immense hardship to the public at large. Further, the court has directed the said committee to submit its report, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months. The matter is further listed on 24th March 2025.
CyberPeace Outlook
Through the issue of misuse of deepfakes by bad actors, it has become increasingly difficult for users to differentiate between genuine and altered content created by deepfakes. This increasing misuse has led to a rise in cyber crimes and poses dangers to users' privacy. Bad actors use any number of random pictures or images collected from the internet to create such non-consensual deepfake content. Such deepfake videos further pose risks of misinformation and fake news campaigns with the potential to sway elections, cause confusion and mistrust in authorities, and more.
The conceivable legislation governing the deepfake is the need of the hour. It is important to foster regulated, ethical and responsible consumption of technology. The comprehensive legislation governing the issue can help ensure technology can be used in a better manner. The dedicated deepfake regulation and deploying ethical practices through a coordinated approach by concerned stakeholders can effectively manage the problems presented by the misuse of deepfake technology. Legal frameworks in this regard need to be equipped to handle the challenges posed by deepfake and AI. Accountability in AI is also a complex issue that requires comprehensive legal reforms. The government should draft policies and regulations that balance innovation and regulation. Through a multifaceted approach and comprehensive regulatory landscape, we can mitigate the risks posed by deepfakes and safeguard privacy, trust, and security in the digital age.
References
- https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/law-order/3168452-delhi-high-court-calls-for-action-on-deepfake-regulation
- https://images.assettype.com/barandbench/2024-11-23/w63zribm/Chaitanya_Rohilla_vs_Union_of_India.pdf
Related Blogs
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.
Introduction
As the sun rises on a new chapter in the Indian telecommunications narrative, the corridors of power in New Delhi are abuzz with palpable excitement and a hint of solemnity. Here, a groundbreaking proposal stands before the lawmakers of the Lok Sabha, not simply a proposed amendment or update to an existing statute, but the cornerstone of a reimagined communications epoch—the Telecommunications Bill of 2023. In every sense, this legislative masterpiece embodies a country at the intersection of tradition and innovation, eager to part ways with vestiges of colonial infrastructure that have shaped its modern landscape.
The Origins
Steeped in history, India's telecommunications system has persevered through a patchwork of regulations and ad hoc policies, growing somewhat unwieldy under the shadow of the Indian Telegraph Act (1885), the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1933), and the Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act (1950). Yet, it is within this context of the old guard, a relic of British administration, that the new Telecommunications Bill seeks to transcend the limitations of the past. It aims to dismantle barriers and create an ecosystem that is fluid, adaptable, and resonant with the rapid cadence of technological advancements and the demands of a population increasingly reliant on digital connectivity.
In crafting this bill, the creators have meticulously knitted together an intricate fabric of vibrant threads, each signifying a pillar of progress. To herald an era of unparalleled growth and dynamism, the bill looks beyond the scope of traditional telecommunication services, boldly embracing the convergence of digital mediums such as wire, radio, and optical fibers, aligning with the modalities of 21st-century communication. The bill’s very essence is innovation, etching a new paradigm through its provisions and signalling India's readiness to interface with the ever-expanding digital frontier.
The Defining Features
A novel and defining feature of this bill is its departure from a rigid licensing regime. It forges ahead with 'authorizations'—a signifier that resonates with flexibility, adaptability, and a regulatory approach that isn't mired in bureaucratic inertia but is rather an enabler of swift technological adoption and market responsiveness. This transformative philosophy signifies a departure from the byzantine processes of yore, orbiting instead toward an agile governance model that is both responsive to current needs and anticipative of future trends.
The introduction of mandatory biometric authentication for telecom customers articulates an unyielding stance against the rampant misuse of communication networks. Indeed, this measure draws a fine line between the right to privacy and the exigencies of data protection, posing ethical questions that animate public discourse. This balance seeks to thwart unsolicited commercial communication, exemplifying the state's vigil on the sanctuaries of personal space and tranquility.
In addition, the forward-looking bill tactically addresses the strategic use of spectrum resources with an undercurrent of prescience. By granting ‘spectrum assets’ legislative stature through the National Frequency Allocation Plan and enabling operators to adapt through 'refarming', the bill forms a visionary blueprint for resource optimization. It inherently recognizes that bandwidth is not simply a commercial commodity but one that serves the wider canvas of national imperatives, connectivity goals, and developmental aspirations.
Further embodying the dual themes of openness and vigilance, the bill incorporates provisions for interception and the implementation of a 'trusted sources' regime, a tacit acknowledgement of the cybersecurity challenges that loom on the horizon amidst increasing geopolitical strains. These measures exemplify the act of walking a tightrope between the democratic ideals of transparency and the unyielding requirements of state security.
Looking to the skies, the bill embraces satellite technologies, foreseeing their potential in unshackling the remote and marginalized areas from the constraints of terrestrial infrastructure and thus forging a digitally inclusive society. Acknowledging the expanse of the Indian subcontinent, the bill paves the way for an interconnected, digital hinterland via thoughtful satellite spectrum allocations.
Emphasizing the human thread in the digital weave, the reformulation of the Universal Service Obligation Fund into 'Digital Bharat Nidhi' underscores an unwavering commitment to reaching the unreached. It's the crystallization of a promise that every Indian, regardless of geographical and socio-economic divides, will be privy to the lenses of opportunity presented by the digital revolution.
The Watershed Moment
The introduction of the Telecommunications Bill of 2023 is a watershed moment, a convergence where history and opportunity coalesce, propelling a nation forward with the ambitions of a burgeoning superpower replacing the Indian Telegraph Act (1885), the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1933), and the Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act (1950). It carries within its articles and clauses the anticipation of a billion dreams, the catalyst to a regulatory environment that nurtures innovation, equality, and a forward leap into the future.
Conclusion
Through its comprehensive scope and visionary approach, the bill writes a fresh chapter in India's digital saga. It is an unfolding story, pregnant with the possibilities of a nascent digital age, charting a trajectory for an India poised to define its own digital dome of the sky, under which its citizens will thrive for generations to come. With every legislative step, India crafts its legacy, a narrative of evolution, a tableau that reflects the aspirations of its people and their resolve to embrace the force of technology for the collective good. As this bill advances through the legislative labyrinth, it carries the spirit of a digital renaissance nestled in the heart of the world's largest democracy.
References
Executive Summary:
A morphed video of the actor Anup Soni popular on social media promoting IPL betting Telegram channel is found to be fake. The audio in the morphed video is produced through AI voice cloning. AI manipulation was identified by AI detection tools and deepfake analysis tools. In the original footage Mr Soni explains a case of crime, a part of the popular show Crime Patrol which is unrelated to betting. Therefore, it is important to draw the conclusion that Anup Soni is in no way associated with the betting channel.
Claims:
The facebook post claims the IPL betting Telegram channel which belongs to Rohit Khattar is promoted by Actor Anup Soni.
Fact Check:
Upon receiving the post, the CyberPeace Research Team closely analyzed the video and found major discrepancies which are mostly seen in AI-manipulated videos. The lip sync of the video does not match the audio. Taking a cue from this we analyzed using a Deepfake detection tool by True Media. It is found that the voice of the video is 100% AI-generated.
We then extracted the audio and checked in an audio Deepfake detection tool named Hive Moderation. Hive moderation found the audio to be 99.9% AI-Generated.
We then divided the video into keyframes and reverse searched one of the keyframes and found the original video uploaded by the YouTube channel named LIV Crime.
Upon analyzing we found that in the 3:18 time frame the video was edited, and altered with an AI voice.
Hence, the viral video is an AI manipulated video and it’s not real. We have previously debunked such AI voice manipulation with different celebrities and politicians to misrepresent the actual context. Netizens must be careful while believing in such AI manipulation videos.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the viral video claiming that IPL betting Telegram channel promotion by actor Anup Soni is false. The video has been manipulated using AI voice cloning technology, as confirmed by both the Hive Moderation AI detector and the True Media AI detection tool. Therefore, the claim is baseless and misleading.
- Claim: An IPL betting Telegram channel belonging to Rohit Khattar promoted by Actor Anup Soni.
- Claimed on: Facebook
- Fact Check: Fake & Misleading
