#Fact Check: Old Video Shared to Fuel Netanyahu Death Rumours
Executive Summary:
A video featuring Sara Netanyahu, wife of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is being widely circulated on social media. In the clip, she is seen attending an online meeting and repeatedly closing her eyes. The video is being shared with claims that it is recent and shows her under the influence of drugs. Some posts also suggest that Prime Minister Netanyahu has died. However, research by the CyberPeace found that the claim is misleading. The video is not recent and has been online since 2020.
Claim:
Social media users are sharing the video claiming that Sara Netanyahu appeared intoxicated following the alleged death of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The clip is also being falsely presented as a recent development. An X user, Christopher Montgomery (@Montgsignals), shared the video with the caption suggesting that Netanyahu may have died and that his wife appeared in a drug-influenced state during a recent court hearing via Zoom.

Fact Check:
To verify the claim, we first examined reports regarding the alleged death of Benjamin Netanyahu. There is no credible evidence supporting this claim. In fact, on March 20, Netanyahu himself addressed the media and dismissed such rumours, confirming that he is alive.

We then analyzed the viral video by extracting keyframes and conducting a reverse search. This led us to the same video posted on a Facebook account under the name Roni Schneider Malia on November 4, 2020. The Hebrew caption associated with the post translates to: “Filmed during a psychological conference on Zoom.”
This confirms that the video is old and unrelated to any recent developments.

Conclusion:
The viral claim is misleading. The video of Sara Netanyahu is not recent but has been available online since 2020. It is being falsely linked to baseless claims about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s death
Related Blogs

Executive Summary
The IT giant Apple has alerted customers to the impending threat of "mercenary spyware" assaults in 92 countries, including India. These highly skilled attacks, which are frequently linked to both private and state actors (such as the NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware), target specific individuals, including politicians, journalists, activists and diplomats. In sharp contrast to consumer-grade malware, these attacks are in a league unto themselves: highly-customized to fit the individual target and involving significant resources to create and use.
As the incidence of such attacks rises, it is important that all persons, businesses, and officials equip themselves with information about how such mercenary spyware programs work, what are the most-used methods, how these attacks can be prevented and what one must do if targeted. Individuals and organizations can begin protecting themselves against these attacks by enabling "Lockdown Mode" to provide an extra layer of security to their devices and by frequently changing passwords and by not visiting the suspicious URLs or attachments.
Introduction: Understanding Mercenary Spyware
Mercenary spyware is a special kind of spyware that is developed exclusively for law enforcement and government organizations. These kinds of spywares are not available in app stores, and are developed for attacking a particular individual and require a significant investment of resources and advanced technologies. Mercenary spyware hackers infiltrate systems by means of techniques such as phishing (by sending malicious links or attachments), pretexting (by manipulating the individuals to share personal information) or baiting (using tempting offers). They often intend to use Advanced Persistent Threats (APT) where the hackers remain undetected for a prolonged period of time to steal data by continuous stealthy infiltration of the target’s network. The other method to gain access is through zero-day vulnerabilities, which is the process of gaining access to mobile devices using vulnerabilities existing in software. A well-known example of mercenary spyware includes the infamous Pegasus by the NSO Group.
Actions: By Apple against Mercenary Spyware
Apple has introduced an advanced, optional protection feature in its newer product versions (including iOS 16, iPadOS 16, and macOS Ventura) to combat mercenary spyware attacks. These features have been provided to the users who are at risk of targeted cyber attacks.
Apple released a statement on the matter, sharing, “mercenary spyware attackers apply exceptional resources to target a very small number of specific individuals and their devices. Mercenary spyware attacks cost millions of dollars and often have a short shelf life, making them much harder to detect and prevent.”
When Apple's internal threat intelligence and investigations detect these highly-targeted attacks, they take immediate action to notify the affected users. The notification process involves:
- Displaying a "Threat Notification" at the top of the user's Apple ID page after they sign in.

- Sending an email and iMessage alert to the addresses and phone numbers associated with the user's Apple ID.
- Providing clear instructions on steps the user should take to protect their devices, including enabling "Lockdown Mode" for the strongest available security.
- Apple stresses that these threat notifications are "high-confidence alerts" - meaning they have strong evidence that the user has been deliberately targeted by mercenary spyware. As such, these alerts should be taken extremely seriously by recipients.
Modus Operandi of Mercenary Spyware
- Installing advanced surveillance equipment remotely and covertly.
- Using zero-click or one-click attacks to take advantage of device vulnerabilities.
- Gain access to a variety of data on the device, including location tracking, call logs, text messages, passwords, microphone, camera, and app information.
- Installation by utilizing many system vulnerabilities on devices running particular iOS and Android versions.
- Defense by patching vulnerabilities with security updates (e.g., CVE-2023-41991, CVE-2023-41992, CVE-2023-41993).
- Utilizing defensive DNS services, non-signature-based endpoint technologies, and frequent device reboots as mitigation techniques.
Prevention Measures: Safeguarding Your Devices
- Turn on security measures: Make use of the security features that the device maker has supplied, such as Apple's Lockdown Mode, which is intended to prevent viruses of all types from infecting Apple products, such as iPhones.
- Frequent software upgrades: Make sure the newest security and software updates are installed on your devices. This aids in patching holes that mercenary malware could exploit.
- Steer clear of misleading connections: Exercise caution while opening attachments or accessing links from unidentified sources. Installing mercenary spyware is possible via phishing links or attachments.
- Limit app permissions: Reassess and restrict app permissions to avoid unwanted access to private information.
- Use secure networks: To reduce the chance of data interception, connect to secure Wi-Fi networks and stay away from public or unprotected connections.
- Install security applications: To identify and stop any spyware attacks, think about installing reliable security programs from reliable sources.
- Be alert: If Apple or other device makers send you a threat notice, consider it carefully and take the advised security precautions.
- Two-factor authentication: To provide an extra degree of protection against unwanted access, enable two-factor authentication (2FA) on your Apple ID and other significant accounts.
- Consider additional security measures: For high-risk individuals, consider using additional security measures, such as encrypted communication apps and secure file storage services
Way Forward: Strengthening Digital Defenses, Strengthening Democracy
People, businesses and administrations must prioritize cyber security measures and keep up with emerging dangers as mercenary spyware attacks continue to develop and spread. To effectively address the growing threat of digital espionage, cooperation between government agencies, cybersecurity specialists, and technology businesses is essential.
In the Indian context, the update carries significant policy implications and must inspire a discussion on legal frameworks for government surveillance practices and cyber security protocols in the nation. As the public becomes more informed about such sophisticated cyber threats, we can expect a greater push for oversight mechanisms and regulatory protocols. The misuse of surveillance technology poses a significant threat to individuals and institutions alike. Policy reforms concerning surveillance tech must be tailored to address the specific concerns of the use of such methods by state actors vs. private players.
There is a pressing need for electoral reforms that help safeguard democratic processes in the current digital age. There has been a paradigm shift in how political activities are conducted in current times: the advent of the digital domain has seen parties and leaders pivot their campaigning efforts to favor the online audience as enthusiastically as they campaign offline. Given that this is an election year, quite possibly the most significant one in modern Indian history, digital outreach and online public engagement are expected to be at an all-time high. And so, it is imperative to protect the electoral process against cyber threats so that public trust in the legitimacy of India’s democratic is rewarded and the digital domain is an asset, and not a threat, to good governance.
.webp)
Introduction
On September 27, 2024, the Indian government took a significant step toward enhancing national security by amending business allocation rules through an extraordinary gazette notification. This amendment, which assigns specific roles to different Union Ministries and Departments regarding telecom network security, cybersecurity, and cybercrime, aims to clarify and streamline efforts in these critical areas. With India's evolving cybersecurity landscape, the need for a structured regulatory framework is pressing, as threats grow in complexity. Recent developments, such as the July 2024 global cyber outage and increasing cyber crimes like SMS scams, highlight the urgency of such reforms. Under Article 77 clause (3), the President amended the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules, 1961, to designate clearer responsibilities, reinforcing India's readiness to tackle emerging digital threats.
Key Highlights of the Gazette Notification
- Telecom Networks Security: A new entry ‘1A’ matters relating to the security of telecom networks" has been added under the Department of Telecommunications, highlighting an increased focus on securing the nation's telecom infrastructure.
- Cyber Security Responsibilities: Cyber security responsibilities have been added as a new entry under the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), "5B. This assigns responsibility to MeitY for cybersecurity issues, concerning the Information Technology Act of 2000, giving the ministry the mandate to support other ministries or departments regarding cybersecurity matters.
- Oversight for Cyber Crime: Under the Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of Internal Security, a new entry "36A Matters relating to Cyber Crime" is introduced. This emphasises that the MHA will handle cybercrime issues, highlighting the government's attention toward enhancing internal security against cyber threats.
- Cyber Security Strategic Coordination: Any matter related to the "overall coordination and strategic direction for Cyber Security," has been given to the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS). This consolidates the role of the NSCS in guiding cybersecurity strategies at the national level.
Impact on Policy and Governance
The amendments introduced through the notification are poised to significantly enhance the Indian government's cybersecurity framework by clarifying the roles of various ministries. The clear separation of responsibilities, telecom network security to the Department of Telecommunications, cybercrime to the Ministry of Home Affairs, and overall cyber strategy to the National Security Council Secretariat could seen as better coordination between ministries. This clarity is expected to reduce bureaucratic delays, allowing for quicker response times in addressing cyber threats, cybercrimes, and telecom vulnerabilities. Such efficient handling is crucial, especially in the evolving landscape of digital threats. These changes have been largely welcomed as it recognises the potential for improved regulatory oversight and faster policy implementation and a step forward in bolstering India’s cyber resilience.
Conclusion
The Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules, 1961 amendments mark a critical step in strengthening India's cybersecurity framework. By setting out specific responsibilities for telecom network security, cybercrime, and overall cybersecurity strategy among key ministries, the government seeks to improve coordination and reduce bureaucratic delays. This policy shift is poised to enhance India’s digital resilience, providing a foundation for rapid responses to emerging cyber threats. However, success hinges on effective implementation, resource allocation, and collaboration across ministries. Addressing concerns like potential jurisdictional overlap and ensuring the inclusion of bodies like NCIIPC will be pivotal to ensuring comprehensive cyber protection. The complexity of cyber crimes and threats is evolving every day and the government's ability and preparedness to handle them with regulatory insight is a high priority.
References
- https://egazette.gov.in/(S(4r5oclueuwrjypfvr5b4vtzg))/ViewPDF.aspx
- https://www.ptinews.com/story/national/govt-specifies-roles-on-matters-related-to-security-of-telecom-network-cyber-security-and-cyber-crime/1856627
- https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/economy/centre-to-further-streamline-mechanism-to-deal-with-cyber-security-cyber-crime/article68694330.ece
- https://telecom.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/policy/govt-specifies-roles-on-matters-related-to-security-of-telecom-network-cyber-security-and-cyber-crime/113754501

Starting in mid-December, 2024, a series of attacks have targeted Chrome browser extensions. A data protection company called Cyberhaven, California, fell victim to one of these attacks. Though identified in the U.S., the geographical extent and potential of the attack are yet to be determined. Assessment of these cases can help us to be better prepared for such instances if they occur in the near future.
The Attack
Browser extensions are small software applications that add and enable functionality or a capacity (feature) to a web browser. These are written in CSS, HTML, or JavaScript and like other software, can be coded to deliver malware. Also known as plug-ins, they have access to their own set of Application Programming Interface (APIs). They can also be used to remove unwanted elements as per customisation, such as pop-up advertisements and auto-play videos, when one lands on a website. Some examples of browser extensions include Ad-blockers (for blocking ads and content filtering) and StayFocusd (which limits the time of the users on a particular website).
In the aforementioned attack, the publisher of the browser at Cyberhaven received a phishing mail from an attacker posing to be from the Google Chrome Web Store Developer Support. It mentioned that their browser policies were not compatible and encouraged the user to click on the “Go to Policy”action item, which led the user to a page that enabled permissions for a malicious OAuth called Privacy Policy Extension (Open Authorisation is an adopted standard that is used to authorise secure access for temporary tokens). Once the permission was granted, the attacker was able to inject malicious code into the target’s Chrome browser extension and steal user access tokens and session cookies. Further investigation revealed that logins of certain AI and social media platforms were targeted.
CyberPeace Recommendations
As attacks of such range continue to occur, it is encouraged that companies and developers take active measures that would make their browser extensions less susceptible to such attacks. Google also has a few guidelines on how developers can safeguard their extensions from their end. These include:
- Minimal Permissions For Extensions- It is encouraged that minimal permissions for extensions barring the required APIs and websites that it depends on are acquired as limiting extension privileges limits the surface area an attacker can exploit.
- Prioritising Protection Of Developer Accounts- A security breach on this end could lead to compromising all users' data as this would allow attackers to mess with extensions via their malicious codes. A 2FA (2-factor authentication) by setting a security key is endorsed.
- HTTPS over HTTP- HTTPS should be preferred over HTTP as it requires a Secure Sockets Layer (SSL)/ transport layer security(TLS) certificate from an independent certificate authority (CA). This creates an encrypted connection between the server and the web browser.
Lastly, as was done in the case of the attack at Cyberhaven, it is encouraged to promote the practice of transparency when such incidents take place to better deal with them.
References
- https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/hackers-hijack-companies-chrome-extensions-cyberhaven-9748454/
- https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/google-chrome-extensions-hack-safety-tips-9751656/
- https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/browser-extension
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2024/12/31/google-chrome-2fa-bypass-attack-confirmed-what-you-need-to-know/
- https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ssl/why-use-https/