#FactCheck - Debunking Manipulated Photos of Smiling Secret Service Agents During Trump Assassination Attempt

Digitisation in Agriculture

The traditional way of doing agriculture has undergone massive digitization in recent years, whereby several agricultural processes have been linked to the Internet. This globally prevalent transformation, driven by smart technology, encompasses the use of sensors, IoT devices, and data analytics to optimize and automate labour-intensive farming practices. Smart farmers in the country and abroad now leverage real-time data to monitor soil conditions, weather patterns, and crop health, enabling precise resource management and improved yields. The integration of smart technology in agriculture not only enhances productivity but also promotes sustainable practices by reducing waste and conserving resources. As a result, the agricultural sector is becoming more efficient, resilient, and capable of meeting the growing global demand for food.

Digitisation of Food Supply Chains

There has also been an increase in the digitisation of food supply chains across the globe since it enables both suppliers and consumers to keep track of the stage of food processing from farm to table and ensures the authenticity of the food product. The latest generation of agricultural robots is being tested to minimise human intervention. It is thought that AI-run processes can mitigate labour shortage, improve warehousing and storage and make transportation more efficient by running continuous evaluations and adjusting the conditions real-time while increasing yield. The company Muddy Machines is currently trialling an autonomous asparagus-harvesting robot called Sprout that not only addresses labour shortages but also selectively harvests green asparagus, which traditionally requires careful picking. However, Chris Chavasse, co-founder of Muddy Machines, highlights that hackers and malicious actors could potentially hack into the robot's servers and prevent it from operating by driving it into a ditch or a hedge, thereby impending core crop activities like seeding and harvesting. Hacking agricultural pieces of machinery also implies damaging a farmer’s produce and in turn profitability for the season.

Case Study: Muddy Machines and Cybersecurity Risks

A cyber attack on digitised agricultural processes has a cascading impact on online food supply chains. Risks are non-exhaustive and spill over to poor protection of cargo in transit, increased manufacturing of counterfeit products, manipulation of data, poor warehousing facilities and product-specific fraud, amongst others. Additional impacts on suppliers are also seen, whereby suppliers have supplied the food products but fail to receive their payments. These cyber-threats may include malware(primarily ransomware) that accounts for 38% of attacks, Internet of Things (IoT) attacks that comprise 29%, Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks, SQL Injections, phishing attacks etc. 

Prominent Cyber Attacks and Their Impacts

Ransomware attacks are the most popular form of cyber threats to food supply chains and may include malicious contaminations, deliberate damage and destruction of tangible assets (like infrastructure) or intangible assets (like reputation and brand). In 2017, NotPetya malware disrupted the world’s largest logistics giant Maersk and destroyed all end-user devices in more than 60 countries. Interestingly, NotPetya was also linked to the malfunction of freezers connected to control systems. The attack led to these control systems being compromised, resulting in freezer failures and potential spoilage of food, highlighting the vulnerability of industrial control systems to cyber threats.

Further Case Studies

NotPetya also impacted Mondelez, the maker of Oreos but disrupting its email systems, file access and logistics for weeks. Mondelez’s insurance claim was also denied since NotPetya malware was described as a “war-like” action, falling outside the purview of the insurance coverage. In April 2021, over the Easter weekend, Bakker Logistiek, a logistics company based in the Netherlands that offers air-conditioned warehousing and food transportation for Dutch supermarkets, experienced a ransomware attack. This incident disrupted their supply chain for several days, resulting in empty shelves at Albert Heijn supermarkets, particularly for products such as packed and grated cheese. Despite the severity of the attack, the company successfully restored their operations within a week by utilizing backups. JBS, one of the world’s biggest meat processing companies, also had to pay $11 million in ransom via Bitcoin to resolve a cyber attack in the same year, whereby computer networks at JBS were hacked, temporarily shutting down their operations and endangering consumer data. The disruption threatened food supplies and risked higher food prices for consumers. Additional cascading impacts also include low food security and hindrances in processing payments at retail stores. 

Credible Threat Agents and Their Targets

Any cyber-attack is usually carried out by credible threat agents that can be classified as either internal or external threat agents. Internal threat agents may include contractors, visitors to business sites, former/current employees, and individuals who work for suppliers. External threat agents may include activists, cyber-criminals, terror cells etc. These threat agents target large organisations owing to their larger ransom-paying capacity, but may also target small companies due to their vulnerability and low experience, especially when such companies are migrating from analogous methods to digitised processes.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation warns that the food and agricultural systems are most vulnerable to cyber-security threats during critical planting and harvesting seasons. It noted an increase in cyber-attacks against six agricultural co-operatives in 2021, with ancillary core functions such as food supply and distribution being impacted. Resultantly, cyber-attacks may lead to a mass shortage of food not only meant for human consumption but also for animals.

Policy Recommendations

To safeguard against digital food supply chains, Food defence emerges as one of the top countermeasures to prevent and mitigate the effects of intentional incidents and threats to the food chain. While earlier, food defence vulnerability assessments focused on product adulteration and food fraud, including vulnerability assessments of agriculture technology now be more relevant.  

Food supply organisations must prioritise regular backups of data using air-gapped and password-protected offline copies, and ensure critical data copies are not modifiable or deletable from the main system.  For this, blockchain-based food supply chain solutions may be deployed, which are not only resilient to hacking, but also allow suppliers and even consumers to track produce. Companies like Ripe.io, Walmart Global Tech, Nestle and Wholechain deploy blockchain for food supply management since it provides overall process transparency, improves trust issues in the transactions, enables traceable and tamper-resistant records and allows accessibility and visibility of data provenance. Extensive recovery plans with multiple copies of essential data and servers in secure, physically separated locations, such as hard drives, storage devices, cloud or distributed ledgers should be adopted in addition to deploying operations plans for critical functions in case of system outages. For core processes which are not labour-intensive,  including manual operation methods may be used to reduce digital dependence. Network segmentation, updates or patches for operating systems, software, and firmware are additional steps which can be taken to secure smart agricultural technologies. 

References

1. Muddy Machines website, Accessed 26 July 2024.  https://www.muddymachines.com/ 
2. “Meat giant JBS pays $11m in ransom to resolve cyber-attack”, BBC, 10 June 2021. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57423008 
3. Marshall, Claire & Prior, Malcolm, “Cyber security: Global food supply chain at risk from malicious hackers.”, BBC, 20 May 2022. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-61336659 
4. “Ransomware Attacks on Agricultural Cooperatives Potentially Timed to Critical Seasons.”, Private Industry Notification, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 20 April  https://www.ic3.gov/Media/News/2022/220420-2.pdf. 
5. Manning, Louise & Kowalska, Aleksandra. (2023). “The threat of ransomware in the food supply chain: a challenge for food defence”, Trends in Organized Crime. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-023-09516-y 
6. “NotPetya: the cyberattack that shook the world”, Economic Times, 5 March 2022. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/newsletters/ettech-unwrapped/notpetya-the-cyberattack-that-shook-the-world/articleshow/89997076.cms?from=mdr 
7. Abrams, Lawrence, “Dutch supermarkets run out of cheese after ransomware attack.”, Bleeping Computer, 12 April 2021. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/dutch-supermarkets-run-out-of-cheese-after-ransomware-attack/ 
8. Pandey, Shipra; Gunasekaran, Angappa; Kumar Singh, Rajesh & Kaushik, Anjali, “Cyber security risks in globalised supply chains: conceptual framework”, Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, January 2020. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Shipra-Pandey/publication/338668641_Cyber_security_risks_in_globalized_supply_chains_conceptual_framework/links/5e2678ae92851c89c9b5ac66/Cyber-security-risks-in-globalized-supply-chains-conceptual-framework.pdf 
9. Daley, Sam, “Blockchain for Food: 10 examples to know”, Builin, 22 March 2023 https://builtin.com/blockchain/food-safety-supply-chain 

‍

Introduction 

The Data Protection Data Privacy Act 2023 is the most essential step towards protecting, prioritising, and promoting the users’ privacy and data protection. The Act is designed to prioritize user consent in data processing while assuring uninterrupted services like online shopping, intermediaries, etc. The Act specifies that once a user provides consent to the following intermediary platforms, the platforms can process the data until the user withdraws the rights of it. This policy assures that the user has the entire control over their data and is accountable for its usage.

‍

A keen Outlook 

The Following Act also provides highlights for user-specific purpose, which is limited to data processing. This step prevents the misuse of data and also ensures that the processed data is being for the purpose for which it was obtained at the initial stage from the user.

1. Data Fudiary and Processing of Online Shopping Platforms: The Act Emphasises More on Users’ Consent. Once provided, the Data Fudiary can constantly process the data until it is specifically withdrawn by the Data Principal.

• Detailed Analysis

• Consent as a Foundation: The Act places the user's consent as a backbone to the data processing. It sets clear boundaries for data processing. It can be Collecting, Processing, and Storing, and must comply with users’ consent before being used.
• Uninterrupted Data processing: With the given user consent, the intermediaries are not time-restrained. As long as the user does not obligate their consent, the process will be ongoing.

2. Consent and Order Fulfillment: Consent, once provided, encloses all the activities related to the specific purpose for which it was meant to the data it was given for subsequent actions such as order fulfilment. 

• Detailed Analysis

• Purpose-Limited Consent: The consent given is purpose-limited. The platform cannot misuse the obtained data for its personal use.
• Seamless User Experience: By ensuring that the user consent covers the full transactions, spared from the unwanted annoyance of repeated consent requests from the actual ongoing activities. 

3. Data Retention and Rub Out on Online Platforms: Platforms must ensure data minimisation post its utilisation period. This extends to any kind of third-party processors they might take on.

• Detailed Analysis

• Minimization and Security Assurance: By compulsory data removal on post ultization,This step helps to reduce the volume of data platforms hold, which leads to minimizing the risk to data.
• Third-Party Accountability, User Privacy Protection. 

‍

Influence from Global frameworks

The impactful changes based on global trends and similar legislation( European Union’s GDPR) here are some fruitful changes in intermediaries and social media platforms experienced after the implementation of the DPDP Act 2023.

1. Solidified Consent Mechanism: Platforms and intermediatries need to ensure the users’ consent is categorically given, and informed, and should be specific to which the data is obtained. This step may lead to user-friendly consent forms activities and prompts. 
2. Data Minimizations: Platforms that tend to need to collect the only data necessary for the specific purpose mentioned and not retain information beyond its utility.
3. Transparency and Accountability: Data collecting Platforms need to ensure transparency in data collecting, data processing, and sharing practices. This involves more detailed policy and regular audits.
4. Data Portability: Users have the right to request for a copy of their own data used in format, allowing them to switch platforms effectively.
5. Right to Obligation: Users can have the request right to deletion of their data, also referred to as the “Right to be forgotten”.
6. Prescribed Reporting: Under circumstances of data breaches, intermediary platforms are required to report the issues and instability to the regulatory authorities within a specific timeline.
7. Data Protection Authorities: Due to the increase in data breaches, Large platforms indeed appoint data protection officers, which are responsible for the right compliance with data protection guidelines.
8. Disciplined Policies: Non-compliance might lead to a huge amount of fines, making it indispensable to invest in data protection measures.
9. Third-Party Audits: Intermediaries have to undergo security audits by external auditors to ensure they are meeting the expeditions of the following compliances.
10. Third-Party Information Sharing Restrictions: Sharing personal information and users’ data with third parties (such as advertisers) come with more detailed and disciplined guideline and user consent.

‍

Conclusion 

The Data Protection Data Privacy Act 2023 prioritises user consent, ensuring uninterrupted services and purpose-limited data processing. It aims to prevent data misuse, emphasising seamless user experiences and data minimisation. Drawing inspiration from global frameworks like the EU's GDPR, it introduces solidified consent mechanisms, transparency, and accountability. Users gain rights such as data portability and data deletion requests. Non-compliance results in significant fines. This legislation sets a new standard for user privacy and data protection, empowering users and holding platforms accountable. In an evolving digital landscape, it plays a crucial role in ensuring data security and responsible data handling.

‍

References:

• https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Digital%20Personal%20Data%20Protection%20Act%202023.pdf
• https://www.mondaq.com/india/privacy-protection/1355068/data-protection-law-in-india-analysis-of-dpdp-act-2023-for-businesses--part-i
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/technology/explained-indias-new-digital-personal-data-protection-framework-101691912775654.html

‍

Executive Summary:

In the context of the recent earthquake in Taiwan, a video has gone viral and is being spread on social media claiming that the video was taken during the recent earthquake that occurred in Taiwan. However, fact checking reveals it to be an old video. The video is from September 2022, when Taiwan had another earthquake of magnitude 7.2. It is clear that the reversed image search and comparison with old videos has established the fact that the viral video is from the 2022 earthquake and not the recent 2024-event. Several news outlets had covered the 2022 incident, mentioning additional confirmation of the video's origin. 

Claims:

There is a news circulating on social media about the earthquake in Taiwan and Japan recently. There is a post on “X” stating that, 

“BREAKING NEWS :

Horrific #earthquake of  7.4 magnitude hit #Taiwan and #Japan. There is an alert that  #Tsunami might hit them soon”. 

‍

Similar Posts:

Fact Check:

We started our investigation by watching the videos thoroughly. We divided the video into frames. Subsequently, we performed reverse search on the images and it took us to an X (formally Twitter) post where a user posted the same viral video on Sept 18, 2022. Worth to notice, the post has the caption- 

“#Tsunami warnings issued after Taiwan quake. #Taiwan #Earthquake #TaiwanEarthquake”

‍

  The same viral video was posted on several news media in September 2022. 

The viral video was also shared on September 18, 2022 on NDTV News channel as shown below.

Conclusion:

To conclude, the viral video that claims to depict the 2024 Taiwan earthquake was from September 2022.  In the course of the rigorous inspection of the old proof and the new evidence, it has become clear that the video does not refer to the recent earthquake that took place as stated. Hence, the recent viral video is misleading . It is important to validate the information before sharing it on social media to prevent the spread of misinformation. 

Claim: Video circulating on social media captures the recent 2024 earthquake in Taiwan.

Claimed on: X, Facebook, YouTube

Fact Check: Fake & Misleading, the video actually refers to an incident from 2022.

‍