#FactCheck - False Claim about Video of Sadhu Lying in Fire at Mahakumbh 2025
Executive Summary:
Recently, our team came across a video on social media that appears to show a saint lying in a fire during the Mahakumbh 2025. The video has been widely viewed and comes with captions claiming that it is part of a ritual during the ongoing Mahakumbh 2025. After thorough research, we found that these claims are false. The video is unrelated to Mahakumbh 2025 and comes from a different context and location. This is an example of how the information posted was from the past and not relevant to the alleged context.
Claim:
A video has gone viral on social media, claiming to show a saint lying in fire during Mahakumbh 2025, suggesting that this act is part of the traditional rituals associated with the ongoing festival. This misleading claim falsely implies that the act is a standard part of the sacred ceremonies held during the Mahakumbh event.
Fact Check:
Upon receiving the post we conducted a reverse image search of the key frames extracted from the video, and traced the video to an old article. Further research revealed that the original post was from 2009, when Ramababu Swamiji, aged 80, laid down on a burning fire for the benefit of society. The video is not recent, as it had already gone viral on social media in November 2009. A closer examination of the scene, crowd, and visuals clearly shows that the video is unrelated to the rituals or context of Mahakumbh 2025. Additionally, our research found that such activities are not part of the Mahakumbh rituals. Reputable sources were also kept into consideration to cross-verify this information, effectively debunking the claim and emphasizing the importance of verifying facts before believing in anything.
For more clarity, the YouTube video attached below further clears the doubt, which reminds us to verify whether such claims are true or not.
Conclusion:
The viral video claiming to depict a saint lying in fire during Mahakumbh 2025 is entirely misleading. Our thorough fact-checking reveals that the video dates back to 2009 and is unrelated to the current event. Such misinformation highlights the importance of verifying content before sharing or believing it. Always rely on credible sources to ensure the accuracy of claims, especially during significant cultural or religious events like Mahakumbh.
- Claim: A viral video claims to show a saint lying in fire during the Mahakumbh 2025.
- Claimed On: X (Formerly Known As Twitter)
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs
Introduction
In a distressing incident that highlights the growing threat of cyber fraud, a software engineer in Bangalore fell victim to fraudsters who posed as police officials. These miscreants, operating under the guise of a fake courier service and law enforcement, employed a sophisticated scam to dupe unsuspecting individuals out of their hard-earned money. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident, as several cases of similar fraud have been reported recently in Bangalore and other cities. It is crucial for everyone to be aware of these scams and adopt preventive measures to protect themselves.
Bangalore Techie Falls Victim to ₹33 Lakh
The software engineer received a call from someone claiming to be from FedEx courier service, informing him that a parcel sent in his name to Taiwan had been seized by the Mumbai police for containing illegal items. The call was then transferred to an impersonator posing as a Mumbai Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), who alleged that a money laundering case had been registered against him. The fraudsters then coerced him into joining a Skype call for verification purposes, during which they obtained his personal details, including bank account information.
Under the guise of verifying his credentials, the fraudsters manipulated him into transferring a significant amount of money to various accounts. They assured him that the funds would be returned after the completion of the procedure. However, once the money was transferred, the fraudsters disappeared, leaving the victim devastated and financially drained.
Best Practices to Stay Safe
- Be vigilant and skeptical: Maintain a healthy level of skepticism when receiving unsolicited calls or messages, especially if they involve sensitive information or financial matters. Be cautious of callers pressuring you to disclose personal details or engage in immediate financial transactions.
- Verify the caller’s authenticity: If someone claims to represent a legitimate organisation or law enforcement agency, independently verify their credentials. Look up the official contact details of the organization or agency and reach out to them directly to confirm the authenticity of the communication.
- Never share sensitive information: Avoid sharing personal information, such as bank account details, passwords, or Aadhaar numbers, over the phone or through unfamiliar online platforms. Legitimate organizations will not ask for such information without proper authentication protocols.
- Use secure communication channels: When communicating sensitive information, prefer secure platforms or official channels that provide end-to-end encryption. Avoid switching to alternative platforms or applications suggested by unknown callers, as fraudsters can exploit these.
- Educate yourself and others: Stay informed about the latest cyber fraud techniques and scams prevalent in your region. Share this knowledge with family, friends, and colleagues to create awareness and prevent them from falling victim to similar schemes.
- Implement robust security measures: Keep your devices and software updated with the latest security patches. Utilize robust anti-virus software, firewalls, and spam filters to safeguard against malicious activities. Regularly review your financial statements and account activity to detect any unauthorized transactions promptly.
Conclusion:
The incident involving the Bangalore techie and other victims of cyber fraud highlights the importance of remaining vigilant and adopting preventive measures to safeguard oneself from such scams. It is disheartening to see individuals falling prey to impersonators who exploit their trust and manipulate them into sharing sensitive information. By staying informed, exercising caution, and following best practices, we can collectively minimize the risk and protect ourselves from these fraudulent activities. Remember, the best defense against cyber fraud is a well-informed and alert individual.
Introduction
Due to the rapid growth of high-capability AI systems around the world, growing concerns regarding safety, accountability, and governance have arisen throughout the world; thus, California has responded by passing the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (TFAIA), the first state statute focused on "frontier" (highly capable) AI models. This statute is unique in that it does not only target harms caused by AI models in the form of consumer protection as compared to the majority of state statutes; rather, this statute addresses the catastrophic and systemic risks to society associated with large-scale AI systems. As California is a global technology leader, the TFAIA is positioned to have a significant impact on both domestic regulation and the evolution of international legal frameworks for AI technology (and as such has the potential to influence corporate compliance practices and the establishment of global norms related to the use of AI).
Understanding the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act
The Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act provides a specific regulatory process for companies that create sophisticated AI systems with societal, economic, or national security implications. Covered developers are required to publish an extensive safety and transparency policy that details how they navigate risk throughout the artificial intelligence lifecycle. The act requires developers to notify the government of any significant incidents or failures with their deployed frontier models on a timely basis.
A significant aspect of the TFAIA is that it establishes the concept of "process transparency", which does not explicitly control how AI developers create their models, but rather holds them accountable for their internal safety governance by mandating that they develop Documented safety frameworks that outline risk assessment, mitigation, and monitoring processes. The act allows developers to protect their trade secrets, patents, and national defense concerns by providing them with limited opportunities for exemption and/or redaction of their documents so that they can maintain a balance between data openness and safeguarding sensitive information..
Extraterritorial Impact on Global AI Developers
While the Act is a state law, its implementation has far-reaching effects. Many of the largest AI companies have facilities, research labs or customers in California. Therefore, to be compliant with the TFAIA, these companies are required to do so commercially. The ability to develop a unified compliance model across regions enables companies to avoid developing duplicate compliance models.
This same pattern has occurred in other regulatory areas, like data protection regulations; where a region's regulations effectively became global compliance benchmarks for that regulatory area. The TFAIA could similarly serve as a global standard for transparency in frontier AI and shape how companies build their governance structure globally even if they don't have explicit regulations in the regions where they operate.
Influence on International AI Regulatory Models
The TFAIA offers a unique perspective on global discussions about regulating AI. In contrast to other legislation which defines different levels of risk depending on the type of AI, the TFAIA targets specifically high-impact or emerging technologies. Other nations may see value in this model of tiered regulations based on capability and apply it for their own regulation of AI, with the strictest obligations placed on those with the most critical potential harm.
The TFAIA may serve as a guide for international public policy makers by showing how they can reference existing standards and best practices in developing regulations, thus improving interoperability and potentially lessening regulatory barriers to cross-border AI innovations.
Corporate Governance, Compliance Costs, and Competition
From an industry perspective, the Act revolutionizes the way companies govern themselves. Developers are now required to create thorough risk assessments, red-teaming exercises, incident response protocols, and have board oversight for AI safety and regulation. The number of people involved in this process increases accountability but at the same time the increases will create a burden of cost for all involved.
The burden of compliance will be easier for large tech companies than for smaller or start-ups, and thus large tech companies may solidify their position of dominance over the development of frontier AI. Smaller and newer developers may be blocked from entering the market unless some form of proportional or scaled compliance mechanism for where they operate emerges. These developments certainly raise issues surrounding innovation policy and competition law at a global scale that will need to be addressed by regulators in conjunction with AI safety concerns.
Transparency, Public Trust, and Accountability
The TFAIA bolsters the capability of citizens, researchers and journalists to oversee the development and the use of artificial intelligence (AI) through its requirement for public disclosure of the safety framework of AI systems. The disclosures will allow citizens, researchers and journalists to critically evaluate corporate claims of responsible AI development. Over time, this evaluation could increase trust in publically regulated AI systems and would expose businesses that exhibit a poor risk management process.
However, how useful this transparency is depends on the quality and comparability of the information being disclosed. Many current disclosures are either too vague or too complex, thus limiting the ability to conduct meaningful oversight. There should be a push for clearer guidance and/or the establishment of standardised disclosure forms for the purposes of public accountability (i.e., citizens) and uniformity between countries.
Conclusion
The Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act is a transformative development in the regulation of Artificial Intelligence Technology, specifically, a whole new risk profile of this new generation of AI / (Advanced High-Powered) Technologies such as Autonomous Vehicles. This new California law will create global impact because it Be will change how technology companies operate, create regulatory frameworks and develop standards to govern/oversee the use of Autonomous Vehicles. The Act creates a “transparent” means for regulating (or governing) Autonomous Vehicles as opposed to relying solely on “technical” means for these systems. As other regions experience similar challenges that US Government is facing with respect to this new generation of AI (written laws), California's approach will likely be used as an example for how AI laws are written in the future and develop a more unified and responsible international AI regulatory framework.
References
- https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/california-enacts-landmark-ai-transparency-law-transparency-frontier-artificial
- https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/09/29/governor-newsom-signs-sb-53-advancing-californias-world-leading-artificial-intelligence-industry/
- https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/251001-california-enacts-ai-safety-transparency-regulation-tfaia-sb-53
- https://www.dlapiper.com/en/insights/publications/2025/10/california-law-mandates-increased-developer-transparency-for-large-ai-models
Executive Summary:
One of the most complex threats that have appeared in the space of network security is focused on the packet rate attacks that tend to challenge traditional approaches to DDoS threats’ involvement. In this year, the British based biggest Internet cloud provider of Europe, OVHcloud was attacked by a record and unprecedented DDoS attack reaching the rate of 840 million packets per second. Targets over 1 Tbps have been observed more regularly starting from 2023, and becoming nearly a daily occurrence in 2024. The maximum attack on May 25, 2024, got to 2.5 Tbps, this points to a direction to even larger and more complex attacks of up to 5 Tbps. Many of these attacks target critical equipment such as Mikrotik models within the core network environment; detection and subsequent containment of these threats prove a test for cloud security measures.
Modus Operandi of a Packet Rate Attack:
A type of cyberattack where an attacker sends with a large volume of packets in a short period of time aimed at a network device is known as packet rate attack, or packet flood attack or network flood attack under volumetric DDoS attack. As opposed to the deliberately narrow bandwidth attacks, these raids target the computation time linked with package processing.
Key technical characteristics include:
- Packet Size: Usually compact, and in many cases is less than 100 bytes
- Protocol: Named UDP, although it can also involve TCP SYN or other protocol flood attacks
- Rate: Exceeding 100 million packets per second (Mpps), with recent attacks exceeding 840 Mpps
- Source IP Diversity: Usually originating from a small number of sources and with a large number of requests per IP, which testifies about the usage of amplification principles
- Attack on the Network Stack : To understand the impact, let's examine how these attacks affect different layers of the network stack:
1. Layer 3 (Network Layer):
- Each packet requires routing table lookups and hence routers and L3 switches have the problem of high CPU usage.
- These mechanisms can often be saturated so that network communication will be negatively impacted by the attacker.
2. Layer 4 (Transport Layer):
- Other stateful devices (e.g. firewalls, load balancers) have problems with tables of connections
- TCP SYN floods can also utilize all connection slots so that no incoming genuine connection can be made.
3. Layer 7 (Application Layer):
- Web servers and application firewalls may be triggered to deliver a better response in a large number of requests
- Session management systems can become saturated, and hence, the performance of future iterations will be a little lower than expected in terms of their perceived quality by the end-user.
Technical Analysis of Attack Vectors
Recent studies have identified several key vectors exploited in high-volume packet rate attacks:
1.MikroTik RouterOS Exploitation:
- Vulnerability: CVE-2023-4967
- Impact: Allows remote attackers to generate massive packet floods
- Technical detail: Exploits a flaw in the FastTrack implementation
2.DNS Amplification:
- Amplification factor: Up to 54x
- Technique: Exploits open DNS resolvers to generate large responses to small queries
- Challenge: Difficult to distinguish from legitimate DNS traffic
3.NTP Reflection:
- Command: monlist
- Amplification factor: Up to 556.9x
- Mitigation: Requires NTP server updates and network-level filtering
Mitigation Strategies: A Technical Perspective
1. Combating packet rate attacks requires a multi-layered approach:
- Hardware-based Mitigation:
- Implementation: FPGA-based packet processing
- Advantage: Can handle millions of packets per second with minimal latency
- Challenge: High cost and specialized programming requirements
2.Anycast Network Distribution:
- Technique: Distributing traffic across multiple global nodes
- Benefit: Dilutes attack traffic, preventing single-point failures
- Consideration: Requires careful BGP routing configuration
3.Stateless Packet Filtering:
- Method: Applying filtering rules without maintaining connection state
- Advantage: Lower computational overhead compared to stateful inspection
- Trade-off: Less granular control over traffic
4.Machine Learning-based Detection:
- Approach: Using ML models to identify attack patterns in real-time
- Key metrics: Packet size distribution, inter-arrival times, protocol anomalies
- Challenge: Requires continuous model training to adapt to new attack patterns
Performance Metrics and Benchmarking
When evaluating DDoS mitigation solutions for packet rate attacks, consider these key performance indicators:
- Flows per second (fps) or packet per second (pps) capability
- Dispersion and the latency that comes with it is inherent to mitigation systems.
- The false positive rate in the case of the attack detection
- Exposure time before beginning of mitigation from the moment of attack
Way Forward
The packet rate attacks are constantly evolving where the credible defenses have not stayed the same. The next step entails extension to edge computing and 5G networks for distributing mitigation closer to the attack origins. Further, AI-based proactive tools of analysis for prediction of such threats will help to strengthen the protection of critical infrastructure against them in advance.
In order to stay one step ahead in this, it is necessary to constantly conduct research, advance new technologies, and work together with other cybersecurity professionals. There is always a need to develop secure defenses that safeguard these networks.
Reference:
https://blog.ovhcloud.com/the-rise-of-packet-rate-attacks-when-core-routers-turn-evil/
https://cybersecuritynews.com/record-breaking-ddos-attack-840-mpps/
https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/famous-ddos-attacks/
