#FactCheck - Old Ajman Fire Video Falsely Linked to Iran Drone Attack on Dubai Airport
Executive Summary:
The ongoing conflict between Iran and the US-Israel has entered its 19th day. Meanwhile, a video is being widely shared on social media claiming that Iran is carrying out continuous drone attacks at Dubai International Airport. The clip shows visuals of massive fire and explosion However, research by the CyberPeace has found the claim to be misleading. Our research revealed that the video has been available on the internet since 2020. In reality, the footage shows a fire at a market in Ajman, UAE, and not explosions at Dubai Airport in 2026. Although there were recent reports of a fire near DXB (Dubai Airport) following a drone attack, this video is not related to that incident.
Claim:
On social media platform X (formerly Twitter), a user shared the viral video on March 17, 2026, writing:
“Dubai International Airport – Iran is dropping drones continuously.”
Post link, archive link, and screenshot are given below:

Fact Check:
To verify the viral claim, we extracted keyframes from the video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the research, we found the same video on a YouTube channel, where it was uploaded on August 6, 2020. The caption read: “Ajman fruits and vegetables market caught in fire.”

Based on this clue, it became clear that the viral video has no connection with the ongoing Iran-US-Israel conflict. In the next step, we searched using relevant keywords and found a report published on August 5, 2020, on the website of Gulf News, which contained visuals similar to the viral video.

According to the Gulf News report, a major fire broke out at a public market in the new industrial area of Ajman at around 6:30 pm. The blaze was later brought under control by Ajman Civil Defence with assistance from teams in Dubai, Sharjah, and Umm Al Quwain.
Conclusion:
Our research found that the viral video has been online since 2020 and shows a fire at a market in Ajman, UAE. It is not related to any recent incident at Dubai Airport.
Related Blogs

Executive Summary
A video showing thick smoke rising from a building and people running in panic is being shared on social media. The video is being circulated with the claim that it shows Iran launching a missile attack on the United States.CyberPeace’s research found the claim to be misleading. Our probe revealed that the video is not related to any recent incident. The viral clip is actually from the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in the United States and is being falsely shared as footage of an alleged Iranian missile strike on the US.
Claim:
An Instagram user shared the video claiming, “Iran has attacked a US airbase in Qatar. Iran has fired six ballistic missiles at the Al Udeid Airbase in Qatar. Al Udeid Airbase is the largest US military base in West Asia.”
Links to the post and its archived version are provided below.

Fact Check:
To verify the claim, we extracted key frames from the viral video and ran a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the search, we found visuals matching the viral clip in a report published by Wion on September 11, 2021. The report, titled “In pics | A look back at the scenes from the 9/11 attacks,” included an image that closely resembled the visuals seen in the viral video. The caption of the image stated that it was a file photo from September 11, 2001, showing pedestrians running as one of the World Trade Center towers collapsed in New York City.

Further research led us to the same footage on the YouTube channel CBS 8 San Diego. At the 01:11 timestamp of the video, visuals matching the viral clip can be clearly seen.

We also found an Al Jazeera report dated June 23, 2025, which confirmed that Iran had attacked US forces stationed at the Al Udeid airbase in Qatar in retaliation for US strikes on Iran’s uclear facilities. However, the visuals used in the viral video do not correspond to this incident.

Conclusion
The viral video does not show a recent Iranian attack on a US airbase in Qatar. The clip actually dates back to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in the United States. Old 9/11 footage has been falsely shared with a misleading claim linking it to Iran’s alleged missile strike on the US.

The European Union (EU) has made trailblazing efforts regarding protection and privacy, coming up with the most comprehensive and detailed regulation called the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation). As countries worldwide continue to grapple with setting their laws, the EU is already taking on issues with tech giants and focusing on the road ahead. Its contentious issues with Meta and the launch of Meta’s AI assistant in the EU are thus seen as a complex process, shaped by stringent data privacy regulations, ongoing debates over copyright, and ethical AI practices. This development is considered important as previously, the EU and Meta have had issues (including fines and and also received a pushback concerning its services), which broadly include data privacy regarding compliance with GDPR, antitrust law concerns- targeting ads, facebook marketplace activities and content moderation with respect to the spread of misinformation.
Privacy and Data Protection Concerns
A significant part of operating Large Language Models (LLMs) is the need to train them with a repository of data/ plausible answers from which they can source. If it doesn’t find relevant information or the request is out of its scope, programmed to answer, it shall continue to follow orders, but with a reduction in the accuracy of its response. Meta's initial plans to train its AI models using publicly available content from adult users in the EU received a setback from privacy regulators. The Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC), acting as Meta's lead privacy regulator in Europe, raised the issue and requested a delay in the rollout to assess its compliance with GDPR. It has also raised similar concerns with Grok, the AI tool of X, to assess whether the EU users’ data was lawfully processed for training it.
In response, Meta stalled the release of this feature for around a year and agreed to exclude private messages and data from users under the age of 18 and implemented an opt-out mechanism for users who do not wish their public data to be used for AI training. This approach aligns with GDPR requirements, which mandate a clear legal basis for processing personal data, such as obtaining explicit consent or demonstrating legitimate interest, along with the option of removal of consent at a later stage, as the user wishes. The version/service available at the moment is a text-based assistant which is not capable of things like image generation, but can provide services and assistance which include brainstorming, planning, and answering queries from web-based information. However, Meta has assured its users of expansion and exploration regarding the AI features in the near future as it continues to cooperate with the regulators.
Regulatory Environment and Strategic Decisions
The EU's regulatory landscape, characterised by the GDPR and the forthcoming AI Act, presents challenges for tech companies like Meta. Citing the "unpredictable nature" of EU regulations, Meta has decided not to release its multimodal Llama AI model—capable of processing text, images, audio, and video—in the EU. This decision underscores the tension between innovation and regulatory compliance, as companies navigate the complexities of deploying advanced AI technologies within strict legal frameworks.
Implications and Future Outlook
Meta's experience highlights the broader challenges faced by AI developers operating in jurisdictions with robust data protection laws. The most critical issue that remains for now is to strike a balance between leveraging user data for AI advancement while respecting individual privacy rights.. As the EU continues to refine its regulatory approach to AI, companies need to adapt their strategies to ensure compliance while fostering innovation. Stringent measures and regular assessment also keep in check the accountability of big tech companies as they make for profit as well as for the public.
Reference:
- https://thehackernews.com/2025/04/meta-resumes-eu-ai-training-using.html
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/meta-to-train-ai-models-on-european-users-public-data/article69451271.ece
- https://about.fb.com/news/2025/04/making-ai-work-harder-for-europeans/
- https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/15/meta_resume_ai_training_eu_user_posts/
- https://noyb.eu/en/twitters-ai-plans-hit-9-more-gdpr-complaints
- https://www.businesstoday.in/technology/news/story/meta-ai-finally-comes-to-europe-after-a-year-long-delay-but-with-some-limitations-468809-2025-03-21
- https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-13/meta-opens-facebook-marketplace-to-rivals-in-eu-antitrust-clash
- https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/22/business/meta-facebook-eu-privacy-fine.html#:~:text=Many%20civil%20society%20groups%20and,million%20for%20a%20data%20leak.
- https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_5801
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/european-union-accuses-facebook-owner-meta-of-breaking-digital-rules-with-paid-ad-free-option/article68358039.ece
- https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/14/ireland_investigation_into_x/
- https://www.theverge.com/2024/7/18/24201041/meta-multimodal-llama-ai-model-launch-eu-regulations?utm_source=chatgpt.com
- https://www.axios.com/2024/07/17/meta-future-multimodal-ai-models-eu?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Introduction
The digital realm is evolving at a rapid pace, revolutionising cyberspace at a breakneck speed. However, this dynamic growth has left several operational and regulatory lacunae in the fabric of cyberspace, which are exploited by cybercriminals for their ulterior motives. One of the threats that emerged rapidly in 2024 is proxyjacking, in which vulnerable systems are exploited by cyber criminals to sell their bandwidth to third-party proxy servers. This cyber threat poses a significant threat to organisations and individual servers.
Proxyjacking is a kind of cyber attack that leverages legit bandwidth sharing services such as Peer2Profit and HoneyGain. These are legitimate platforms but proxyjacking occurs when such services are exploited without user consent. These services provide the opportunity to monetize their surplus internet bandwidth by sharing with other users. The model itself is harmless but provides an avenue for numerous cyber hostilities. The participants install net-sharing software and add the participating system to the proxy network, enabling users to route their traffic through the system. This setup intends to enhance privacy and provide access to geo-locked content.
The Modus Operandi
These systems are hijacked by cybercriminals, who sell the bandwidth of infected devices. This is achieved by establishing Secure Shell (SSH) connections to vulnerable servers. While hackers rarely use honeypots to render elaborate scams, the technical possibility of them doing so cannot be discounted. Cowrie Honeypots, for instance, are engineered to emulate UNIX systems. Attackers can use similar tactics to gain unauthorized access to poorly secured systems. Once inside the system, attackers utilise legit tools such as public docker images to take over proxy monetization services. These tools are undetectable to anti-malware software due to being genuine software in and of themselves. Endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools also struggle with the same threats.
The Major Challenges
Limitation Of Current Safeguards – current malware detection software is unable to distinguish between malicious and genuine use of bandwidth services, as the nature of the attack is not inherently malicious.
Bigger Threat Than Crypto-Jacking – Proxyjacking poses a bigger threat than cryptojacking, where systems are compromised to mine crypto-currency. Proxyjacking uses minimal system resources rendering it more challenging to identify. As such, proxyjacking offers perpetrators a higher degree of stealth because it is a resource-light technique, whereas cryptojacking can leave CPU and GPU usage footprints.
Role of Technology in the Fight Against Proxyjacking
Advanced Safety Measures- Implementing advanced safety measures is crucial in combating proxyjacking. Network monitoring tools can help detect unusual traffic patterns indicative of proxyjacking. Key-based authentication for SSH can significantly reduce the risk of unauthorized access, ensuring that only trusted devices can establish connections. Intrusion Detection Systems and Intrusion Prevention Systems can go a long way towards monitoring unusual outbound traffic.
Robust Verification Processes- sharing services must adopt robust verification processes to ensure that only legitimate users are sharing bandwidth. This could include stricter identity verification methods and continuous monitoring of user activities to identify and block suspicious behaviour.
Policy Recommendations
Verification for Bandwidth Sharing Services – Mandatory verification standards should be enforced for bandwidth-sharing services, including stringent Know Your Customer (KYC) protocols to verify the identity of users. A strong regulatory body would ensure proper compliance with verification standards and impose penalties. The transparency reports must document the user base, verification processes and incidents.
Robust SSH Security Protocols – Key-based authentication for SSH across organisations should be mandated, to neutralize the risk of brute force attacks. Mandatory security audits of SSH configuration within organisations to ensure best practices are complied with and vulnerabilities are identified will help. Detailed logging of SSH attempts will streamline the process of identification and investigation of suspicious behaviour.
Effective Anomaly Detection System – Design a standard anomaly detection system to monitor networks. The industry-wide detection system should focus on detecting inconsistencies in traffic patterns indicating proxy-jacking. Establishing mandatory protocols for incident reporting to centralised authority should be implemented. The system should incorporate machine learning in order to stay abreast with evolving attack methodologies.
Framework for Incident Response – A national framework should include guidelines for investigation, response and remediation to be followed by organisations. A centralized database can be used for logging and tracking all proxy hacking incidents, allowing for information sharing on a real-time basis. This mechanism will aid in identifying emerging trends and common attack vectors.
Whistleblower Incentives – Enacting whistleblower protection laws will ensure the proper safety of individuals reporting proxyjacking activities. Monetary rewards provide extra incentives and motivate individuals to join whistleblowing programs. To provide further protection to whistleblowers, secure communication channels can be established which will ensure full anonymity to individuals.
Conclusion
Proxyjacking represents an insidious and complicated threat in cyberspace. By exploiting legitimate bandwidth-sharing services, cybercriminals can profit while remaining entirely anonymous. Addressing this issue requires a multifaceted approach, including advanced anomaly detection systems, effective verification systems, and comprehensive incident response frameworks. These measures of strong cyber awareness among netizens will ensure a healthy and robust cyberspace.
References
- https://gridinsoft.com/blogs/what-is-proxyjacking/
- https://www.darkreading.com/cyber-risk/ssh-servers-hit-in-proxyjacking-cyberattacks
- https://therecord.media/hackers-use-log4j-in-proxyjacking-scheme