#FactCheck - Old Bareilly Lathi-Charge Video Falsely Linked to Lucknow Protest

Introduction

Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C) was established by the Ministry of Home Affairs  (MHA) to provide a framework for law enforcement agencies (LEAs) to deal with cybercrime in a coordinated and comprehensive manner. The Indian Ministry of Home Affairs approved a scheme for the establishment of the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) in October 2018.  I4C is actively working towards initiatives to combat the emerging threats in cyberspace and it has become a strong pillar of India’s cyber security and cybercrime prevention. The ‘National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal’ equipped with a 24x7 helpline number 1930,  is one of the key components of the I4C.

On 10 September 2024, I4Ccelebrated its foundation day for the first time at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi.  This celebration marked a major milestone in India’s efforts against cybercrimes and in enhancing its cybersecurity infrastructure. Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation, Shri Amit Shah, launched key initiatives aimed at strengthening the country’s cybersecurity landscape.

Launch of Key Initiatives to Strengthen Cybersecurity

1. Cyber ​​Fraud Mitigation Centre (CFMC): As a     product of Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi’s vision, the Cyber Fraud     Mitigation Centre (CFMC), was incorporated to bring together banks,     financial institutions, telecom companies, Internet Service Providers, and     law enforcement agencies on a single platform to tackle online financial     crimes efficiently. This integrated approach is     expected to minimise the time required to streamline operations and to     track and neutralise cyber fraud.
2. Cyber ​​Commando: The Cyber Commandos Program is an initiative in which     a specialised wing of trained Cyber Commandos will be established in     states, Union Territories, and Central Police Organizations. These     commandos will work to secure the nation’s digital space and counter     rising cyber threats. They will form the first line of defence in     safeguarding India from the growing cyber threats.
3. Samanvay Platform: The Samanvay platform is a web-based Joint Cybercrime     Investigation Facility System that was introduced as a one-stop data     repository for cybercrime. It facilitates cybercrime mapping, data     analytics, and cooperation among law enforcement agencies across the     country. This will play a pivotal role in fostering collaborations in     combating cybercrimes. Mr. Shah recognised the Samanvay platform as a     crucial step in fostering data sharing and collaboration. He called for a     shift from the “need to know” principle to a “duty to share” mindset in     dealing with cyber threats. The Samanvay platform will serve as India’s     first shared data repository, significantly enhancing the country’s     cybercrime response.
4. Suspect Registry: The Suspect Registry Portal is a national-level     platform that has been designed to track cybercriminals. The portal     registry will be connected to the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal     (NCRP) which aims to help banks, financial intermediaries, and law enforcement     agencies strengthen fraud risk management. The     initiative is expected to improve the real-time tracking of cyber     suspects, preventing repeat offences and improving fraud detection     mechanisms.

Rising Digitalization: Prioritizing Cybersecurity

The number of internet users in India has grown from 25 crores in 2014 to 95 crores in 2024, accompanied by a 78-foldincrease in data consumption. This growth is echoed in the number of growing cybersecurity challenges in the digital era. With the rise of digital transactions through Jan Dhan accounts, Rupay debit cards, and UPI systems, Shri Shah underscored the growing threat of digital fraud. He emphasised the need to protect personal data, prevent online harassment, and counter misinformation, fake news, and child abuse in the digital space.

The three new criminal laws, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), which aim to strengthen India’s legal framework for cybercrime prevention, were also referred to in the address bythe Home Minister. These laws incorporate tech-driven solutions that will ensure investigations are conducted scientifically and effectively.

Mr. Shah emphasised popularising the 1930Cyber Crime Helpline. Additionally, he noted that I4C has issued over 600advisories, blocked numerous websites and social media pages operated by cybercriminals, and established a National Cyber Forensic Laboratory in Delhi. Over 1,100 officers have already received cyber forensics training under theI4C umbrella.

In response to the regional cybercrime challenges, the formation of Joint Cyber Coordination Teams in cybercrime hotspot areas like Mewat, Jamtara, Ahmedabad, Hyderabad, Chandigarh, Visakhapatnam and Guwahati was highlighted as a coordinated response to local cybercrime hotspot issues.

Conclusion

With the launch of initiatives like the Cyber Fraud Mitigation Centre, the Samanvay platform, and the Cyber Commandos Program, I4C is positioned to play a crucial role in combating cybercrime. The I4C is moving forward with a clear vision for a secure digital future and safeguarding India's digital ecosystem.

References:

●     https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2053438

‍

Introduction
‍

Agentic AI systems are autonomous systems that can plan, make decisions, and take actions by interacting with external tools and environments. But they shift the nature of risk by blurring the lines among input, decision, and execution. A conventional model generates an output and stops. An agent takes input, makes plans, invokes tools, updates its state and repeats the cycle. This creates a system where decisions are continuously revised through interaction with external tools and environments, rather than being fixed at the point of input.

This means the attack surface expands in size and becomes more dynamic. Instead of remaining confined to components as in traditional computational systems, they spread in layers and can continue to grow through time. To understand this shift, the system can be analysed through functional layers such as inputs, memory, reasoning, and execution, while recognising that risk does not remain isolated within these layers but emerges through their interaction.

‍

‍

Agentic AI Attack Surface

‍

A layered view of how risks emerge across input, memory, reasoning, execution, and system integration, including feedback loops and cross-system dependencies that amplify vulnerabilities.
‍

Input Layer: Where Untrusted Data Becomes Control
‍

The entry point of an agent is no longer one prompt. The documents, APIs, files, system logs and the outputs of other agents can now be considered input. This diversity is significant due to the fact that every source of input carries its own trust assumptions, and in the majority of cases, they are weak.

The most obvious threat is prompt injection, where inputs are treated as instructions rather than data. Since inputs are treated as instructions, a virus, a malicious webpage, or a document can contain instructions that override system goals without necessarily being detected as something harmful.

Indirect prompt injection extends this risk beyond direct user interaction. Instead of targeting the interface, attackers compromise the retrieval process by embedding malicious instructions within external data sources. When the agent retrieves and processes the data, it treats the embedded content as legitimate input. As a result, the attack is executed through normal reasoning processes, allowing the system to act on untrusted data without recognising the manipulation.

Data poisoning also occurs at runtime. In contrast to classical poisoning (where training data is manipulated), runtime poisoning distorts the agent’s perception of its environment as it runs. This can change decisions without causing apparent failures.

Obfuscation introduces another indirect attacker vector. Encoded instructions or complicated forms may bypass human review but remain readable to the model. This creates asymmetry whereby the system knows more about the attack than those operating it. Once compromised at this layer, the agent implements compromised instructions which affect downstream operations.
‍

Context and Memory: Persistence of Influence
‍

Agentic systems depend on memory to operate efficiently. They often retain context across sessions and frequently store information between sessions.

This introduces a different type of risk: persistence. Through memory poisoning, attackers can insert false or adversarial information into sorted context, which then influences future decisions. Unlike prompt injection, which is often limited to a single interaction, this effect carries forward. Over time, the agent begins to operate on a distorted internal state, shaping decisions in ways that may not be immediately visible.

Another issue is cross-session leakage. Information in a particular context may be replayed in a different context when memory is being shared or there is insufficient memory separation. This is specifically dangerous in those systems that combine retrieval and long-term storage. The context management in itself becomes a weakness. Agents are required to make decisions on what to retain and what to discard. This is susceptible to attackers who can flood the context or manipulate what is still visible and indirectly affect reasoning.

The underlying problem is structural. Memory turns data into a state. Once state is corrupted, the system cannot easily distinguish valid knowledge from adversarial influence.

The issue is structural. Memory converts temporary data into a persistent state. Once this state is weakened, the system cannot reliably separate valid information from adversarial influence, making recovery significantly more difficult.
‍

Reasoning and Planning: Manipulating Intent Without Breaking Logic
‍

The reasoning layer is where agentic AI stands apart from traditional systems. The model no longer reacts to inputs alone. It actively breaks down objectives, analyses alternatives, and ranks actions.

At the reasoning stage, the nature of risk shifts. The concern is no longer limited to injecting instructions, but to influencing how decisions are made. One example is goal manipulation, where the agent subtly reinterprets its objective and produces outcomes that are technically correct but strategically harmful. Reasoning hijacking operates within intermediate steps, altering how constraints are evaluated or how trade-offs are prioritised. The system may remain internally consistent, which makes such deviations difficult to detect.

Tool selection becomes a critical control point. Agents decide which tools to use and when, so influencing these choices can redirect execution without directly accessing the tools themselves. Hallucinations also take on a different role here. In static systems, they remain errors. In agentic systems, they can trigger actions. A perceived need or incorrect judgement can translate into real-world consequences.

This layer introduces probabilistic failure. The system is not fully weakened, but it is nudged towards decisions that appear reasonable yet are incorrect. The risk lies in how those decisions are justified.

‍
‍Tool and Execution: When Decisions Gain Reach
‍

Once an agent begins interacting with tools, its behaviour extends beyond the model into external systems. APIs, databases, and services become part of the execution path.

One key risk is the use of unauthorised tools. When agents operate with broad permissions, any manipulation of the upstream can be converted into real-world actions. This makes access control a central security concern. Command injection also takes a different form here. The agent generates commands based on its reasoning, so if that reasoning is compromised, the resulting actions may still appear valid despite being harmful.

External tool outputs introduce another risk. If these systems return corrupted or misleading data, the agent may accept it without verification and incorporate it into its decisions. It is also becoming increasingly reliant on third-part tools and plugins adds to this exposure. If these components are compromised, they can affect behaviour without directly attacking the core system, creating a supply-side risk.

At this stage, the agent effectively operates as an insider. It holds legitimate credentials and interacts with systems in expected ways, making misuse harder to identify.
‍

Application and Integration: System-Level Exposure
‍

Agentic systems rarely operate in isolation. They are embedded in larger environments, interacting with identity systems, business logic, and operational workflows.

Access control becomes a major vulnerability. Agents tend to operate across multiple systems with various permission models, creating irregularities that can be exploited. Risks also arise from identity and delegation. In case an agent is operating on behalf of a user, then any vulnerabilities in authentication or session management can allow attackers to assume that authority.

Workflow execution amplifies these risks. Agents can initiate multi-step processes such as transactions, updates, or approvals. Manipulating a single step can change the result of the entire workflow. As integrations increase, so do the number of interaction points, making cumulative risk harder to track.

At this layer, failures are not isolated. They propagate into business operations, making consequences harder to contain.
‍

Output and Action: Where Failures Become Visible
‍

The output layer is where failures become visible, though they rarely originate there.

Data leakage has been a key concern. Agents may disclose information they are allowed to access, especially when tasks boundaries are not clearly defined. Misinformation and unsafe outputs are also important, particularly when outputs directly influence actions or decisions.

Generated code and commands introduce execution risk. If outputs are used without validation, errors or manipulations can have system-level effects. The shift towards autonomous action increases this risk, as small upstream deviations can lead to significant consequences without human intervention. This layer reflects symptoms rather than root causes. Addressing it alone does not reduce the underlying risk.
‍

Beyond Layers: The Missing Dimension
‍

A layered view helps, but it does not capture the full picture. Agentic systems are defined by continuous interaction across layers.

The key missing dimension is the runtime loop. Inputs shape reasoning, reasoning drives action, and actions feed back into both reasoning and memory. These cycles create feedback loops, where small manipulations may escalate over time. This also reduces observability. With multiple interacting components, it becomes difficult to trace cause and effect or identify where failures originate.

Supply chain dependencies add another layer of risk. Models, datasets, APIs, and plugins each introduce their own points of failure. A compromise at any of these points can propagate across the system. The attack surface also includes governance. Weak supervision, unclear responsibility, or excessive autonomy increase overall risk. Human control is not external to the system; it is part of its security.
‍

Conclusion: Structuring the Attack Surface
‍

Agentic AI expands the attack surface beyond traditional systems. It is both recursive and stateful. Risk does not just accumulate across layers; it moves and changes as the system operates.

Any useful representation must go beyond a linear stack. It should capture feedback loops, persistent state, and cross-layer dependencies that characterise the way these systems actually behave. The system is not a pipeline but a cycle. That is where both its capability and its risk emerge.

‍

In an exciting milestone achieved by CyberPeace, an ICANN APRALO At-Large organization, in collaboration with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), has successfully deployed and made operational an L-root server instance in Ranchi, Jharkhand. This initiative marks a significant step toward enhancing the resilience, speed, and security of internet connectivity in eastern India.

Understanding the DNS hierarchy – Starting from Root

Internet users access online information through different domain names and interactions with any web browser takes place through IP (Internet Protocol) addresses. Domain Name System (DNS) functions as the internet's equivalent of Yellow Pages or the phonebook of cyberspace. When a person uses a domain name like www.cyberpeace.org to access a website, their browser communicates with the internet protocol, and DNS converts the domain name to the corresponding IP address so that web browsers may load the web pages. The function of a DNS is to convert domain names to Internet Protocol addresses. It enables the respective browsers to load the resources from the Internet.

When a user types a domain name into your browser, a DNS query works behind the scenes to find the website’s IP address. First, your device asks a DNS resolver—often provided by your ISP or a third-party service—for the address. The resolver checks its cache for a match, and if none is found, it queries a root server to locate the top-level domain (TLD) server (like .com or .org). The resolver then asks the TLD server for the Authoritative nameserver responsible for the particular domain, which provides the specific IP address. Finally, the resolver sends this address back to your device, enabling it to connect to the website’s server and load the page. The entire process happens in milliseconds, ensuring seamless browsing.

Special focus on Root Server:

A root server is a name server that directly answers queries for records in the root zone and redirects requests for more specific domains to the appropriate top-level domain (TLD) servers. Root servers are an integral part of this system, acting as the first step in resolving a domain name into its corresponding IP address. They provide the initial direction needed to locate the authoritative servers for any domain.

The DNS root zone is served by 13 unique IP addresses, supported by hundreds of redundant root servers distributed worldwide connected through Anycast Routing to manage requests efficiently. As of January 8, 2025, the global root server system consists of 1921 instances operated by 12 independent root server operators. These servers ensure the smooth functioning of the internet by managing the backbone of DNS queries.

Type of Root Server Instances:

Well, in this regard,  there are two types of root server instances that can be found– Global instance and Local instance. 

Global root server instances are the primary root servers distributed strategically around the world. Local instances, on the other hand, are replicas of these global servers deployed in specific regions to handle local DNS traffic more efficiently. In each operator's list of sites, some instances are marked as global (globe icon) and some are marked as local (flag icon). The difference is in how widely available that instance will be, because of how routing for that instance is done. Recall that the routes for an instance are announced by BGP, the inter-domain routing protocol.

For global instances, the route advertisement is permitted to spread throughout the Internet, i.e., any router on the Internet could know the path to that instance. Of course, for a particular source, the route to that instance may not be the optimal route, so some other instance could be chosen as the destination.

With a local instance, however, the route advertisement is limited to only nearby networks. For example, the instance may be visible to just one ISP, or to ISPs that connect at a particular exchange point. Sources from farther away will not be able to see and query that local instance.

Deployment in Ranchi - The Journey & Significance:

CyberPeace in Collaboration with ICANN has successfully deployed an L-root server instance in Ranchi, marking a significant milestone in enhancing regional Internet infrastructure. This deployment, part of a global network of root servers, ensures faster and more reliable DNS query resolution for the region, reducing latency and enhancing cybersecurity. 

‍
The Journey of deploying the L-Root instance in Collaboration with ICANN followed the steps-
‍

• Signing the Agreement: Finalized the L-SINGLE Hosting Agreement with ICANN to formalize the partnership.
• Procuring the Hardware: Acquired the required hardware appliance to meet technical standards for hosting the L-root server.
• Setup and Installation: Configured and installed the appliance to prepare it for seamless operation.
• Joining the Anycast Network: Integrated the server into ICANN's global Anycast network using BGP (Border Gateway Protocol) for efficient DNS traffic management.

The deployment of the L-root server in Ranchi marks a significant boost to the region’s digital ecosystem. It accelerates DNS query resolution, reducing latency and enhancing internet speed and reliability for users.

This instance strengthens cyber defenses by mitigating Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) risks and managing local traffic efficiently. It also underscores Eastern India’s advanced digital infrastructure, aligning with initiatives like Digital India to meet evolving digital demands.

By handling local queries, the L-root server eases the load on global servers, contributing to a more stable and resilient global internet.

CyberPeace’s Commitment to a Secure and resilient Cyberspace

As an organization dedicated to promoting peace, security and resilience in cyberspace, CyberPeace views this collaboration with ICANN as a significant achievement in its mission. By strengthening the internet’s backbone in eastern India, this deployment underscores our commitment to enabling a secure, accessible, and resilient digital ecosystem. 

Way forward and Roadmap for Strengthening India’s DNS Infrastructure:

The successful deployment of the L-root instance in Ranchi is a stepping stone toward bolstering India's digital ecosystem. CyberPeace aims to promote awareness about DNS infrastructure through workshops and seminars, emphasizing its critical role in a resilient digital future.

With plans to deploy more such root server instances across India, the focus is on expanding local DNS infrastructure to enhance efficiency and security. Collaborative efforts with government agencies, ISPs, and tech organizations will drive this vision forward. A robust monitoring framework will ensure optimal performance and long-term sustainability of these initiatives.

Conclusion

The deployment of the L-root server instance in Eastern India represents a monumental step toward strengthening the region’s digital foundation. As Ranchi joins the network of cities hosting root server instances, the benefits will extend not only to the local community but also to the global internet ecosystem. With this milestone, CyberPeace reaffirms its commitment to driving innovation and resilience in cyberspace, paving the way for a more connected and secure future.

‍