#FactCheck - Viral Claim About Anti-Trump Protests in the US Is Misleading
A photograph showing a massive crowd on a road is being widely shared on social media. The image is being circulated with the claim that people in the United States are staging large-scale protests against President Donald Trump.
However, CyberPeace Foundation’s research has found this claim to be misleading. Our fact-check reveals that the viral photograph is nearly eight years old and has been falsely linked to recent political developments.
Claim:
Social media users are sharing a photograph and claiming that it shows people protesting against US President Donald Trump.An X (formerly Twitter) user, Salman Khan Gauri (@khansalman88177), shared the image with the caption:“Today, a massive protest is taking place in America against Donald Trump.”
The post can be viewed here, and its archived version is available here.

FactCheck:
To verify the claim, we conducted a reverse image search of the viral photograph using Google. This led us to a report published by The Mercury News on April 6, 2018.
The report features the same image and states that the photograph was taken on March 24, 2018, during the ‘March for Our Lives’ rally in Washington, DC. The rally was organized to demand stricter gun control laws in the United States. The image shows a large crowd gathered on Pennsylvania Avenue in support of gun reform.
The report further notes that the Associated Press, on March 30, 2018, debunked false claims circulating online which alleged that liberal billionaire George Soros and his organizations had paid protesters $300 each to participate in the rally.

Further research led us to a report published by The Hindu on March 25, 2018, which also carries the same photograph. According to the report, thousands of Americans across the country participated in ‘March for Our Lives’ rallies following a mass shooting at a school in Florida. The protests were led by survivors and victims, demanding stronger gun laws.
The objective of these demonstrations was to break the legislative deadlock that has long hindered efforts to tighten firearm regulations in a country frequently rocked by mass shootings in schools and colleges.

Conclusion
The viral photograph is nearly eight years old and is unrelated to any recent protests against President Donald Trump.The image actually depicts a gun control protest held in 2018 and is being falsely shared with a misleading political claim.By circulating this outdated image with an incorrect context, social media users are spreading misinformation.
Related Blogs

A war in the twenty-first century does not start when the first bullet or missile is fired. It begins much earlier, covertly, and without any official announcement. Cyberspace is this new battlefield. States now use a variety of ransomware, malicious codes, and disinformation campaigns to undermine their enemies' capabilities before launching an offensive. These pre-conflict cyber operations are now the primary frontline of contemporary hybrid warfare, which is changing how conflicts are fought and conducted.
The Birth of a Digital Battlefield
Hybrid Warfare is a blend of conventional military force with nonmilitary tactics like economic coercion, disinformation, and cyberattacks that have evolved rapidly in recent decades. Hybrid methods of warfare are nothing new, as the scale and sophistication of cyber operations in modern conflicts are unprecedented. Russia’s actions in Ukraine demonstrated the capability of digital tools to paralyse the critical systems before its heavy munitions could be deployed for combat operations. Within days of the 2022 invasions, Ukraine faced massive Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks targeting banks, government websites, and energy infrastructures. The digital frontlines have softened the physical defences long before the conventional warfare began.
According to the FP Analytics’ “Digital Front Lines” Project, cyber operations are no longer an auxiliary tactic but a core component of hybrid warfare, blurring the boundary between peace and war. They enable states to exert pressure, gather intelligence, and disrupt adversaries, often without being attributed or held accountable.
Cyber Operations: The modern Prelude to War
The use of digital technologies for surveillance, information network disruption, or critical infrastructure destruction is known as cyber operations. They are especially useful instruments for pre-conflict manipulation because of their ambiguity and stealth. Cyberattacks, in contrast to conventional military strikes, can accomplish strategic goals while providing plausible deniability.
Coordinated cyberattacks that spread misinformation and damaged public confidence disrupted government communication systems prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. These sorts of incidents highlight the integrated nature of cyber and kinetic operations, where digital assaults often serve as the initial phases of modern wars.
The Expanding Spectrum of Actors or Threat
Cyberspace has democratized warfare, which once required an army, can now be initiated by a handful of skilled programmers with access to the right tools. The cyber landscape of the present times features a wide spectrum of threat actors, which can be understood as;
- State actors like intelligence or military agencies conduct cyber operations as part of official foreign policy.
- Cybercriminals pursue financial gains, often overlapping with political motives.
- Terrorist groups use cyberspace to spread propaganda for coordinated attacks.
- Cyber mercenaries being hired by both the state and nonstate clients can blur the ethical and legal boundaries.
This diversity can complicate the attribution by determining that anyone who is actively working behind conducting cyberattacks can be notoriously difficult, allowing the states to hide behind “plausible deniability.” This ‘Gray Zone’ of conflict below the threshold of a declared war, above mere diplomacy, has become the preferred arena for modern power struggles.
Civilian Involvement and Ethical Dilemmas
Unlike traditional warfare, where the cyber domain entangles civilians as both participants and targets. Much of the nation’s critical infrastructure, which includes energy grids, hospitals, transportation, and communication systems, is owned and operated by private entities. As a result, the civilian industries and experts are becoming central to both cyber defence and offence.
During the Russia–Ukraine War, the volunteer hackers from around the world were many of whom are being coordinated through the app Telegram, which is termed as ‘IT Army of Ukraine’, are known for conducting digital strikes on Russian networks. Conversely, the Russia-affiliated hacker groups like Conti had vowed to retaliate against any nations that supported Ukraine.
This civilian participation raises profound legal and moral questions, over a private company’s role in defending their networks of becoming a combatant, or the impact of retaliatory cyberattacks on civilian infrastructure war crimes. International law has yet to provide a clear answer, which can leave dangerous gaps in the governance to counter cybercrimes.
Susceptibility of Contemporary Society to Cyber Warfare
Cyberwarfare can impact an entire global digital ecosystem due to its interconnectedness. Power grids, hospitals, air traffic systems, and even automation devices can be compromised. While the NotPetya ransomware, which was cloaked as ransomware, caused billions of losses and caused worldwide economic damage from shipping companies to pharmaceutical companies, the WannaCry ransomware attacks in 2017 paralysed hospitals throughout the UK's National Health Service.
When taken as a whole, these incidents have also shown that cyberattacks are no longer limited to espionage situations and can have real-world consequences comparable to those of conventional warfare. The consequences of cyberattacks could increase dramatically as our dependence on technology increases. Because these effects are profoundly psychological in nature and seek to sow fear, mistrust, and social disintegration, they are not merely technical or economic in nature.
The Future: Permanent Cyber Frontlines
Technological developments have made cyberspace a permanent theatre of conflict, joining the land, sea, air, and space. Countries are currently making significant investments in cyber capabilities for deterrence as well as defence. According to security experts like Eriksson and Giacomello, societies are now inherently fragile due to our increasing reliance on information technologies.
Cyber operations in this context are about strategic dominance in a globalised world, not just digital espionage. Who controls the networks and algorithms that run contemporary civilisation will determine the future of war, not just who controls the skies or the seas. As per the new reality, before the drop of the first bomb, a silent war in cyberspace will already be underway.
References
- https://digitalfrontlines.io/2023/05/25/the-evolution-of-cyber-operations-in-armed-conflict/
- https://theses.ubn.ru.nl/server/api/core/bitstreams/9d74149e-fb9a-402f-aa65-a90445ad7603/content
- https://cybersecurityguide.org/resources/cyberwarfare/
- https://re.public.polimi.it/retrieve/e0c31c0b-ce6c-4599-e053-1705fe0aef77/21%20Century%20Cyber%20Warfare.pdf

Introduction
Devices and interconnectivity are the pipelines which drive the data into cyberspace, and in turn, the users consume this data to perform different tasks in the digital age. The security of devices and networks is essential as they are the first defenders of cyberspace. Bad actors often target systems and networks with malware and ransomware, these attacks are differently motivated, but all wreak havoc upon the system and can impact individuals and organisations alike. Mobile users worldwide prefer iOS or Android, but both operating systems are vulnerable to cyberattacks these days. Some of these attacks go undetected for a long time.
Op Triangulation
As reported by Kaspersky, While monitoring the network traffic of their own corporate Wi-Fi network dedicated to mobile devices using the Kaspersky Unified Monitoring and Analysis Platform (KUMA), Kaspersky noticed suspicious activity that originated from several iOS-based phones. Since it is impossible to inspect modern iOS devices from the inside, they created offline backups of the devices in question, inspected them using the Mobile Verification Toolkit’s mvt-ios and discovered traces of compromise. This is known as Operation Triangulation and has been in action since 2019 and got detected in 2023.
The Malware
A portion of the filesystem, including some of the user data and service databases, is included in mobile device backups. The files, directories, and database entries’ timestamps make it possible to reconstruct the events that happened to the device roughly. The “timeline.csv” file created by the mvt-ios software contains a sorted timeline of events that is comparable to the super-timeline utilised by traditional digital forensic tools. Pinpointing particular artefacts that show the compromise using this timeframe. This made it possible to advance the research and reassemble the broad infection sequence:
Through the iMessage service, a message with an attachment containing an exploit is delivered to the target iOS device.
The message initiates a vulnerability that results in code execution without any user input.
The exploit’s code downloads multiple additional stages, including additional exploits for privilege escalation, from the C&C server.
After successful exploitation, a fully functional APT platform is downloaded as the final payload from the C&C server.
The first message and the attachment’s exploit are removed

The lack of persistence support in the harmful toolset is most likely a result of OS restrictions. Multiple devices’ timeframes suggest that after rebooting, they might get infected again. The earliest signs of infection that we found date to 2019. The most recent version of the devices that have been successfully attacked as of the time of writing in June 2023 is iOS 15.7.
The final payload analysis is still ongoing. The programme executes with root rights, implements a set of commands for gathering user and system data, and can run any code downloaded as plugin modules from the C&C server.
Malicious Domains
Using the forensic artefacts, it was possible to identify the domain name set used by the exploits and further malicious stages. They can be used to check the DNS logs for historical information and to identify the devices currently running the malware:
addatamarket[.]net
backuprabbit[.]com
businessvideonews[.]com
cloudsponcer[.]com
datamarketplace[.]net
mobilegamerstats[.]com
snoweeanalytics[.]com
tagclick-cdn[.]com
topographyupdates[.]com
unlimitedteacup[.]com
virtuallaughing[.]com
web-trackers[.]com
growthtransport[.]com
anstv[.]netAns7tv[.]net
Safeguards for iOS users
Despite its world-class safety and privacy architecture, iOS is vulnerable to a few attacks; the following steps can be undertaken to safeguard iOS users –
Keeping Device updated
Security patches
Disabling iMessage would prevent Zero clicks exploits or the Triangulation attacks
Paying zero attention to unwanted, unsolicited messages
The user should make sure that any application they are downloading or installing; it should be from a trusted source ( This Zero click attack does not occur by any other means, It exploits / it targets software vulnerabilities in operating systems networks and applications)
Being cautious with the messaging app and emails
Implement device restrictions (management features like parental control and restrictions over using necessary applications)

Conclusion
Operation Triangulation is one of the recent operations combating cyber attacks, but such operations are launched nearly daily. This is also due to a rapid rise in internet and technology penetration across the world. Cyberattacks have taken a new face as they have evolved with the new and emerging technology. The influence of the Darknet has allowed many hackers to remain on the black hat side due to easy accessibility to illegal tools and material over the dark net, which facilitates such crimes.
%20(1).webp)
Introduction
The global food industry is vast and complex, influencing consumer behaviour, policy, and health outcomes worldwide. However, misinformation within this sector is pervasive, with significant consequences for public health and market dynamics. Misinformation can arise from various sources, including misleading marketing campaigns, unsubstantiated health claims, and misrepresentation of food production practices through public endorsement or otherwise. Nutrition misinformation is one such example. The promotion of false or unproven products for profit can lead to mislead consumers and affect their interests. Misleading claims and inaccurate information about the nutritional value of food products and processes are common claims. The misinformation created about food on the global stage distorts public understanding of nutrition, food safety, and environmental impacts, leading to significant consequences for public health, consumer trust, and the economy.
Rise of Nutritional Misinformation and Consumer Distrust
Health and nutrition-related misinformation is one of the most prevalent types in the food sector. Businesses frequently advertise their products as "natural" or "healthy" without providing sufficient data to back up these claims, tricking customers into buying goods that might be heavy in fat, sugar, or salt. Words like "superfood" are frequently used without supporting evidence from science, giving the impression that they are healthier.
Misinformation also impacts the sustainability and ethics of food production. Claims of "sustainable" or "ethical" sourcing are frequently exaggerated or fabricated, leaving consumers unaware of the true environmental and social costs associated with certain products.
This lack of clarity is not only observed in general food trends but also within organisations meant to provide trustworthy information. There has been significant criticism, directed at the International Food Information Council (IFIC), for their alleged promotion of nutrition-based misinformation to safeguard the interests of large food corporations, resulting in potentially compromising public health. The preemptive claims that IFIC made about the nutritive claims have been questioned by the National Institutes of Health, USA in November 2022. They reported in their study that IFIC promotes food and beverage company interests and undermines the accurate dissemination of scientific evidence related to diet and health. This was in support of the objective of the study, which was to determine whether, there have been many claims that the nutritional value of certain foods or diets may be manipulated to favour business goals, leaving consumers misinformed about what constitutes a truly healthy diet.
Another source of misinformation is the growing ‘Free-From’ fad. The “free-from” label in the US is a food category of products that claim to be free from certain ingredients or chemicals. It has been steadily growing by 7% annually. These labels often tout products as healthier due to a simpler ingredient list. Although seemingly harmless, transparency in ingredient disclosure is often obscured in the 'free-from' trend. This can lead to consumer distrust in the long run, making them hesitant.
The Harmful Effects of Food Misinformation
The effects of misinformation about nutrition and food safety can directly affect public health.
Consumers unknowingly may accept false claims or avoid certain foods without scientific basis and adopt harmful dietary habits, potentially leading to malnutrition or other health problems. By the time the realisation sets in about being misled, their trust is eroded not only towards such companies but also towards the regulators. This distrust can lead to declining consumer confidence and disrupt market stability.
Some food-related misinformation downplays the environmental impact that certain food production practices have. An example of such a situation is the promotion of meat alternatives as being entirely eco-friendly without considering all environmental factors. This can mislead consumers and obscure the complex environmental effects of food production systems.
Misinformation can distort consumer purchasing habits, potentially leading to a reduced demand for certain products and unfair competition. The sufferers in this case are the small-scale producers who suffer disproportionately, while the large corporations might use this misinformation to maintain their dominance in the market. Regulatory checks, open communication, and public education campaigns are needed to combat mis/disinformation in the global food sector and enable consumers to make decisions that are sustainable, healthful and informed.
CyberPeace Recommendations
- Unfair trade practices like providing misleading information or unchecked claims on food products should be better addressed by the regulators. Companies must provide clear, transparent and accurate information about their products as mandated under the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018. This information should include the true origins, production methods, and nutritional content on their labels.
- Promotions of initiatives and investments by public health organisations and food authorities towards educating consumers and improving food literacy should encouraged.
- Regulating social media endorsement is also crucial to prevent the spread of misinformation and unchecked claims. Without proper due diligence on product details, influencers may unknowingly mislead their audience, causing potential harm.
- The Social Media Platforms can partner with nutritionists, dietitians, and other health professionals who are content creators, as they can help in understanding and promoting accurate, science-based nutrition information and debunk any misleading claims.
- Campaigns should be encouraged to spread public awareness about the harms of food-related misleading claims or trends. Emphasis should be on evidence-based nutritional guidance. The ongoing research towards food safety, nutrition, and true information should be actively communicated to keep the public informed. Combating food misinformation requires more robust regulations, improved transparency, and heightened consumer awareness and vigilance.
References
- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/label-claims-on-packaged-food-could-be-misleading-icmr/articleshow/110053363.cms
- https://www.outlookindia.com/hub4business/empowering-change-freedom-food-alliance-takes-on-global-food-industry-misinformation
- https://insightsnow.com/misinformation-hurting-food-business/
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9618198/pdf/12992_2022_Article_884.pdf