#FactCheck - Viral Video Claiming Iran’s Attack on US Airbase Debunked as 9/11 Footage

I. The Principles Laid Down

In addition to commemorating twenty years of an unexpected alliance, the leaders of eleven countries gathered in Bharat Mandapam this September for the 18th BRICS Summit in an effort to codify a worldview. The 140-point New Delhi Declaration, which was unanimously adopted on September 12, 2026, with the theme "Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability," is based on a few enduring principles: respect for one another, sovereign equality, solidarity, democracy, openness, inclusivity, cooperation, and consensus.

Although these terms are not new to the BRICS lexicon, their emphasis this year felt very deliberate. Through the BRICS Leaders' Statement on the Global Governance of Artificial Intelligence, the Declaration formally incorporated artificial intelligence into its agenda, pushed for fair geographic representation in the UN Secretariat and other multilateral organisations, and demanded a realignment of shareholding at international financial institutions to address the historical under-representation of the Global South. It called for compatible international standards on supply-chain security and addressed ICT security, cybercrime, data protection, and the growing threat of deepfakes and disinformation. Leaders highlighted the condemnation of terrorism, particularly the Pahalgam incident, as a collective zero-tolerance position. Taken together, these are not merely diplomatic courtesies,  they are the scaffolding of an alternative vision for how a multipolar world might govern itself.

II. The Conversation That Followed

No declaration of this scale escapes scrutiny, and the days following the summit produced a spirited, occasionally sceptical, conversation among policy circles, economists and diplomats. Commentators were quick to note what the Declaration deliberately avoided: it named no country on the more combustible geopolitical fault lines, choosing studied ambiguity over confrontation, even as it acknowledged simmering tensions in West Asia. This restraint was itself read as a signal, that a bloc as internally diverse as Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the UAE can only move forward on the strength of what unites it, not what divides it.

Analysts also debated the substance behind the rhetoric of de-dollarisation and financial reform, questioning whether a bloc still negotiating its own internal consensus on trade and currency mechanisms could realistically reshape institutions built over eight decades. Others, more sympathetic to the Global South's grievances, argued that the very act of convening over four hundred meetings across thirty Indian cities,  bringing together ministers, parliamentarians, technocrats, businesses and citizens,  was itself a form of institution-building, patient and unglamorous, but far more durable than a single communiqué. The debate, in essence, was not about whether BRICS had said the right things, but whether saying them, repeatedly and jointly, could eventually translate into structural change.

III. India's Outlook

For India, the Summit was less an isolated diplomatic event than the culmination of a year-long chairship built around a deliberate proposition: that representation without capacity is hollow, and that political voice must be matched by economic and institutional readiness. This is the thread that ran through India's engagement, from its insistence on resilient and diversified supply chains, to its championing of the Global South's right to a genuine seat at the table, not merely a symbolic one.

India used the platform to advance an agenda that was pragmatic rather than purely aspirational,  referencing its own hosting of the AI Impact Summit earlier in the year, pushing for common standards on cybersecurity and data governance, and positioning itself as a credible bridge between the ambitions of emerging economies and the operational discipline needed to realise them. The message India sent, deliberately or otherwise, was one of quiet confidence: that a nation navigating its own extraordinary digital transformation,  from public digital infrastructure to an expanding AI ecosystem  has both the standing and the responsibility to help shape the norms that will govern technology, trade and trust for the rest of the developing world.

IV. The Message and the Road Ahead

The abiding message of the New Delhi Declaration, stripped of its diplomatic phrasing, is this: the architecture of global governance was built for a world that no longer exists, and the countries most affected by that mismatch intend to keep saying so, together, and increasingly, on their own terms. Whether that translates into reformed institutions or remains an evolving conversation will depend on follow-through, not further declarations.

Speaking to the significance of this moment, Major Vineet Kumar, Founder and Global President of CyberPeace, observed that "India today sits at the forefront of a generational shift, not just in economic growth, but in shaping the digital trust and cyber-resilience frameworks that the rest of the Global South will look to for years to come." It is a fitting note to close on, because the road ahead for BRICS, and for India within it, will likely be won or lost not in the language of declarations, but in the quieter work of building institutions, standards and trust that outlast any single summit.

If the last two decades of BRICS were about proving that such a coalition could exist at all, the next chapter, anchored, for now, by India's own trajectory,  will be about proving that it can build something durable: resilient supply chains, credible AI governance, safer digital ecosystems, and institutions genuinely reflective of a multipolar world. The principles have been laid down. What follows will define whether they were a moment, or a movement.


References

- Prime Minister of India, Government of India. BRICS New Delhi Declaration: Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability (September 12, 2026). pmindia.gov.in
- Forbes India. BRICS Summit 2026: 11 Key Takeaways From the New Delhi Declaration. forbesindia.com
- The Statesman. BRICS Summit 2026: Here is what the New Delhi Declaration says. thestatesman.com
- Tribune India. India to host BRICS Summit in 2026; forum collectively condemns Pahalgam terror attack, calls for zero tolerance: Om Birla.tribuneindia.com
- ummid.com News Network. BRICS Declaration 2026: Full Text.* ummid.com
- PIB India (Press Information Bureau, via Substack). BRICS 2026: From Representation to Partnership. pibindia.substack.com
- BRICS Expert Council (Russia). Kumar, Vineet. CyberPeace, BRICS, and a New Framework for Digital Trust. bricscouncil.ru

‍

Introduction

In the evolving landscape of cybercrime, attackers are not only becoming more sophisticated in their approach but also more adept in their infrastructure. The Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C) has issued a warning about the use of ‘disposable domains’ by cybercriminals. These are short-lived websites designed tomimic legitimate platforms, deceive users, and then disappear quickly to avoid detection and legal repercussions.

Although they may appear harmless at first glance, disposable domains form the backbone of countless online scams, phishing campaigns, malware distributionschemes, and disinformation networks. Cybercriminals use them to host fake websites, distribute malicious files, send deceptive emails, and mislead unsuspecting users, all while evading detection and takedown efforts.

As India’s digital economy grows and more citizens, businesses, and public services move online, it is crucial to understand this hidden layer of cybercrime infrastructure.Greater awareness among individuals, enterprises, and policymakers is essential to strengthen defences against fraud, protect users from harm, and build trust in thedigital ecosystem

What Are Disposable Domains?

A disposable domain is a website domain that is registered to be used temporarily, usually for hours or days, typically to evade detection or accountability.

These domains are inexpensive, easy to obtain, and can be set up with minimal information. They are often bought in bulk through domain registrars that do not strictly verify ownership information, sometimes using stolen credit cards or cryptocurrencies to remain anonymous. They differ from legitimate temporary domains used for testing or development in one significant aspect, which is ‘purpose’. Cybercriminals use disposable domains to carry out malicious activities such as phishing, sextortion, malware distribution, fake e-commerce sites, spam email campaigns, and disinformation operations.

How Cybercriminals Utilise Disposable Domains

1. Phishing & Credential Stealing: Attackers tend to register lookalike domains that are similar to legitimate websites (e.g., go0gle-login[.]com or sbi-verification[.]online) and trick victims into entering their login credentials. These domains will be active only long enough to deceive, and then they will disappear.

2. Malware Distribution: Disposable domains are widely used for ransomware and spyware operations for hosting malicious files. Because the domains are temporary, threat intelligence systems tend to notice them too late.

3. Fake E-Commerce & Investment Scams: Cyber crooks clone legitimate e-commerce or investment sites, place ad campaigns, and trick victims into "purchasing" goods or investing in scams. The domain vanishes when the scam runs out.

4. Spam and Botnets: Disposable domains assist in botnet command-and-control activities. They make it more difficult for defenders to block static IPs or trace the attacker's infrastructure.

5. Disinformation and Influence Campaigns: State-sponsored actors and coordinated troll networks use disposable domains to host fabricated news articles, fake government documents, and manipulated videos. When these sites are detected and taken down, they are quickly replaced with new domains, allowing the disinformation cycle to continue uninterrupted.

Why Are They Hard to Stop?

Registering a domain is inexpensive and quick, often requiring no more than an email address and payment. The difficulty is the easy domain registrations and the absence of worldwide enforcement. Domain registrars differ in enforcing Know-Your-Customer (KYC) standards stringently. ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) has certain regulations in place but enforcement is inconsistent. ICANN does require registrars to maintain accurate Who is information (the “Registrant Data Accuracy Policy”) and to act on abuse complaints. However, ICANN is not an enforcement agency. It oversees contracts with registrars but cannot directly police every registration. Cybercriminals exploit services such as:

• Privacy protection shields that conceal actual WHOIS information.
• Bulletproof hosting that evades takedown notices.
• Fast-flux DNS methods to rapidly alter IP addresses

Additionally, utilisation of IDNs ( Internationalised Domain Names) and homoglyph attacks enables the attackers to register visually similar domains to legitimate ones (e.g., using Cyrillic characters to represent Latin ones).

Real-World Example: India and the Rise of Fake Investment Sites

India has witnessed a wave of monetary scams that are connected with disposable domains. Over hundreds of false websites impersonating government loan schemes, banks or investment websites, and crypto-exchanges were found on disposable domains such as gov-loans-apply[.]xyz, indiabonds-secure[.]top, or rbi-invest[.]store. Most of them placed paid advertisements on sites such as Facebook or Google and harvested user information and payments, only to vanish in 48–72 hours. Victims had no avenue of proper recourse, and the authorities were left with a digital ghost trail.

How Disposable Domains Undermine Cybersecurity

• Bypass Blacklists: Dynamic domains constantly shifting evade static blacklists.
• Delay Attribution: Time is wasted pursuing non-existent owners or takedowns.
• Mass Targeting: One actor can register thousands of domains and attack at scale.
• Undermine Trust: Frequent users become targets when genuine sites are duplicated and it looks realistic.

Recommendations Addressing Legal and Policy Gaps in India

1. There is a need to establish a formal coordination mechanism between domain registrars and national CERTs such as CERT-In to enable effective communication and timely response to domain-based threats.

2. There is a need to strengthen the investigative and enforcement capabilities of law enforcement agencies through dedicated resources, training, and technical support to effectively tackle domain-based scams.

3. There is a need to leverage the provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 to take action against phishing websites and malicious domains that collect personal data without consent.

4. There is a need to draft and implement specific regulations or guidelines to address the misuse of digital infrastructure, particularly disposable and fraudulent domains, and close existing regulatory gaps.

What Can Be Done: CyberPeace View

1. Stronger KYC for Domain Registrations: Registrars selling domains to Indian users or based in India should conduct verified KYC processes, with legal repercussions for carelessness.

2. Real-Time Domain Blacklists: CERT-In, along with ISPs and hosting companies, should operate and enforce a real-time blacklist of scam domains known.

3. Public Reporting Tools: Observers or victims should be capable of reporting suspicious domains through an easy interface (tied to cybercrime.gov.in).

4. Collaboration with Tech Platforms: Social media services and online ad platforms should filter out ads associated with disposable or spurious domains and report abuse data to CERT-In.

5. User Awareness: Netizens should be educated to check URLs thoroughly, not click on unsolicited links and they must verify the authenticity of websites.

Conclusion

Disposable domains have silently become the foundation of contemporary cybercrime. They are inexpensive, highly anonymous, and short-lived, which makes them a darling weapon for cybercriminals ranging from solo spammers to nation-state operators. In an increasingly connected Indian society where the penetration rate of internet users is high, this poses an expanding threat to economic security, public confidence, and national resilience. Combating this problem will need a combination of technical defences, policy changes, public-private alliances, and end-user sensitisation. As India develops a Cyber Secure Bharat, monitoring and addressing disposable domain abuse must be the utmost concern.

References

• https://www.bitcot.com/disposable-domains
• https://atdata.com/blog/evolution-of-email-fraud-rise-of-hyper-disposable-domains/
• https://www.cyfirma.com/research/scamonomics-the-dark-side-of-stock-crypto-investments-in-india/
• https://knowledgebase.constantcontact.com/lead-gen-crm/articles/KnowledgeBase/50330-Understanding-Blocked-Forbidden-and-Disposable-Domains?lang=en_US
• https://www.meity.gov.in/
• https://intel471.com/blog/bulletproof-hosting-fast-flux-dns-double-flux-vps

‍

‍

Executive Summary:
‍

Amid the ongoing conflict involving the United States, Israel, and Iran, a video showing a building engulfed in flames is being widely circulated on social media. In the clip, a large fire can be seen inside a building while several people appear to be running in panic. The video is being shared with the claim that Iran fired a hypersonic missile targeting a ceremony in Tel Aviv, Israel, allegedly killing several Israeli military generals and other prominent figures.

However, research by the CyberPeace found that the claim is false. The video being circulated as footage of an attack in Israel actually predates the current conflict and shows a fire that broke out during a wedding ceremony.

‍

Claim

‍

A Facebook user named “Syed Asif Raza Jafri” shared the video on March 13, 2026, claiming that an Iranian hypersonic missile had struck a grand ceremony in Tel Aviv, where several Israeli military officers, generals, soldiers, and other important personalities were present. According to the post, the attack resulted in multiple casualties.

Source:

• https://www.facebook.com/reel/902182825912364
• https://ghostarchive.org/archive/rZryr

‍

‍

Fact Check

‍

To verify the claim, we began our research using the Google Lens reverse image search tool. Several key frames from the viral video were extracted and searched online.

During the search, we found the same video shared earlier on multiple foreign social media accounts. A Facebook user named “Es de Bombero” from Chile had posted the video on January 17, 2026, describing it in Spanish as footage of a fire that broke out during a wedding celebration.

• https://www.facebook.com/reel/898957402853732 

‍

‍

Our research shows that the viral video had been circulating on social media since at least January 15, 2026, well before the escalation of the current conflict. According to a report published on March 1, 2026, by BBC, the large-scale attacks on Iran by the United States and Israel began on February 28, 2026, after which Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was reported dead.

‍

Additionally, a March 12, 2026 report by Al Jazeera stated that a house near Tel Aviv in central Israel was damaged by a rocket reportedly fired by Hezbollah, which has previously carried out joint attacks in coordination with Iran.

‍

‍

Conclusion

‍

The viral video being shared as footage of an Iranian hypersonic missile strike in Tel Aviv is misleading. The clip is an older video of a fire that reportedly broke out during a wedding ceremony and was circulating online before the current conflict began.

While the exact location of the incident shown in the video cannot be independently verified, it is clear that the footage has no connection to the ongoing war between the United States, Israel, and Iran.

‍