#FactCheck - "Viral Video Falsely Claimed as Evidence of Attacks in Bangladesh is False & Misleading”
Executive Summary:
A misleading video of a child covered in ash allegedly circulating as the evidence for attacks against Hindu minorities in Bangladesh. However, the investigation revealed that the video is actually from Gaza, Palestine, and was filmed following an Israeli airstrike in July 2024. The claim linking the video to Bangladesh is false and misleading.
Claims:
A viral video claims to show a child in Bangladesh covered in ash as evidence of attacks on Hindu minorities.
Fact Check:
Upon receiving the viral posts, we conducted a Google Lens search on keyframes of the video, which led us to a X post posted by Quds News Network. The report identified the video as footage from Gaza, Palestine, specifically capturing the aftermath of an Israeli airstrike on the Nuseirat refugee camp in July 2024.
The caption of the post reads, “Journalist Hani Mahmoud reports on the deadly Israeli attack yesterday which targeted a UN school in Nuseirat, killing at least 17 people who were sheltering inside and injuring many more.”
To further verify, we examined the video footage where the watermark of Al Jazeera News media could be seen, We found the same post posted on the Instagram account on 14 July, 2024 where we confirmed that the child in the video had survived a massacre caused by the Israeli airstrike on a school shelter in Gaza.
Additionally, we found the same video uploaded to CBS News' YouTube channel, where it was clearly captioned as "Video captures aftermath of Israeli airstrike in Gaza", further confirming its true origin.
We found no credible reports or evidence were found linking this video to any incidents in Bangladesh. This clearly implies that the viral video was falsely attributed to Bangladesh.
Conclusion:
The video circulating on social media which shows a child covered in ash as the evidence of attack against Hindu minorities is false and misleading. The investigation leads that the video originally originated from Gaza, Palestine and documents the aftermath of an Israeli air strike in July 2024.
- Claims: A video shows a child in Bangladesh covered in ash as evidence of attacks on Hindu minorities.
- Claimed by: Facebook
- Fact Check: False & Misleading
Related Blogs
Introduction:
This Op-ed sheds light on the perspectives of the US and China regarding cyber espionage. Additionally, it seeks to analyze China's response to the US accusation regarding cyber espionage.
What is Cyber espionage?
Cyber espionage or cyber spying is the act of obtaining personal, sensitive, or proprietary information from individuals without their knowledge or consent. In an increasingly transparent and technological society, the ability to control the private information an individual reveals on the Internet and the ability of others to access that information are a growing concern. This includes storage and retrieval of e-mail by third parties, social media, search engines, data mining, GPS tracking, the explosion of smartphone usage, and many other technology considerations. In the age of big data, there is a growing concern for privacy issues surrounding the storage and misuse of personal data and non-consensual mining of private information by companies, criminals, and governments.
Cyber espionage aims for economic, political, and technological gain. Fox example Stuxnet (2010) cyber-attack by the US and its allies Israel against Iran’s Nuclear facilities. Three espionage tools were discovered connected to Stuxnet, such as Gauss, FLAME and DuQu, for stealing data such as passwords, screenshots, Bluetooth, Skype functions, etc.
Cyber espionage is one of the most significant and intriguing international challenges globally. Many nations and international bodies, such as the US and China, have created their definitions and have always struggled over cyber espionage norms.
The US Perspective
In 2009, US officials (along with other allied countries) mentioned that cyber espionage was acceptable if it safeguarded national security, although they condemned economically motivated cyber espionage. Even the Director of National Intelligence said in 2013 that foreign intelligence capabilities cannot steal foreign companies' trade secrets to benefit their firms. This stance is consistent with the Economic Espionage Act (EEA) of 1996, particularly Section 1831, which prohibits economic espionage. This includes the theft of a trade secret that "will benefit any foreign government, foreign agent or foreign instrumentality.
Second, the US advocates for cybersecurity market standards and strongly opposes transferring personal data extracted from the US Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to cybercrime markets. Furthermore, China has been reported to sell OPM data on illicit markets. It became a grave concern for the US government when the Chinese government managed to acquire sensitive details of 22.1 million US government workers through cyber intrusions in 2014.
Third, Cyber-espionage is acceptable unless it’s utilized for Doxing, which involves disclosing personal information about someone online without their consent and using it as a tool for political influence operations. However, Western academics and scholars have endeavoured to distinguish between doxing and whistleblowing. They argue that whistleblowing, exemplified by events like the Snowden Leaks and Vault 7 disclosures, serves the interests of US citizens. In the US, being regarded as an open society, certain disclosures are not promoted but rather required by mandate.
Fourth, the US argues that there is no cyber espionage against critical infrastructure during peacetime. According to the US, there are 16 critical infrastructure sectors, including chemical, nuclear, energy, defence, food, water, and so on. These sectors are considered essential to the US, and any disruption or harm would impact security, national public health and national economic security.
The US concern regarding China’s cyber espionage
According to James Lewis (a senior vice president at the Center for US-China Economic and Security Review Commission), the US faces losses between $ 20 billion and $30 billion annually due to China’s cyberespionage. The 2018 U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Section 301 report highlighted instances, where the Chinese government and executives from Chinese companies engaged in clandestine cyber intrusions to obtaining commercially valuable information from the U.S. businesses, such as in 2018 where officials from China’s Ministry of State Security, stole trade from General Electric aviation and other aerospace companies.
China's response to the US accusations of cyber espionage
China's perspective on cyber espionage is outlined by its 2014 anti-espionage law, which was revised in 2023. Article 1 of this legislation is formulated to prevent, halt, and punish espionage actions to maintain national security. Article 4 addresses the act of espionage and does not differentiate between state-sponsored cyber espionage for economic purposes and state-sponsored cyber espionage for national security purposes. However, China doesn't make a clear difference between government-to-government hacking (spying) and government-to-corporate sector hacking, unlike the US. This distinction is less apparent in China due to its strong state-owned enterprise (SOE) sector. However, military spying is considered part of the national interest in the US, while corporate spying is considered a crime.
China asserts that the US has established cyber norms concerning cyber espionage to normalize public attribution as acceptable conduct. This is achieved by targeting China for cyber operations, imposing sanctions on accused Chinese individuals, and making political accusations, such as blaming China and Russia for meddling in US elections. Despite all this, Washington D.C has never taken responsibility for the infamous Flame and Stuxnet cyber operations, which were widely recognized as part of a broader collaborative initiative known as Operation Olympic Games between the US and Israel. Additionally, the US takes the lead in surveillance activities conducted against China, Russia, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, and several French presidents. Surveillance programs such as Irritant Horn, Stellar Wind, Bvp47, the Hive, and PRISM are recognized as tools used by the US to monitor both allies and adversaries to maintain global hegemony.
China urges the US to cease its smear campaign associated with Volt Typhoon’s cyberattack for cyber espionage, citing the publication of a report titled “Volt Typhoon: A Conspiratorial Swindling Campaign Targets with U.S. Congress and Taxpayers Conducted by U.S. Intelligence Community” by China's National Computer Virus Emergency Response Centre and the 360 Digital Security Group on 15 April. According to the report, 'Volt Typhoon' is a ransomware cyber criminal group self-identified as the 'Dark Power' and is not affiliated with any state or region. Multiple cybersecurity authorities in the US collaborated to fabricate this story just for more budgets from Congress. In the meantime, Microsoft and other U.S. cybersecurity firms are seeking more big contracts from US cybersecurity authorities. The reality behind “Volt Typhoon '' is a conspiratorial swindling campaign to achieve two objectives by amplifying the "China threat theory" and cheating money from the U.S. Congress and taxpayers.
Beijing condemned the US claims of cyber espionage without any solid evidence. China also blames the US for economic espionage by citing the European Parliament report that the National Security Agency (NSA) was also involved in assisting Boeing in beating Airbus for a multi-billion dollar contract. Furthermore, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff also accused the US authorities of spying against the state-owned oil company “Petrobras” for economic reasons.
Conclusion
In 2015, the US and China marked a milestone as both President Xi Jinping and Barack Obama signed an agreement, committing that neither country's government would conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets, intellectual property, or other confidential business information to grant competitive advantages to firms or commercial sectors. However, the China Cybersecurity Industry Alliance (CCIA) published a report titled 'US Threats and Sabotage to the Security and Development of Global Cyberspace' in 2024, highlighting the US escalating cyber-attack and espionage activities against China and other nations. Additionally, there has been a considerable increase in the volume and sophistication of Chinese hacking since 2016. According to a survey by the Center for International and Strategic Studies, out of 224 cyber espionage incidents reported since 2000, 69% occurred after Xi assumed office. Therefore, China and the US must address cybersecurity issues through dialogue and cooperation, utilizing bilateral and multilateral agreements.
Introduction
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), on March 13 2023, published a new rule to regulate telemarketing firms. Trai has demonstrated strictness when it comes to bombarding users with intrusive marketing pitches. In a report, TRAI stated that 10-digit mobile numbers could not be utilised for advertising. In reality, different phone numbers are given out for regular calls and telemarketing calls. Hence, it is an appropriate and much-required move in order to suppress and eradicate phishing scammers and secure the Indian Cyber-ecosystem at large.
What are the new rules?
The rules state that now 10-digit unregistered mobile numbers for promotional purposes would be shut down over the following five days. The rule claim that calling from unregistered mobile numbers had been banned was published on February 16. In this case, using 10-digit promotional messages for promotional calling will end within the following five days. This step by TRAI has been seen after nearly 6-8 months of releasing the Telecommunication Bill, 2022, which has focused towards creating a stable Indian Telecom market and reducing the phoney calls/messages by bad actors to reduce cyber crimes like phishing. This is done to distinguish between legitimate and promotional calls. According to certain reports, some telecom firms allegedly break the law by using 10-digit mobile numbers to make unwanted calls and send promotional messages. All telecom service providers must execute the requirements under the recent TRAI directive within five days.
How will the new rules help?
The promotional use of a cellphone number with 10 digits was allowed since the start, however, with the latest NCRB report on cyber crimes and the rising instances and reporting of cyber crimes primarily focused towards frauds related to monetary gains by the bad actors points to the issue of unregulated promotional messages. This move will act as a critical step towards eradicating scammers from the cyber-ecosystem, TRAI has been very critical in understanding the dynamics and shortcomings in the regulation of the telecom spectrum and network in India and has shown keen interest towards suppressing the modes of technology used by the scammers. It is a fact that the invention of the technology does not define its use, the policy of the technology does, hence it is important to draft ad enact policies which better regulate the existing and emerging technologies.
What to avoid?
In pursuance of the rules enacted by TRAI, the business owners involved in promotional services through 10-digit numbers will have to follow these steps-
- It is against the law to utilise a 10-digit cellphone number for promotional calls.
- You should stop doing so right now.
- Your mobile number will be blocked in the following five days if not.
- Users employed by telemarketing firms are encouraged to refrain from using the system in such circumstances.
- Those working for telemarketing firms are encouraged not to call from their mobile numbers.
- Users should phone the company’s registered mobile number for promotional purposes.
Conclusion
The Indian netizen has been exposed to the technology a little later than the western world. However, this changed drastically during the Covid-19 pandemic as the internet and technology penetration rates increased exponentially in just a couple of months. Although this has been used as an advantage by the bad actors, it was pertinent for the government and its institutions to take an effective and efficient step to safeguard the people from financial fraud. Although these frauds occur in high numbers due to a lack of knowledge and awareness, we need to work on preventive solutions rather than precautionary steps and the new rules by TRAI point towards a safe, secured and sustainable future of cyberspace in India.
Introduction
Emerging technologies in the digital era have made their inroads in manifold domains and locations, including the “Aviation industry”. A 2022 Cranfield University and Inmarsat report has made the point for digitalization powering a reviving age for the aviation industry. Several airport authorities are presently mobilizing power of emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) across the airport bedrock to provide travelers with a plain sailing and expeditious air travel experience.
The Perils of Juice-Jacking
Today, Universal Serial Bus (USB) charging ports are ubiquitous and a convenient way for travelers to keep their devices powered up. In their busy, mundane lives, people use the public charging facility while travelling. However, cybersecurity experts have warned that charging in public areas could wipe off data from an electronic device or install malware, and they have urged people to stay away from USB charging ports at airports and other public areas. This leads to the possibility that fraudsters may manipulate susceptible users via juice jacking.
Investigative journalist Brian Krebs in 2011 coined the term "Juice Jacking". It isa form of cyber attack where a public USB charging port is fiddled with and infected using hardware and software changes to pocket data or install malware on devices connected to it. The term “juice jacking” is a slang representation for electric power or energy, and “hijacking” indicates an unauthorized key toa device.
While the preliminary purpose of juice jacking is usually to pilfer sensitive information from corresponding devices, such as passwords and payment card details, attackers can exploit this stolen information to attain unauthorized to your financial accounts. If the adversary attacker installs malware in the electronic device during the juice jacking strategy, the attacker may further observe the individual's movements even after one has disconnected the device from the USB port. However, the hazards of Juice Jacking include malware infection, data heist, economic loss and damage to the reputation of an individual.
RedFlags from Agencies
In2023, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) forewarned travelers against using charging stations in public zones such as hotels, airports, and shopping malls due to malicious actors attempting to use the public USB to introduce monitoring software and malware into devices. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has also administered a new advisory regarding “juice jacking "and its possibility of launching a hushed cyber attack against a mobile gadget while one is charging the phone with a USB cord. Similarly, according to new research from International Business Machines (IBM) Security, many nation-state hackers are currently training their eyes on travelers.
RBI Advisory
Recently in 2024, The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has likewise administered a warning statement to mobile phone users urging them against charging their devices using public ports. RBI has additionally accentuated the importance of safeguarding private and financial data while using mobile devices. Juice jacking is further cited as one of the scams in the RBI booklet on the modus operandi of financial fraudsters in the financial space.
Preventing juice jacking attacks
The routes to avoid Juice Jacking are to keep a tab on the USB devices, not use the public charging ports, update the phone software regularly, enable and utilize the software security measures of the device, use a USB pass-through device, a wall outlet, or a backup battery; never use unknown charging cables and use only the trusted security apps. It is further important to avoid using cables that are left behind by other travelers in any public space. Users can correspondingly turn off their devices before connecting to a wary charging port. Nevertheless, the absence of documented cases does not necessarily imply that users cannot be a target of such an attack and a warning is still recommended when securing personal gadgets with susceptible user data while using standard cables. Also, using a virtual private network (VPN) and assuring that devices have the updated security updates established can aid in mitigating the danger of cyber attacks. It is equally important to utilize the security features of your device, such as passcodes, fingerprints, or facial recognition, enabled to count as a supplementary layer of safeguard.
Conclusion
In the contemporary digital age, individuals, on the whole, need to be vigilant about “Cybersecurity hygiene” and avoid accessing susceptible data or conducting financial transactions on unsecured networks. Mobile phones or devices should run on the latest operating system, and antivirus software should be revamped to mitigate conceivable security susceptibilities.
References
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2023/04/20/juice-jacking-malware-phone-airports-hotels/?sh=47adab7e82ed
- https://www.businessairportinternational.com/features/how-ai-is-improving-business-aviation-operations.html
- https://www.news18.com/business/juice-jacking-attack-scam-bank-frauds-india-8412037.html
- https://www.comparitech.com/blog/information-security/juice-jacking/
- https://blogs.blackberry.com/en/2023/04/juice-jacking-advisory
- https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/juice-jacking-rbi-issues-warning-against-charging-mobile-phones-using-public-ports/article67895091.ece
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/juice-jacking-how-hackers-target-smartphones-tethered-to-public-charging-points/article67026433.ece
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2019/05/21/why-you-should-never-use-airport-usb-charging-stations/?sh=630f026a5955
- https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/12/tech/fbi-public-charging-port-warning/index.html
- https://social-innovation.hitachi/en-in/knowledge-hub/hitachi-voice/digital-transformation/
- https://www.inmarsat.com/en/insights/aviation/2022/future-aviation-connectivity.html