#FactCheck- Old 2019 Video Falsely Shared as Iran Seizing US Ship in Hormuz

Introduction

Social media has emerged as a leading source of communication and information; its relevance cannot be ignored during natural disasters since it is relied upon by governments and disaster relief organisations as a tool for disseminating aid and relief-related resources and communications instantly. During disaster times, social media has emerged as a primary source for affected populations to access information on relief resources; community forums offering aid resources and official government channels for government aid have enabled efficient and timely administration of relief initiatives.

However, given the nature of social media, misinformation risks during natural disasters has also emerged as a primary concern that severely hampers aid administration during natural disasters. The disaster-disinformation network offers some sensationalised influential campaigns against communities at their most vulnerable. Victims who seek reliable resources during natural calamities often reach out to inhospitable campaigns and may experience delayed or lack of access to necessary healthcare, significantly impacting their recovery and survival. This delay can lead to worsening medical conditions and an increased death toll among those affected by the disaster. Victims may lack clear information on the appropriate agencies to seek assistance from, causing confusion and delays in receiving help. 

Misinformation Threat Landscape during Natural Disaster

During the 2018 floods in Kerala, it was noted that a fake video on water leakage from the Mullaperyar Dam created panic among the citizens and negatively impacted the rescue operations. Similarly, in 2017, reports emerged claiming that Hurricane Irma had caused sharks to be displaced onto a Florida highway. Similar stories, accompanied by the same image, resurfaced following Hurricanes Harvey and Florence. The disaster-affected nation may face international criticism and fail to receive necessary support due to its perceived inability to manage the crisis effectively. This lack of confidence from the global community can further exacerbate the challenges faced by the nation, leaving it more vulnerable and isolated in its time of need.

The spread of misinformation through social media severely hinders the administration of aid and relief operations during natural disasters since it hinders first responders' efforts to counteract and reduce the spread of misinformation, rumours, and false information and declines public trust in government, media, and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), who are often the first point of contact for both victims and officials due to their familiarity with the region and the community. In Moldova, it was noted that foreign influence has exploited the ongoing drought to create divisions between the semi-autonomous regions of Transnistria and Gagauzia and the central government in Chisinau. News coverage critical of the government leverages economic and energy insecurities to incite civil unrest in this already unstable region. Additionally, First responders may struggle to locate victims and assist them to safety, complicating rescue operations. The inability to efficiently find and evacuate those in need can result in prolonged exposure to dangerous conditions and a higher risk of injury or death.

Further, international aid from other countries could be impeded, affecting the overall relief effort. Without timely and coordinated support from the global community, the disaster response may be insufficient, leaving many needs unmet. Further, misinformation also impedes military, reducing the effectiveness of rescue and relief operations. Military assistance often plays a crucial role in disaster response, and any delays can hinder efforts to provide immediate and large-scale aid.

Misinformation also creates problems of allocation of relief resources to unaffected areas which resultantly impacts aid processes for regions in actual need. Following the April 2015 earthquake in Nepal, a Facebook post claimed that 300 houses in Dhading needed aid. Shared over 1,000 times, it reached around 350,000 people within 48 hours. The originator aimed to seek help for Ward #4’s villagers via social media. Given the average Facebook user has 350 contacts, the message was widely viewed. However, the need had already been reported on quakemap.org, a crisis-mapping database managed by Kathmandu Living Labs, a week earlier. Helping Hands, a humanitarian group was notified on May 7, and by May 11, Ward #4 received essential food and shelter. The re-sharing and sensationalisation of outdated information could have wasted relief efforts since critical resources would have been redirected to a region that had already been secured.

Policy Recommendations

Perhaps the most important step in combating misinformation during natural disasters is the increasing public education and the rapid, widespread dissemination of early warnings. This was best witnessed in the November 1970 tropical cyclone in southeastern Bangladesh, combined with a high tide, struck southeastern Bangladesh, leaving more than 300,000 people dead and 1.3 million homeless. In May 1985, when a comparable cyclone and storm surge hit the same area, local dissemination of disaster warnings was much improved and the people were better prepared to respond to them. The loss of life, while still high (at about 10,000), the numbers were about 3% of that in 1970. On a similar note, when a devastating cyclone struck the same area of Bangladesh in May 1994, fewer than 1,000 people died. In India, the 1977 cyclone in Andra Pradesh killed 10,000 people, but a similar storm in the same area 13 years later killed only 910. The dramatic difference in mortalities was owed to a new early-warning system connected with radio stations to alert people in low-lying areas. 

Additionally, location-based filtering for monitoring social media during disasters is considered as another best practice to curb misinformation. However, agencies should be aware that this method may miss local information from devices without geolocation enabled. A 2012 Georgia Tech study found that less than 1.4 percent of Twitter content is geolocated. Additionally, a study by Humanity Road and Arizona State University on Hurricane Sandy data indicated a significant decline in geolocation data during weather events.

Alternatively, Publish frequent updates to promote transparency and control the message. In emergency management and disaster recovery, digital volunteers—trusted agents who provide online support—can assist overwhelmed on-site personnel by managing the vast volume of social media data. Trained digital volunteers help direct affected individuals to critical resources and disseminate reliable information. 

Enhancing the quality of communication requires double-verifying information to eliminate ambiguity and reduce the impact of misinformation, rumors, and false information must also be emphasised. This approach helps prevent alert fatigue and "cry wolf" scenarios by ensuring that only accurate, relevant information is disseminated. Prioritizing ground truth over assumptions and swiftly releasing verified information or acknowledging the situation can bolster an agency's credibility. This credibility allows the agency to collaborate effectively with truth amplifiers. Prebunking and Debunking methods are also effective way to counter misinformation and build cognitive defenses to recognise red flags. Additionally, evaluating the relevance of various social media information is crucial for maintaining clear and effective communication.

References

1. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-40399-9#:~:text=Moreover%2C%20misinformation%20can%20create%20unnecessary,impacting%20the%20rescue%20operations29. 
2. https://www.redcross.ca/blog/2023/5/why-misinformation-is-dangerous-especially-during-disasters
3. https://www.soas.ac.uk/about/blog/disinformation-during-natural-disasters-emerging-vulnerability‍
4. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/SMWG_Countering-False-Info-Social-M dia-Disasters-Emergencies_Mar2018-508.pdf

Executive Summary
‍
A video is being widely shared on social media showing what appears to be a military facility coming under heavy aerial bombardment. Soldiers can be seen running for cover as explosions occur, followed by thick plumes of smoke rising from the site. Users sharing the clip claim that tensions in the Middle East have escalated once again and that the United States has launched fresh strikes on Iranian-linked military positions. CyberPeace Research Wing's research found the viral claim to be false. Our research revealed that the circulating video is AI-generated and has no connection with the ongoing tensions between the United States and Iran.

‍

Claim
‍

An Instagram user shared the video claiming that fresh US strikes on Iranian-linked targets had significantly escalated the situation in the Middle East.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZeaatFNv2E/?igsh=aWRvaTZvNTV2aDR3

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZeaatFNv2E/?igsh=aWRvaTZvNTV2aDR3

https://archive.ph/pTtDN 

Fact Check

‍

We extracted several keyframes from the viral video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. The search did not lead to any credible news reports or verified sources related to the footage. We then closely examined the video and observed several visual inconsistencies. In the opening frames, the soldiers, military vehicles, and surrounding objects display unnatural shapes and distortions—artifacts commonly associated with AI-generated content. In the next stage of our research, we analysed the clip using the AI detection tool Sightengine. The analysis indicated that the video is approximately 66 per cent AI-generated, further supporting our findings that the footage is not authentic. 

‍

Another analysis of the recording using the DetectVideo AI tool found a 72 per cent probability that it was generated using artificial intelligence (AI).

‍

‍

Finally, we searched for recent developments related to the US-Iran tensions using relevant keywords on Google. During the search, we found an NDTV report published on July 9, 2026. The report explains that despite ongoing diplomatic engagement, tensions between the United States and Iran continue to persist due to decades-old political, strategic, and geopolitical disputes. It discusses why incidents of military escalation continue to occur despite repeated attempts at dialogue and de-escalation. 

‍

https://ndtv.in/world-news/us-iran-conflict-explained-why-peace-remains-so-elusive-11747960 

‍

‍

Conclusion

‍

Our research found that the viral video is not genuine. It is an AI-generated video being circulated with a false claim linking it to recent US military strikes on Iran. There is no credible evidence to suggest that the video depicts any real incident connected to the current US-Iran conflict.

‍

What are Wi-Fi attacks?

Wi-fi is an important area of cyber security and there is no need for physical cable for the network. Wi-Fi has access to a network signal radius everywhere. The devices and systems can have a network without physical access due to Wi-fi. But everything comes with cons and pros, and if we talk about cybersecurity, it has been established that Wi-fi networks are extremely vulnerable to security breaches and it is very easy to be hacked by hackers. Wi-Fi can be accessed by almost every device in the modern day: it can be smartphones, tablets, computers, and laptops. To know whether someone has been tampering with your personal Wi-Fi there are certain signs that can prove it. The first and most important sign is that your internet speed gets slower, as someone else is using your Wi-Fi surf.

Why would anyone hack someone’s Wi-Fi network?

Usually, hackers hack the network because they want access to the confidential data of someone and they can observe all the online activities and data that have been sent through a network. An unauthorize hacker will pretty much be able to see everything you do online. Wi-Fi allows hackers o view information on sites. Any financial information which is saved in the browser can be accessed by hackers and they can alter it and can alter the content you see online. And all the information saved in Wi-fi networks can be used by hackers for their own benefit, they can sell it, impersonate you, or even take money out of your bank through Wi-Fi.

Avoiding vulnerable Wi-Fi networks

The first and foremost rule of protection is that you should not use public networks if that network is easily open to you then that is also available to others and from others, and someone can who wishes to use your confidential and sensitive information, can access that.  If you really need to access the public network in an urgent situation, then you must make sure to limit your activities while connected. And avoid accessing your online banking or pages that require login information. Also, a good measure to take as well is to always delete your cookies after using public WIFI.

How To Secure Your Home Wi-Fi Network

Your home’s wireless internet connection is your Wi-Fi network. Typically, a wireless router is used, which broadcasts a signal into the atmosphere. You can connect to the internet using that signal. However, if your network is not password-protected, any nearby device can grab the signal off the air and connect to your internet. The benefit of Wi-Fi? Wireless access to the internet is possible. The negative? Your internet activity, including your personal information, may be visible to neighboring users who connect to your unprotected network. Furthermore, if someone uses your network to conduct a crime or send out unauthorized spam, you might be held accountable.

Wi-Fi or Li-Fi? –

The common consensus is that Li-Fi technology is more secure than Wi-Fi. Li-Fi systems can be made more secure by integrating a variety of security features. Although these qualities might appear when Li-Fi is widely used in the near future, it is already thought to be safer because of a number of security features. Since the connection’s characteristics make it simpler to lock connections, limit access, and track users even in the absence of encryption and other security features, Li-Fi is seen as being safer. Li-Fi systems will be able to support new security protocols, which will not only enable high-speed networking but also open the door for innovative security techniques to strengthen connections.

Conclusion

A hacker can sniff the network packets without having to be in the same building where the network is located. As wireless networks communicate through radio waves, a hacker can easily sniff the network from a nearby location. Most attackers use network sniffing to find the SSID and hack a wireless network.

Any wireless network can theoretically be attacked in a number of different ways. Use of the default SSID or password, WPS pin authentication, insufficient access control, and leaving the access point available in open locations are all examples of potential vulnerabilities that could allow for the theft of sensitive data. Kismet’s architecture in WIDS mode may guard against DOS, MiTM, and MAC spoofing attacks. routine software updates on the other hand, the use of firewalls may help defend the network against outside intrusion. The act of finding infrastructure issues that could allow harmful code to be injected into a service, system, or organization is known as ethical hacking. They use this technique to prevent invasions by lawfully breaking into networks and looking for weak spots.