#FactCheck- Old March Strike Video from Tehran Falsely Linked to Recent Iran–Israel Attacks

Introduction

Cybercrime in India is developing at a rapid rate in terms of depth and volume, with culprits leveraging technology, anonymity, and social engineering to exploit unsuspecting victims. In a high-profile instance of coordinated police action, the Delhi Police Crime Branch recently cracked a large-scale pan-India cybercrime syndicate with its arms stretching across Delhi, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh. The syndicate used to be involved in a range of cybercrimes, from sextortion and online fraud to fake call centres and cloning of bank accounts. With over ₹5 crore of illicit financial transactions revealed, the operation highlights the critical role of proactive cyber policing, data security and public awareness in India's war against digital crime.

A Multi-State Operation: Crime Network across States

On May 24, 2025, on receiving a tip-off, the Delhi Police conducted a specific raid in New Ashok Nagar to catch a suspect consignment said to be used for cybercrime. This resulted in a multi-layered investigation that revealed a large crime syndicate. Police recovered 28 mobile phones, 30 SIM cards, 15 debit cards, 8 cheque books, and two laptops, equipment said to have been used in crimes ranging from sextortion to fake loan scams.

Three of the initial arrests revealed the use of fake kits like pre-activated SIMs and counterfeit documents to create phoney digital identities and bank accounts. They were being used to bypass KYC norms and make untraceable transactions, illustrating how cyber thieves exploit digital identity as well as financial authentication loopholes in the system.

Fake Call Centre Falsely Claiming to be a Lender

Tracing the leads, the investigation then led the police to Mundka, a semi-residential and industrial area in Delhi, where a fake call centre in the name of a loan assistance service was operating. Suspects were allegedly operating the business. With deceptive scripts, their telemarketing staff lured victims with the offer of instant personal loans. When a prospective victim replied favorably and was willing to go further, he was asked to send identification documents and was then forced to pay a "processing fee." Once the payment was made, the accused would cut off contact immediately, leaving the victims shortchanged.

During the raid, seven individuals were apprehended, six of whom were trained tele-callers with a reasonable level of technical skill. In spite of possessing educational certificates and receiving a meagre pay of between ₹8,000 and ₹9,000 a month, these individuals had been enticed into the cybercrime network, demonstrating how educated youth are now more commonly being exploited or recruited by such scam networks in return for quick money.

Uncovering the Sextortion Racket

The most shocking disclosure was that of a sextortion racket being run from New Ashok Nagar, a residential area located in West Delhi, New Delhi. Suspects tricked victims with fraudulent Facebook profiles, contacted them on Messenger, and then changed to WhatsApp video calls. Pornographic videos were played on such calls while the reactions of the victim were secretly recorded. These were later utilised for extortion by threatening to share them with the whole world. The ability of such a group to blackmail and psychologically manipulate the victims indicates the psychological nature of cybercrime and the need for online safety education.

Impact and Significance: A Wake-Up Call for Law Enforcement and Public Awareness

This crackdown is uncovering some ominous trends that reflect the changing face of cybercrime in India. The syndicate's framework highlights the organised and multi-state nature of cybercrime, mostly operating through systemic loopholes. Misuse of social media sites and fintech apps is also rampant, and these are being leveraged for scams, sextortion, and monetary fraud. One of the most concerning trends is young people becoming more engaged in cybercrime, either out of economic necessity or enticed by easy cash. Most of these scams increasingly involve psychological manipulation, particularly in sextortion, where shame and fear are employed as tools. Digital identity fraud has also been facilitated through false documents and lenient Know Your Customer (KYC) checks, with fraudsters being able to evade verification processes.

These observations underscore the necessity of strong reporting channels. There also needs to be an urgent implementation of stringent verification standards in the telecom and banking industries, along with extensive community-level digital literacy initiatives to sensitise citizens to online threats and preventive measures.

CyberPeace Vision: Building a Safe Digital India

India needs a multi-level cyber security approach, comprising people awareness, AI-driven detection systems, and coordination of inter-state policing. Precedence needs to be given to:

• Capacity building of cyber police units.
• Real-time exchange of scam intelligence among law enforcement.
• Schools, colleges, and workplaces should be aware of digital hygiene.
• Rehabilitation of cyber-offenders, especially youth.
• Countering online misinformation and disinformation through fact-checking and public education campaigns
• Ensuring inclusivity in cyber safety policies so vulnerable populations, including rural users, senior citizens, and linguistic minorities, are not left behind

The breakdown of the syndicate is a major victory, but the absence of difficulty with which these networks function highlights the need for cybercrime prevention initiatives, not after the fact. 

Conclusion 

The Delhi Police bust of a pan-India cybercrime gang is evidence of the increasing reach and audacity of cyber crooks from one corner of India to another. From sextortion and social engineering to financial fraud and identity theft on the web, the bust demonstrates how deep and pervasive cybercrime gangs have become. It is also a reminder that anyone can get entangled and that education, awareness, and early reporting are our best defence. With India's online presence expanding day by day, our collective cyber awareness must keep pace. The fight against cybercrime will not be won only by arrests, but through a national effort to secure our digital spaces.

‍

References

1. https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/delhi-police-cyber-crime-syndicate-10047218/
2. https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/delhi-police-bust-pan-india-cybercrime-syndicate/article69652694.ece#:~:text=The%20Delhi%20police%20have%20dismantled,and%20an%20orchestrated%20sextortion%20racket.
3. https://cybercrime.gov.in/
4. https://www.ncrb.gov.in/
5. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/save/online-scams-are-on-the-rise-learn-about-the-latest-tricks-fraudsters-are-using-to-identify-frauds-and-protect-yourself/articleshow/114162295.cms?from=mdr

‍

Executive Summary
‍
‍

Amid the ongoing tensions involving the United States, Israel, and Iran, a video of a cargo ship engulfed in flames is being widely shared across social media platforms. The clip shows a vessel burning intensely at sea, with users claiming that Iran targeted the ship with a drone for attempting to cross the Strait of Hormuz without permission. Some users have also claimed that the destroyed vessel was a Pakistani-flagged oil tanker hit by Iranian missiles. However, research by CyberPeace found the claim to be false. Our verification also reveals that the viral video is being misrepresented.

‍

Claim

‍

Social media users, including an X (formerly Twitter) account named “IranDefenceForce,” shared the video claiming that Iran targeted an oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz for allegedly violating restrictions.

‍

• https://x.com/IranDefenceForc/status/2037436345501782308
• https://perma.cc/PAK5-JQ6Y 

‍

‍

Fact Check

‍

A keyword-based news search led us to multiple credible reports mentioning a statement by Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. According to reports, Iran had allowed ships from “friendly countries” including India, China, Russia, Iraq, and Pakistan to pass through the Strait of Hormuz.

• https://x.com/IranDefenceForc/status/2037436345501782308?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E203743 

‍

‍

A March 26, 2026 report by The Hindu stated that Araghchi also emphasized Iran’s assertion of sovereignty over the strategic waterway connecting the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. The same statement was also shared via the official X handle of the Iranian Consulate in Mumbai. During a frame-by-frame analysis of the viral video, we noticed the word “SAFEEN” written on a part of the ship. Using this clue, we conducted a targeted news search and found a report by Reuters dated March 4, 2026.

‍

• https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/malta-flagged-container-ship-hit-by-projectile-hormuz-vessel-abandoned-sources-2026-03-04/ 

‍

‍

‍

According to the report, a Malta-flagged container ship named Safeen Prestige was damaged in an attack while heading toward the Strait of Hormuz. Shipping sources cited in the report stated that the vessel was struck around 1109 GMT while sailing eastward, approximately two nautical miles north of Oman. The ship had reportedly departed from Sharjah Port in the United Arab Emirates but was damaged before reaching its destination. Its last known location was in the Persian Gulf. Additionally, earlier this month, another cargo vessel named Mayuri Naree was also attacked near Iran’s Qeshm Island. As per Reuters, an explosion caused a fire in the engine room, after which 20 crew members were rescued by the Omani navy, while three remained missing.

‍

Conclusion

‍

The viral video does not show Iran targeting a Pakistani oil tanker for violating restrictions in the Strait of Hormuz. In reality, the clip features the Malta-flagged container ship Safeen Prestige, which was damaged in an unidentified attack in the Persian Gulf. The claim being circulated on social media is misleading.

‍

On 25 September 2026, at UN Headquarters in New York, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar signed the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime on the sidelines of the 81st session of the UN General Assembly, calling it a step that "strengthens international cooperation for a safer digital future."

 The signature places India among the growing list of nations joining what is officially the first comprehensive global treaty dedicated to cybercrime. What Jaishankar's brief statement did not mention is that this same treaty has spent the better part of three years drawing sustained, detailed criticism from human rights organisations, technology companies, and digital rights groups, who argue it risks becoming a tool for surveillance rather than a tool against crime.

A Conversation CyberPeace Has Been Having for Years

For CyberPeace, India’s signature is not an isolated development but the latest chapter in a conversation the organisation has been following since the Convention was still being negotiated.

In December 2024, CyberPeace published its analysis of the emerging UN Convention against Cybercrime, examining its objectives, proposed offences, mechanisms for international cooperation, electronic evidence and its relationship with the Budapest Convention. The analysis also highlighted an important principle embedded in the emerging framework: that stronger cybercrime enforcement must operate alongside due process, privacy and human-rights safeguards.

That conversation continued in October 2025, when CyberPeace published The Digital Leviathan: The UN Cybercrime Treaty and the Future of Global Governance. The piece examined the Convention not merely as a cybercrime instrument, but as part of a larger evolution in global digital governance, particularly around cross-border evidence, international cooperation and the changing architecture of cyber sovereignty.

And in August 2026, CyberPeace returned to the question from the operational side in The World Is Rewriting the Rules Against Cyber-Enabled Transnational Crime. The analysis placed the Convention alongside the wider international response to transnational cyber-enabled crime, including scam networks, financial fraud and increasingly sophisticated criminal ecosystems that operate across multiple jurisdictions.

What the Convention actually is

The treaty's full, formal title is unusually descriptive for a UN instrument: the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime, Strengthening International Cooperation for Combating Certain Crimes Committed by Means of Information and Communications Technology Systems and for the Sharing of Evidence in Electronic Form of Serious Crimes. The UN General Assembly adopted it unanimously on 24 December 2024, following three years of negotiation, and it opened for signature at a ceremony in Hanoi, Vietnam, in October 2025. It will remain open for signature at UN Headquarters through 31 December 2026, and comes into force ninety days after the fortieth country ratifies it.

At its core, the Convention gives signatory states a shared legal framework for two things: preventing and prosecuting offences committed through digital systems, and cooperating across borders when evidence, offenders, or victims of a crime are scattered across multiple jurisdictions, a structural problem that has long frustrated cybercrime investigations. It also includes provisions specifically addressing the recovery of criminal proceeds, adding a financial dimension that lets states cooperate not just on prosecuting offenders but on tracing and reclaiming stolen money that has moved across borders, often through mule accounts and shell transactions designed to outrun any single country's jurisdiction.

Why India signed, in its own words

Jaishankar's public reasoning was concise. Cybercrime, in the government's framing, does not respect national boundaries, and India's own cybercrime caseload, spanning cross-border financial fraud, romance scams, and organised online extortion networks often operating from outside India's borders, has repeatedly run into exactly the jurisdictional walls this Convention is designed to lower. Prof. Triveni Singh, a well known cybercrime expert and former IPS officer, put the practical case plainly: "Cybercrime does not stop at national borders. Criminals can operate from one country and target victims in another. This convention can help countries share evidence and work together faster. For India, stronger international cooperation can make it easier to investigate cross-border cyber fraud and trace stolen money." 

The part the announcement leaves out

Here is where the story gets considerably more complicated than a signing ceremony photo suggests. Since before the Convention's text was even finalised, a wide coalition of digital rights organisations, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Human Rights Watch, the Global Network Initiative, and Privacy International, has warned that the treaty's language is dangerously broad, and that its safeguards against misuse are considerably weaker than they need to be.

Cisco, one of the few major technology companies to comment publicly, stated the Convention does not do enough to "sufficiently protect basic human rights." UN Secretary-General António Guterres, notably, has himself urged countries to sign and ratify the Convention while simultaneously calling for its implementation to be "rooted in human rights," a somewhat unusual dual message from the very institution that produced the text, and one that implicitly acknowledges the concerns raised against it.

Where this leaves India

None of this means India's signature was unwarranted. The jurisdictional friction Prof. Triveni Singh described is real and well documented, and a shared international framework for evidence sharing genuinely could accelerate investigations that currently stall for months while agencies wait on slow, bilateral mutual legal assistance requests. India's existing domestic cybercrime coordination architecture is already substantial, spanning I4C, the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal, and newer mechanisms like the Citizen Financial Cyber Fraud Reporting and Management System and the Sahyog platform, and a global treaty that maps onto this existing infrastructure could genuinely close gaps that purely domestic tools cannot reach, particularly in cases where the perpetrator, the server, and the victim all sit in different countries, a pattern that has become close to the default in organised online financial fraud rather than the exception.

But the criticisms levelled at the Convention are not fringe objections; they come from some of the most established digital rights organisations in the world, and they focus specifically on the treaty's most powerful surveillance and cross-border cooperation provisions, the very mechanisms India will now need to operationalise domestically. Signing the Convention is also only the first procedural step; India's obligations under it will not take practical effect until the instrument is ratified domestically, a process that typically allows room for a signatory state to clarify how broadly or narrowly it intends to apply the treaty's more expansive provisions. How India chooses to implement those provisions, whether through the kind of judicial oversight and narrow, offence-specific application human rights groups have called for, or through the broader interpretation the treaty's text technically permits, will likely determine whether this Convention becomes a genuine tool against fraud and organised cybercrime, or a broader instrument whose reach eventually extends well past the digital offences it was signed to address.

References

• The420.in, "India Signs UN Cybercrime Convention to Strengthen Global Fight Against Digital Crime." ANI, "EAM Jaishankar signs UN Convention against Cybercrime on UNGA sidelines." https://aninews.in/news/world/us/eam-jaishankar-signs-un-convention-against-cybercrime-on-unga-sidelines20260926063207/
• Ministry of Cyber Affairs, "India signs UN Convention against Cybercrime at UNGA 81." https://ministryofcyberaffairs.com/news/india-signs-un-convention-against-cybercrime-at-unga-81-95b7e43b-7e29-4722-a4a7-304bca55b71c
•  Electronic Frontier Foundation, "UN Cybercrime Convention Negotiations Enter Final Phase With Troubling Surveillance Powers Still on the Table."  https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/un-cybercrime-convention-negotiations-enter-final-phase-troubling-surveillance
• Electronic Frontier Foundation, "First Draft of UN Cybercrime Convention Drops Troubling Provisions, But Dangerous And Open-Ended Cross Border Surveillance Powers Are Still on the Table."
• https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/07/first-draft-un-cybercrime-treaty-drops-troubling-provisions-dangerous-and-open
• Global Network Initiative, "GNI Calls on Member States Not to Support the UN Cybercrime Convention." https://globalnetworkinitiative.org/gni-statement-on-uncc/
• Just Security, "The UN Cybercrime Convention: Analyzing the Risks to Human Rights and Global Privacy." https://www.justsecurity.org/98738/cybercrime-convention-human-rights/
• TechRadar Pro, "UN cybercrime convention inadequate, says Human Rights Watch." https://techradar.com/pro/un-cybercrime-convention-inadequate-says-human-rights-watch
• Digital Watch Observatory, "Comparative analysis: the Budapest Convention vs the UN Convention Against Cybercrime." https://dig.watch/updates/comparative-analysis-the-budapest-convention-vs-the-un-convention-against-cybercrime
• epicenter.works, "Cybercrime Convention: Cross-Border Human Rights Violations." https://epicenter.works/en/content/cybercrime-convention-cross-border-human-rights-violations
• UN Press, "Secretary-General Urges All Countries to Sign, Ratify New UN Convention against Cybercrime, Calls for Solutions Rooted in Human Rights." https://press.un.org/en/2025/sgsm22961.doc.htm
• https://cyberpeace.org/resources/blogs/the-digital-leviathan-the-un-cybercrime-treaty-and-the-future-of-global-governance 
• https://cyberpeace.org/resources/blogs/the-world-is-rewriting-the-rules-against-cyber-enabled-transnational-crime 

‍