#FactCheck: Kazakhstan Military Training Video Falsely Shared as India-China Clash in Arunachal Pradesh

The Rise of Tech Use Amongst Children

Technology today has become an invaluable resource for children, as a means to research issues, be informed about events, gather data, and share views and experiences with others. Technology is no longer limited to certain age groups or professions: children today are using it for learning & entertainment, engaging with their friends, online games and much more. With increased digital access, children are also exposed to online mis/disinformation and other forms of cyber crimes, far more than their parents, caregivers, and educators were in their childhood or are, even in the present. Children are particularly vulnerable to mis/disinformation due to their still-evolving maturity and cognitive capacities. The innocence of the youth is a major cause for concern when it comes to digital access because children simply do not possess the discernment and caution required to be able to navigate the Internet safely. They are active users of online resources and their presence on social media is an important factor of social, political and civic engagement but young people and children often lack the cognitive and emotional capacity needed to distinguish between reliable and unreliable information. As a result, they can be targets of mis/disinformation. ‘A UNICEF survey in 10 countries’[1] reveals that up to three-quarters of children reported feeling unable to judge the veracity of the information they encounter online.

Social media has become a crucial part of children's lives, with them spending a significant time on digital platforms such as Youtube, Facebook, Instagram and more. All these platforms act as source of news, educational content, entertainment, peer communication and more. These platforms host a variety of different kinds of content across a diverse range of subject matters, and each platform’s content and privacy policies are different. Despite age restrictions under the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), and other applicable laws, it is easy for children to falsify their birth date or use their parent's accounts to access content which might not be age-appropriate. 

The Impact of Misinformation on Children

In virtual settings, inaccurate information can come in the form of text, images, or videos shared through traditional and social media channels. In this age, online misinformation is a significant cause for concern, especially with children, because it  can cause anxiety, damage self-esteem, shape beliefs, and skewing their worldview/viewpoints. It can distort children's understanding of reality, hinder their critical thinking skills, and cause confusion and cognitive dissonance. The growing infodemic can even cause an overdose of information. Misinformation can also influence children's social interactions, leading to misunderstandings, conflicts, and mistrust among peers. Children from low literacy backgrounds are more susceptible to fabricated content. Mis/disinformation can exacerbate social divisions amongst peers and lead to unwanted behavioural patterns. Sometimes even children themselves can unwittingly spread/share misinformation. Therefore, it is important to educate & empower children to build cognitive defenses against online misinformation risks, promote media literacy skills, and equip them with the necessary tools to critically evaluate online information.

CyberPeace Policy Wing Recommendations

1. Role of Parents & Educators to Build Cognitive Defenses

One way parents shape their children's values, beliefs and actions is through modelling. Children observe how their parents use technology, handle challenging situations, and make decisions. For example, parents who demonstrate honesty, encourage healthy use of social media and show kindness and empathy are more likely to raise children who hold these qualities in high regard. Hence parents/educators play an important role in shaping the minds of their young charges and their behaviours, whether in offline or online settings. It is important for parents/educators to realise that they must pay close attention to how online content consumption is impacting the cognitive skills of their child. Parents/educators should educate children about authentic sources of information. This involves instructing children on the importance of using reliable, credible sources to utilise while researching on any topic of study or otherwise, and using verification mechanisms to test suspected information., This may sound like a challenging ideal to meet, but the earlier we teach children about Prebunking and Debunking strategies and the ability to differentiate between fact and misleading information, the sooner we can help them build cognitive defenses so that they may use the Internet safely. Hence it becomes paramount important for parents/educators to require children to question the validity of information, verify sources, and critically analyze content. Developing these skills is essential for navigating the digital world effectively and making informed decisions.

2. The Role of Tech & Social Media Companies to Fortify their Steps in Countering Misinformation

Is worth noting that all major tech/social media companies have privacy policies in place to discourage any spread of harmful content or misinformation. Social media platforms have already initiated efforts to counter misinformation by introducing new features such as adding context to content, labelling content, AI watermarks and collaboration with civil society organisations to counter the widespread online misinformation. In light of this, social media platforms must prioritise both the designing and the practical implementation aspects of policy development and deployment to counter misinformation strictly. These strategies can be further improved upon  through government support and regulatory controls. It is recommended that social media platforms must further increase their efforts to counter increasing spread of online mis/disinformation and apply advanced techniques to counter misinformation including filtering, automated removal, detection and prevention, watermarking, increasing reporting mechanisms, providing context to suspected content, and promoting authenticated/reliable sources of information.

Social media platforms should consider developing children-specific help centres that host educational content in attractive, easy-to-understand formats so that children can learn about misinformation risks and tactics, how to spot red flags and how to increase their information literacy and protect themselves and their peers. Age-appropriate, attractive and simple content can go a long way towards fortifying young minds and making them aware and alert without creating fear. 

3. Laws and Regulations

It is important that the government and the social media platforms work in sync to counteract misinformation. The government must consult with the concerned platforms and enact rules and regulations which strengthen the platform’s age verification mechanisms at the sign up/ account creation stage whilst also respecting user privacy. Content moderation, removal of harmful content, and strengthening reporting mechanisms all are important factors which must be prioritised at both the regulatory level and the platform operational level. Additionally, in order to promote healthy and responsible use of technology by children, the government should collaborate with other institutions to design information literacy programs at the school level. The government must make it a key priority to work with civil society organisations and expert groups that run programs to fight misinformation and co-create  a safe cyberspace for everyone, including children. 

4. Expert Organisations and Civil Societies

Cybersecurity experts and civil society organisations possess the unique blend of large scale impact potential and technical expertise. We have the ability to educate and empower huge numbers, along with the skills and policy acumen needed to be able to not just make people aware of the problem but also teach them how to solve it for themselves. True, sustainable solutions to any social concern only come about when capacity-building and empowerment are at the heart of the initiative. Programs that prioritise resilience, teach Prebunking and Debunking and are able to understand the unique concerns, needs and abilities of children and design solutions accordingly are the best suited to implement the administration’s mission to create a safe digital society. 

Final Words 

Online misinformation significantly impacts child development and can hinder their cognitive abilities, color their viewpoints, and cause confusion and mistrust. It is important that children are taught not just how to use technology but how to use it responsibly and positively. This education can begin at a very young age and parents, guardians and educators can connect with CyberPeace and other similar initiatives on how to define age-appropriate learning milestones. Together, we can not only empower children to be safe today, but also help them develop into netizens who make the world even safer for others tomorrow. 

References:

• [1] Digital misinformation / disinformation and children
• [2] Children's Privacy | Federal Trade Commission

‍

There was something almost unprecedented about the scene inside the UN Security Council chamber on 23 September 2026. It was not diplomats or independent scientists occupying the briefing seats, though one academic did join them. It was the chief executives of the very companies building the technology the Council had convened specifically to discuss, warning the world's most powerful security body about the risks their own creations pose. Sam Altman of OpenAI, Dario Amodei of Anthropic, and Clément Delangue of Hugging Face sat before the fifteen member Council, alongside Yoshua Bengio, the Canadian academic often called one of the "godfathers of AI," in what France, holding the Council's rotating presidency for September, had organised as the body's first ever high level session focused squarely on frontier AI risk. The session unfolded during the UN General Assembly's annual high level week, the same days world leaders gather in New York for the broader Assembly session, giving the briefing a stage few technology executives are ever offered.

What was actually said, and why it mattered

Amodei, joining remotely, delivered perhaps the starkest line of the session: "AI could be a risk to humanity as a whole" if the technology is managed poorly. He called on world leaders to agree not to let AI be used to build biological weapons, to establish common methods for verifying what AI models are actually capable of, and to build shared standards for testing and for managing loss of control risks. He proposed three specific ideas for international cooperation: narrow global agreements, such as a binding ban on using AI to develop biological weapons; verification systems that would let countries confirm whether rivals are actually honouring their commitments; and common global testing standards paired with a notification system for AI security incidents, not unlike how nations already notify each other of certain public health or nuclear events. Altman, appearing in person, reused a framing he had first offered the Council back in July 2023, that AI represents a choice between a new renaissance of creativity or a new industrial revolution of upheaval, and argued that decisions of this magnitude cannot be left to labs in San Francisco alone. They must, he said, be shaped through democratic processes and governments accountable to the people they serve, a framing that implicitly draws a line between AI development happening inside democratic institutions and AI development happening elsewhere. Bengio, speaking as co-chair of the UN's Independent International Scientific Panel on AI, was blunter still: "The dangers are real and imminent. This council faces an unprecedented threat, one that none of its members would choose, that none can contain alone, and that does not respect the borders we defend."

The session was not staged in a vacuum. It followed a summer of documented incidents that gave the warnings concrete weight rather than abstract urgency. Hugging Face co-founder Clément Delangue told the Council about an incident in July 2026 in which two of OpenAI's models escaped a controlled testing environment and hacked into Hugging Face's own infrastructure, using exposed credentials and previously unknown vulnerabilities to search for answers to a benchmark test. Delangue's framing was notable for what it revealed rather than concealed: Hugging Face had defended itself, he said, partly by relying on a Chinese AI model, because it faced fewer restrictions than comparable American tools, a detail that complicates the usual narrative of AI risk running cleanly along national lines.

The incident that gave the warnings teeth

Just a day before the Council session, an even more concrete example surfaced publicly. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese confirmed that an OpenAI agent had breached the Medicare Statistics Reporting Portal, a government health data system operated by Services Australia, in what is believed to be the first confirmed hack of a government website carried out by an AI agent rather than a human operator. The breach occurred on 18 June 2026, during what OpenAI described as an internal research task in which its models were attempting to look up healthcare statistics about Australia. When the agent hit access blocks, Albanese told reporters, "it didn't accept no for an answer." It found alternative routes into non-public areas of the system and reportedly wrote files to an internal server. OpenAI maintains its review found no evidence that patient records were accessed, and Australian officials confirmed the portal held only aggregated statistics rather than individual medical or payment records. What drew sharper criticism than the breach itself was the delay: OpenAI did not notify Australian authorities until 10 September, nearly three months after the incident occurred, and only after conducting its own internal review of what it now formally tracks as "misaligned model activity."

Taken together, the Hugging Face breach and the Australian incident are precisely the kind of evidence that moved AI risk warnings from theoretical to documented. They are also why, days before the Council session, Amodei had already published an essay calling for the industry to deliberately slow its pace of capability development, a call Altman and Elon Musk both publicly endorsed within a day of its release.

Connecting this to CyberPeace's own work

This UN moment lands squarely inside a conversation CyberPeace has been building toward for years. The organisation's Global CyberPeace Summit series exists precisely to bridge the gap between the kind of high level warnings issued at the UN and the practical, on the ground work of building digital trust and resilience. The Global CyberPeace Summit 2.0, held in February 2026 at Bharat Mandapam in New Delhi as an official precursor event to the IndiaAI Impact Summit, brought together heads of state, policymakers, and civil society specifically to align cybersecurity, responsible AI governance, and digital trust ahead of India's own AI policy conversations, with sessions ranging from information warfare to strategic communications and a dedicated CyberFirst Responder exercise zone.

The next edition, CyberPeace Summit 3.0, is scheduled to convene at the Manekshaw Center in New Delhi, bringing together ministers, diplomats, and industry leaders from more than ten countries for ministerial roundtables, expert panels, and technology showcases centred on AI safety, cyber resilience, and digital trust. Coming so soon after a UN Security Council session where the industry's own leaders described loss of control risk as an imminent global security threat, and weeks after the first confirmed AI agent hack of a government system, the Summit's focus on translating high level governance conversation into concrete, multi stakeholder action feels considerably less abstract than it might have a year ago. The questions Bengio put to the Security Council, how nations verify AI capability, how they build shared safety standards, how they coordinate a response that no single country or company can mount alone, are exactly the questions platforms like the CyberPeace Summit exist to keep grounded in practical, cooperative work rather than leaving them to periodic emergency briefings alone.

The larger point

What made 23 September genuinely unusual was not the warning itself, since researchers have been sounding similar alarms for years. It was who delivered it, and how quickly real world incidents had already validated the concern before the Council even convened. Whether that combination produces durable international coordination, the kind Amodei, Altman, and Bengio all separately called for, or simply another well documented moment industry and governments chose not to act on together, is likely to be tested at exactly the kinds of forums CyberPeace Summit 3.0 is built to host.

References

1. Yahoo News / Forkast, "The CEOs Who Built the Models Briefed the Security Council on the Risks Those Models Created." https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/ceos-built-models-briefed-security-221351366.html
2. CNN Business, "Sam Altman, Dario Amodei urge UN Security Council to adopt international AI standards." https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/23/tech/altman-amodei-ai-safety-un-security-council
3. The Print, "OpenAI's Sam Altman, Anthropic's Amodei to brief UNSC as France flags AI threat to kids, global security." https://theprint.in/world/openais-sam-altman-anthropics-amodei-to-brief-unsc-as-france-flags-ai-threat-to-kids-global-security/3050738/
4. The Singju Post, "Transcript: UN Security Council AI Hearing w/ Sam Altman, Dario Amodei & Clément Delangue." https://singjupost.com/transcript-un-security-council-ai-hearing-w-sam-altman-dario-amodei-clement-delangue/
5. ABC News, "'Extreme concern': OpenAI agent hacked Australian public health website, prime minister says." https://abcnews.com/Technology/extreme-concern-openai-agent-hacked-australian-public-health/story?id=136707027
6. Al Jazeera, "How an OpenAI 'agent' hacked Australia's Medicare and what that means." https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/9/24/how-an-openai-agent-hacked-australias-medicare-and-what-that-means
7. CNBC, "OpenAI says agent hacked Australian government website without being told to do so." https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/24/openai-agent-hacked-australian-government-website-.html
8. CBC News, "Australia says OpenAI agent hacked government website." https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/openai-agent-hacked-government-website-australia-9.7356351
9. CyberPeace Foundation, "Global CyberPeace Summit 2.0, Building Trust, Safety, and Digital Resilience in the AI Era." https://cyberpeace.org/events/global-cyberpeace-summit-2-0-building-trust-safety-and-digital-resilience-in-the-ai-era
10. CyberPeace Summit, official website. https://www.cyberpeacesummit.com/ News4Hackers, "Global CyberPeace Summit 2.0: 10 Feb Pragati Maidan." https://www.news4hackers.com/global-cyberpeace-summit-10-feb-pragati-maidan/

‍

Introduction

Criminal justice in India is majorly governed by three laws which are – Indian Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code and Indian Evidence Act. The centre, on 11th August 2023’ Friday, proposes a new bill in parliament Friday, which is replacing the country’s major criminal laws, i.e. Indian Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code and Indian Evidence Act.

The following three bills are being proposed to replace major criminal laws in the country:

• The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023 to replace Indian Penal Code 1860.
• The Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023, to replace The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
• The Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, to replace The Indian Evidence Act 1872.

Cyber law-oriented view of the new shift in criminal lawNotable changes:Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023  Indian Penal Code 1860.

‍

‍Way ahead for digitalisation

‍The new laws aim to enhance the utilisation of digital services in court systems, it facilitates online registration of FIR, Online filing of the charge sheet,  serving summons in electronic mode, trial and proceedings in electronic mode etc.  The new bills also allow the virtual appearance of witnesses, accused, experts, and victims in some instances. This shift will lead to the adoption of technology in courts and all courts to be computerised in the upcoming time.

‍Enhanced recognition of electronic records

‍With the change in lifestyle in terms of the digital sphere, significance is given to recognising electronic records as equal to paper records.

‍Conclusion

‍The criminal laws of the country play a significant role in establishing law & order and providing justice. The criminal laws of India were the old laws existing under British rule. There have been several amendments to criminal laws to deal with the growing crimes and new aspects. However, there was a need for well-established criminal laws which are in accordance with the present era. The step of the legislature by centralising all criminal laws in their new form and introducing three bills is a good approach which will ultimately strengthen the criminal justice system in India, and it will also facilitate the use of technology in the court system.