#FactCheck-Old Bengal Panchayat Poll Video Falsely Linked to 2026 Assembly Elections

Introduction

Not every major breach begins with a sophisticated new exploit. Sometimes it begins with a device nobody remembered to update, and this one began exactly that way, at scale. Security researchers have disclosed a campaign that compromised more than 14,530 internet connected cameras made by Dahua Technology, (one of the world's largest surveillance equipment manufacturers), using a mix of stolen credentials, two long known authentication flaws, and a peer to peer relay technique that let attackers reach devices tucked behind home and office routers. The operation, tracked by researchers at Hunt.io, has been named Operation CameraSwarm. It ran between June 17 and July 22, 2026, and was reconstructed almost entirely from an exposed 407 megabyte working directory the attackers themselves left accessible, containing over 2,600 files, campaign logs, shell history, and tooling. Confirmed compromises were concentrated in Ukraine and Russia, and researchers described the operators/attackers as Russian speaking based on language artifacts found in the recovered material, suggesting the campaign was most plausibly built around surveillance or access relevant to the ongoing conflict between the two countries, though no formal attribution to a named threat actor or state entity has been established or claimed. What makes this worth understanding in detail is not just the scale, though 14,500 compromised cameras is a serious number, but how mundane the actual break in methods were. None of this depended on the attackers discovering some brand new, unknown flaw, the kind of vulnerability security researchers call a ‘zero day’. It depended on something far more ordinary: thousands of devices running years-old software that had never been patched, combined with cheap automated tools that could try weak passwords and known exploits at scale.

What is Dahua, and why does this matter

Dahua Technology, founded in Hangzhou in 2001, is a publicly traded, partially state owned Chinese company and the world's second largest video surveillance manufacturer by revenue, trailing only fellow Chinese firm Hikvision. Its cameras, digital video recorders, and network video recorders are sold in roughly 180 countries through more than 2,100 partners, and the company has shipped tens of millions of devices into homes, retail stores, offices, and public infrastructure worldwide. That scale is precisely what makes any systemic vulnerability in Dahua's product line consequential well beyond a single country or sector.

How the attackers actually got in

Hunt.io attributed the compromises to three distinct attack paths. The largest, by far, was straightforward credential attacks, essentially automated login guessing using weak, default, or previously leaked passwords, which researchers traced to 12,324 unique IP addresses across more than 13,000 recorded campaign attempts. The second path exploited two authentication bypass flaws, catalogued as CVE-2021-33044 and CVE-2021-33045, both rated a severe 9.8 out of 10 on the current CVSS severity scale used by the US National Vulnerability Database. These are not new vulnerabilities. They were publicly disclosed back in 2021, and Dahua issued fixed firmware for them years ago, yet both remain listed today on the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, a designation reserved specifically for flaws still being actively exploited in the wild despite available patches. The third and most technically interesting path involved a peer to peer, or P2P, relay mechanism built into Dahua's own Easy4IP cloud infrastructure, a system designed to let users remotely access their camera without manually configuring network settings. Security firm ITRES Labs, which documented this exposure separately in 2025, found that on firmware released before mid-2024, simply knowing a device's serial number was enough to establish a connection route through Dahua's relay servers before the camera's own login check ever kicked in, a design gap that let attackers reach devices even when they sat behind network address translation, the technical barrier that normally shields home devices from direct internet exposure. Hunt.io's recovered operator logs claimed an extraordinary 89.4 percent of live serial numbers tested returned an open channel without any authentication at all, though it is worth noting that figure comes solely from the attackers' own recovered data and has not been independently verified by Dahua, ITRES Labs, or any public incident response body as of this writing. Beyond the initial break in, the campaign also planted 1,923 cameras with a persistent account, essentially a backdoor login the operators could return to later, and researchers found evidence suggesting parts of the toolkit may have been built specifically to hand off access to a third party, though no confirmed link to a named threat actor or state sponsor has been established.

Why cameras remain such a persistent target

Internet connected cameras occupy an unusual position in the broader device ecosystem. Unlike a laptop or phone, they are rarely patched by an end user paying regular attention, they are often installed once and forgotten, and many owners never change the default credentials shipped from the factory. A compromised camera also offers an attacker something more than a foothold, live or recorded video feeds of homes, businesses, and sometimes sensitive facilities, which carries value well beyond the kind of access a compromised laptop typically provides.

CyberPeace Advisory | What device owners should do now

For anyone running Dahua surveillance equipment, or any internet connected camera system, several concrete steps meaningfully reduce exposure.

For Dahua device owners specifically:

Two steps address the exact mechanisms this campaign exploited.

• First, check the device's firmware version against Dahua's official download portal and apply the latest available update immediately, since the fixes for both 2021 authentication bypass vulnerabilities have existed for years and simply have not been applied on thousands of devices.
• Second, disable the P2P or Easy4IP remote access feature entirely unless it is actively required, since this is the exact mechanism the third attack path, the serial number based relay, relied on to reach cameras without any login check at all.

For any internet connected camera system, including in India:

The remaining precautions apply regardless of manufacturer, and are worth following on any brand of camera, DVR, or NVR connected to the internet.

• Replace default or weak passwords with strong, unique credentials on every camera and recorder, and remove any unused or unrecognised accounts, since the persistent account technique this campaign used depends entirely on unnoticed access surviving unchecked.
• Place surveillance devices on a segmented network separate from computers and phones, so that a compromised camera cannot become a stepping stone into more sensitive systems.
• Periodically audit which devices on a home or office network are internet facing at all, since many cameras end up exposed simply because remote access was left switched on by default and nobody thought to check.
• And where a device offers the option, disable any built in peer to peer or cloud relay convenience feature unless genuinely needed, since the underlying design pattern this campaign exploited, a remote access shortcut that runs before proper authentication.Is not unique to Dahua and has shown up across other camera brands in the past.

‍

The view from India

This disclosure lands at a particularly relevant moment for India, which enforced sweeping new restrictions on Chinese origin CCTV equipment earlier this year. Since April 1, 2026, internet connected surveillance cameras sold in India have been required to carry Standardisation Testing and Quality Certification under Essential Requirements norms first introduced by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology in April 2024, It's a country-of-origin requirement under the Essential Requirements norms (introduced by India's Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology in April 2024), manufacturers must disclose the origin of key components like the System-on-Chip (SoC), and devices using Chinese-origin chipsets are reportedly not being granted approval by certifying authorities. Since Dahua's cameras, like Hikvision's and TP-Link's, generally rely on Chinese-made chipsets, the practical effect is that their products haven't received STQC certification, which functions as a blanket exclusion without the government needing to name any single company in the rule text itself. The stated rationale for that policy, concerns over hidden backdoor access, transmission of data to foreign servers, and deployment near sensitive locations, reads almost like a preview of exactly the kind of exposure Operation CameraSwarm has now documented in the wild. It is worth being precise here: the restriction applies to new sales, not existing installations, and CameraSwarm's confirmed victims were concentrated in Ukraine and Russia rather than India. But the underlying lesson travels well beyond any one country's borders. A camera manufactured with a convenience feature that bypasses its own login check, sitting unpatched for years despite a fix being publicly available, is a vulnerability that does not respect national boundaries, and India's decision to tighten certification requirements before an incident of this scale surfaced looks, in hindsight, considerably more prudent than reactive.

References

1. The Hacker News, "Hackers Compromised 14,500+ Dahua Devices Using Credential Attacks, Auth Bypasses, and P2P." August 19, 2026. https://thehackernews.com/2026/08/hackers-compromised-14500-dahua-devices.html
2. Hunt.io, "Operation CameraSwarm: Dahua Cameras Compromised." https://hunt.io/blog/operation-cameraswarm-dahua-cameras-compromised
3. ITRES Labs, "Dahua Beyond CVE-2025-31702: P2P Relay Exposure." October 29, 2025. https://labs.itresit.es/2025/10/29/dahua-beyond-cve-2025-31702-p2p-relay-exposure?
4. Dahua Security, "DHCC-SA-202106-001: Security Advisory - Identity Authentication Bypass Vulnerability Found in Some Dahua Products." https://www.dahuasecurity.com/about-dahua/trust-center/dahua-psirt/dhcc-sa-202106-001%3Asecurity-advisory---identity-authentication-bypass-vulnerability-found-in-some-dahua-products
5. National Vulnerability Database, "CVE-2021-33044 Detail." https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-33044
6. CISA, "Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalog." https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog
7. Business Standard, "India to ban Chinese CCTV from Apr 1 as security concerns reshape market." https://www.business-standard.com/industry/news/india-ban-chinese-cctv-government-security-concerns-hikvision-dahua-market-126033000316_1.html
8. PTC News, "India CCTV ban 2026: Hikvision, Dahua face STQC block as new security rules begin." https://www.ptcnews.tv/amp/nation/india-cctv-ban-hikvision-dahua-stqc-rules-2026-4422961
9. Uyghur Human Rights Project, "Surveillance Tech Series: Dahua's Links to Human Rights Abuses in East Turkistan." https://uhrp.org/report/dahuas-links-to-human-rights-abuses-in-east-turkistan/

‍

Introduction

‍
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has transcended its role as a futuristic tool; it is already an integral part of the decision-making process in various sectors, including governance, the medical field, education, security, and the economy, worldwide. On the one hand, there are concerns about the nature of AI, its advantages and disadvantages, and the risks it may pose to the world. There are also doubts about the technology’s capacity to provide effective solutions, especially when threats such as misinformation, cybercrime, and deepfakes are becoming more common.

Recently, global leaders have reiterated that the use of AI should continue to be human-centric, transparent, and governed responsibly. The issue of offering unbridled access to innovators, while also preventing harm, is a dilemma that must be resolved.

‍

AI as a Global Public Good

‍

In earlier times only the most influential states and large corporations controlled the supply and use of advanced technologies, and they guarded them as national strategic assets. In contrast, AI has emerged as a digital innovation that exists and evolves within a deeply interconnected environment, which makes access far more distributed than before. Usage of AI in a specific country will not only bring its pros and cons to that particular place, but the rest of the world as well. For instance, deepfake scams and biased algorithms will not only affect the people in the country where they are created but also in all other countries where such people might be doing business or communicating. 

‍

The Growing Threat of AI Misuse

‍

• Deepfakes, Crime, and Digital Terrorism
  The application of artificial intelligence in the wrong way is quickly becoming one of the main security problems. Deepfake technology is being used to carry out electoral misinformation spread, communicate lies, and create false narratives. Cybercriminals are now making use of AI to make phishing attacks faster and more efficient, hack into security systems, and come up with elaborate social engineering tactics. In the case of extremist groups, AI has the power to give a better quality of propaganda, recruitment, and coordination.

‍

• Solution - Human Oversight and Safety-by-Design
  To overcome these dangers, a global AI system must be developed based on the principles of safety-by-design. This means incorporating moral safeguards right from the development phase rather than reacting after the damage is done. Moreover, human control is just as vital. Artificial intelligence (AI) systems that influence public confidence, security, or human rights should always be under the control of human decision-makers. Automated decision-making where there is no openness or the possibility of auditing could lead to black-box systems being developed, where the assignment of responsibility is unclear.

‍

Three Pillars of a Responsible AI Framework 

‍

1. Equitable Access to AI Technologies
   One of the major hindrances to global AI development is the non-uniformity of access. The provision of high-end computing capability, data infrastructure, and AI research resources is still highly localised in some areas. A sustainable framework needs to be set up so that smaller countries, rural areas, and people speaking different languages will also be able to share the benefits of AI. The distribution of access fairly will be a gradual process, but at the same time, it will lead to the creation of new ideas and improvements in the different places where the local markets are. Thus, there would be no digital divide, and the AI future would not be exclusively determined by the wealthy economies.
2. Population-Level Skilling and Talent Readiness
   AI will have an impact on worldwide working areas. Thus, societies must not only equip their people with the existing job skills but also with the future technology-based skills. Massive AI literacy programs, digital competencies enhancement, and cross-disciplinary education are very important. Forecasting human resources for roles in AI governance, data ethics, cyber security, and modern technologies will help prevent large scale displacement while also promoting growth that is genuinely inclusive.
3. Responsible and Human-Centric Deployment
   Adoption of Responsible AI makes sure that technology is used for social good and not just for making profits. The human-centred AI directs its applications to the sectors like healthcare, agriculture, education, disaster management, and public services, especially the underserved regions in the world that are most in need of these innovations. This strategy guarantees that progress in technology will improve human life instead of making the situation worse for the poor or taking away the responsibility from humans.

‍

Need for a Global AI Governance Framework

‍

• Why International Cooperation Matters
  AI governance cannot be fragmented. Different national regulations lead to the creation of loopholes that allow bad actors to operate in different countries. Hence, global coordination and harmonisation of safety frameworks is of utmost importance. A single AI governance framework should stipulate: 

• Clear responsible prohibition on AI misuse in terrorism, deepfakes, and cybercrime .
• Transparency and algorithm audits as a compulsory requirement.
• Independent global oversight bodies.
• Ethical codes of conduct in harmony with humanitarian laws.

Framework like this makes it clear that AI will be shaped by common values rather than being subject to the influence of different interest groups.

‍

• Talent Mobility and Open Innovation
  If AI is to be universally accepted, then global mobility of talent must be made easier. The flow of innovation takes place when the interaction between researchers, engineers, and policymakers is not limited by borders. 

‍

• AI, Equity, and Global Development
  The rapid concentration of technology in a few hands poses the risk of widening the gap in equality among countries. Most developing countries are facing the problems of poor infrastructure, lack of education and digital resources. By regarding them only as technology markets and not as partners in innovation, they become even more isolated from the mainstream of development. An AI development mix of human-centred and technology-driven must consider that the global stillness is broken only by the inclusion of the participation of the whole world. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic has already demonstrated how technology can be a major factor in the building of healthcare and crisis resilience. As a matter of fact, when fairly used, AI has a significant role to play in the realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals.

‍

Conclusion

‍
AI is located at a crucial junction. It can either enhance human progress or increase the digital risks. Making sure that AI is a global good goes beyond mere sophisticated technology; it requires moral leadership, inclusion in governance, and collaboration between countries. Preventing misuse by means of openness, supervision by humans, and policies that are responsible will be vital in keeping public trust. Properly guided, AI can make society more resilient, speed up development, and empower future generations. The future we choose is determined by how responsibly we act today.

As PM Modi stated ‘AI should serve as a global good, and at the same time nations must stay vigilant against its misuse’. CyberPeace reinforces this vision by advocating responsible innovation and a secure digital future for all.

‍

References

‍

• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/ai-a-global-good-but-must-guard-against-misuse-pm-101763922179359.html
• https://www.deccanherald.com/india/g20-summit-pm-modi-goes-against-donald-trumps-stand-seeks-global-governance-for-ai-3807928
• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/need-global-compact-to-prevent-ai-misuse-pm-modi/articleshow/125525379.cms

‍

Executive Summary

A video circulating on social media shows a woman using abusive language in front of a camera. Users sharing the clip claim that the woman is a professor at Galgotias University and that the video exposes her alleged reality. However, an research  by CyberPeace found the claim to be misleading. The probe revealed that the woman seen in the viral video has no connection with Galgotias University and is not a professor there.Fact-checking further showed that the video is not recent but around seven years old. The woman featured in the clip was identified as Shubhrastha, who is a political strategist by profession.

‍

Claim:

‍

A user on X (formerly Twitter) shared the viral video on February 18, 2026, claiming: “A ‘class in abuse studies’ at Galgotias University? An obscene video of a professor teaching ethics has gone viral. Another shameful chapter has been added to the list of controversies surrounding Galgotias University.” The post further alleged that after falsely claiming a Chinese robot as its own, the university’s “Culture and Ethics” faculty member was seen publicly using abusive language in the viral clip. The post link and its archived version are provided below:

‍

• https://x.com/UNNEWS_24X7/status/2024064255142797649
• https://archive.ph/yjzTE 

‍

‍

Fact Check:

‍

To verify the authenticity of the viral claim, we extracted key frames from the video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the research , we found the same video uploaded on the Indian Spectator’s YouTube channel on June 9, 2018

‍

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gx103szHCVI 

‍

‍

The video was also found on another YouTube channel, where it had been uploaded on June 12, 2018.

‍

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNpJmNk4jDc

‍

‍

Conclusion

‍

The research  clearly establishes that the woman seen in the viral video has no association with Galgotias University and is not a professor there. The clip is also not recent but approximately seven years old. The woman in the video was identified as Shubhrastha, a political strategist.

‍