#FactCheck-Viral Claim That Modi’s Jhalmuri Vendor Was an SPG Commando Is False
Executive Summary
A collage of two images circulating on social media is falsely claiming that the street vendor who served jhalmuri to Prime Minister Narendra Modi during an election campaign in Jhargram was actually a personnel from the Special Protection Group (SPG). Research by the CyberPeace Research Wing found the claim to be false and misleading, indicating that it is being shared as part of election-related misinformation. The vendor and the SPG personnel seen in the viral collage are two different individuals.
Claim
An X (formerly Twitter) user, “@Jeetuburdak,” shared the viral collage on April 21, 2026, with the caption: “Another scam! The jhalmuri seller turned out to be an SPG commando.” The post quickly gained traction online.

Fact Check
A close examination of the two images used in the collage shows clear visual differences between the individuals. The person seen in SPG uniform does not match the street vendor who served food to the prime minister. Reverse image searches were conducted using multiple tools to trace the origin of the images. While no verifiable source was found linking the SPG personnel’s image to the vendor, several credible reports and videos featured the actual jhalmuri seller from the campaign event.
- https://x.com/ANI/status/2045859146508177911?s=20
- https://news24online.com/cities/kolkata/who-is-the-man-that-served-jhalmuri-to-pm-modi-know-his-daily-income-and-what-he-talked-about-with-pm/811123/


According to media reports, the prime minister briefly stopped at a roadside stall during the campaign in Jhargram and interacted with the vendor while enjoying jhalmuri. The vendor was later interviewed by multiple outlets, further confirming his identity as a local seller. Additionally, technical facial comparison analysis using online tools also indicated that the two individuals in the viral collage are not the same person.

Conclusion
The claim that the jhalmuri vendor was an SPG commando is false and misleading. The viral collage shows two different individuals, and there is no evidence to support the allegation.
Related Blogs

Executive Summary:
A viral post on X (formerly Twitter) gained much attention, creating a false narrative of recent damage caused by the earthquake in Tibet. Our findings confirmed that the clip was not filmed in Tibet, instead it came from an earthquake that occurred in Japan in the past. The origin of the claim is traced in this report. More to this, analysis and verified findings regarding the evidence have been put in place for further clarification of the misinformation around the video.

Claim:
The viral video shows collapsed infrastructure and significant destruction, with the caption or claims suggesting it is evidence of a recent earthquake in Tibet. Similar claims can be found here and here

Fact Check:
The widely circulated clip, initially claimed to depict the aftermath of the most recent earthquake in Tibet, has been rigorously analyzed and proven to be misattributed. A reverse image search based on the Keyframes of the claimed video revealed that the footage originated from a devastating earthquake in Japan in the past. According to an article published by a Japanese news website, the incident occurred in February 2024. The video was authenticated by news agencies, as it accurately depicted the scenes of destruction reported during that event.

Moreover, the same video was already uploaded on a YouTube channel, which proves that the video was not recent. The architecture, the signboards written in Japanese script, and the vehicles appearing in the video also prove that the footage belongs to Japan, not Tibet. The video shows news from Japan that occurred in the past, proving the video was shared with different context to spread false information.

The video was uploaded on February 2nd, 2024.
Snap from viral video

Snap from Youtube video

Conclusion:
The video viral about the earthquake recently experienced by Tibet is, therefore, wrong as it appears to be old footage from Japan, a previous earthquake experienced by this nation. Thus, the need for information verification, such that doing this helps the spreading of true information to avoid giving false data.
- Claim: A viral video claims to show recent earthquake destruction in Tibet.
- Claimed On: X (Formerly Known As Twitter)
- Fact Check: False and Misleading

Executive Summary:
One of the most complex threats that have appeared in the space of network security is focused on the packet rate attacks that tend to challenge traditional approaches to DDoS threats’ involvement. In this year, the British based biggest Internet cloud provider of Europe, OVHcloud was attacked by a record and unprecedented DDoS attack reaching the rate of 840 million packets per second. Targets over 1 Tbps have been observed more regularly starting from 2023, and becoming nearly a daily occurrence in 2024. The maximum attack on May 25, 2024, got to 2.5 Tbps, this points to a direction to even larger and more complex attacks of up to 5 Tbps. Many of these attacks target critical equipment such as Mikrotik models within the core network environment; detection and subsequent containment of these threats prove a test for cloud security measures.
Modus Operandi of a Packet Rate Attack:
A type of cyberattack where an attacker sends with a large volume of packets in a short period of time aimed at a network device is known as packet rate attack, or packet flood attack or network flood attack under volumetric DDoS attack. As opposed to the deliberately narrow bandwidth attacks, these raids target the computation time linked with package processing.
Key technical characteristics include:
- Packet Size: Usually compact, and in many cases is less than 100 bytes
- Protocol: Named UDP, although it can also involve TCP SYN or other protocol flood attacks
- Rate: Exceeding 100 million packets per second (Mpps), with recent attacks exceeding 840 Mpps
- Source IP Diversity: Usually originating from a small number of sources and with a large number of requests per IP, which testifies about the usage of amplification principles
- Attack on the Network Stack : To understand the impact, let's examine how these attacks affect different layers of the network stack:
1. Layer 3 (Network Layer):
- Each packet requires routing table lookups and hence routers and L3 switches have the problem of high CPU usage.
- These mechanisms can often be saturated so that network communication will be negatively impacted by the attacker.
2. Layer 4 (Transport Layer):
- Other stateful devices (e.g. firewalls, load balancers) have problems with tables of connections
- TCP SYN floods can also utilize all connection slots so that no incoming genuine connection can be made.
3. Layer 7 (Application Layer):
- Web servers and application firewalls may be triggered to deliver a better response in a large number of requests
- Session management systems can become saturated, and hence, the performance of future iterations will be a little lower than expected in terms of their perceived quality by the end-user.
Technical Analysis of Attack Vectors
Recent studies have identified several key vectors exploited in high-volume packet rate attacks:
1.MikroTik RouterOS Exploitation:
- Vulnerability: CVE-2023-4967
- Impact: Allows remote attackers to generate massive packet floods
- Technical detail: Exploits a flaw in the FastTrack implementation
2.DNS Amplification:
- Amplification factor: Up to 54x
- Technique: Exploits open DNS resolvers to generate large responses to small queries
- Challenge: Difficult to distinguish from legitimate DNS traffic
3.NTP Reflection:
- Command: monlist
- Amplification factor: Up to 556.9x
- Mitigation: Requires NTP server updates and network-level filtering
Mitigation Strategies: A Technical Perspective
1. Combating packet rate attacks requires a multi-layered approach:
- Hardware-based Mitigation:
- Implementation: FPGA-based packet processing
- Advantage: Can handle millions of packets per second with minimal latency
- Challenge: High cost and specialized programming requirements
2.Anycast Network Distribution:
- Technique: Distributing traffic across multiple global nodes
- Benefit: Dilutes attack traffic, preventing single-point failures
- Consideration: Requires careful BGP routing configuration
3.Stateless Packet Filtering:
- Method: Applying filtering rules without maintaining connection state
- Advantage: Lower computational overhead compared to stateful inspection
- Trade-off: Less granular control over traffic
4.Machine Learning-based Detection:
- Approach: Using ML models to identify attack patterns in real-time
- Key metrics: Packet size distribution, inter-arrival times, protocol anomalies
- Challenge: Requires continuous model training to adapt to new attack patterns
Performance Metrics and Benchmarking
When evaluating DDoS mitigation solutions for packet rate attacks, consider these key performance indicators:
- Flows per second (fps) or packet per second (pps) capability
- Dispersion and the latency that comes with it is inherent to mitigation systems.
- The false positive rate in the case of the attack detection
- Exposure time before beginning of mitigation from the moment of attack
Way Forward
The packet rate attacks are constantly evolving where the credible defenses have not stayed the same. The next step entails extension to edge computing and 5G networks for distributing mitigation closer to the attack origins. Further, AI-based proactive tools of analysis for prediction of such threats will help to strengthen the protection of critical infrastructure against them in advance.
In order to stay one step ahead in this, it is necessary to constantly conduct research, advance new technologies, and work together with other cybersecurity professionals. There is always a need to develop secure defenses that safeguard these networks.
Reference:
https://blog.ovhcloud.com/the-rise-of-packet-rate-attacks-when-core-routers-turn-evil/
https://cybersecuritynews.com/record-breaking-ddos-attack-840-mpps/
https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ddos/famous-ddos-attacks/

Introduction
In this ever-evolving world of technology, cybercrimes and criminals continue to explore new and innovative methods to exploit and intimidate their victims. One of the recent shocking incidents has been reported from the city of Bharatpur, Rajasthan, where the cyber crooks organised a mock court session This complex operation, meant to induce fear and force obedience, exemplifies the daring and intelligence of modern hackers. In this blog article, we’ll go deeper into this concerning occurrence, delving into it to offer light on the strategies used and the ramifications for cybersecurity.to frighten their targets.
The Setup
The case was reported from Gopalgarh village in Bharatpur, Rajasthan, and has unfolded with a shocking twist -the father-son duo, Tahir Khan and his son Talim Khano — from Gopalgarh village in Bharatpur, Rajasthan, has been fooling people to gain their monetary gain by staging a mock court setting and recorded the proceedings to intimidate their victims into paying hefty sums. In the recent case, they have gained 2.69 crores through sextortion. the duo uses to trace their targets on social media platforms, blackmail them, and earn a hefty amount.
An official complaint was filed by a 69-year-old victim who was singled out through his social media accounts, his friends, and his posts Initially, they contacted the victim with a pre-recorded video featuring a nude woman, coaxing him into a compromising situation. As officials from the Delhi Crime Branch and the CBI, they threatened the victim, claiming that a girl had approached them intending to file a complaint against him. Later, masquerading as YouTubers, they threatened to release the incriminating video online. Adding to the charade, they impersonated a local MLA and presented the victim with a forged stamp paper alleging molestation charges. Eventually, posing as Delhi Crime Branch officials again, they demanded money to settle the case after falsely stating that they had apprehended the girl. To further manipulate the victim, the accused staged a court proceeding, recording it and subsequently sending it to him, creating the illusion that everything was concluded. This unique case of sextortion stands out as the only instance where the culprits went to such lengths, staging and recording a mock court to extort money. Furthermore, it was discovered that the accused had fabricated a letter from the Delhi High Court, adding another layer of deception to their scheme.
The Investigation
The complaint was made in a cyber cell. After the complaint was filed, the investigation was made, and it was found that this case stands as one of the most significant sextortion incidents in the country. The father-son pair skillfully assumed five different roles, meticulously executing their plan, which included creating a simulated court environment. “We have also managed to recover Rs 25 lakh from the accused duo—some from their residence in Gopalgarh and the rest from the bank account where it was deposited.
The Tricks used by the duo
The father-son The setup in the fake court scene event was a meticulously built web of deception to inspire fear and weakness in the victim. Let’s look at the tricks the two used to fool the people.
- Social Engineering strategies: Cyber criminals are skilled at using social engineering strategies to acquire the trust of their victims. In this situation, they may have employed phishing emails or phone calls to get personal information about the victim. By appearing as respectable persons or organisations, the crooks tricked the victim into disclosing vital information, giving them weapons they needed to create a sense of trustworthiness.
- Making a False Narrative: To make the fictitious court scenario more credible, the cyber hackers concocted a captivating story based on the victim’s purported legal problems. They might have created plausible papers to give their plan authority, such as forged court summonses, legal notifications, or warrants. They attempted to create a sense of impending danger and an urgent necessity for the victim to comply with their demands by deploying persuasive language and legal jargon.
- Psychological Manipulation: The perpetrators of the fictitious court scenario were well aware of the power of psychological manipulation in coercing their victims. They hoped to emotionally overwhelm the victim by using fear, uncertainty, and the possible implications of legal action. The offenders probably used threats of incarceration, fines, or public exposure to increase the victim’s fear and hinder their capacity to think critically. The idea was to use desperation and anxiety to force the victim to comply.
- Use of Technology to Strengthen Deception: Technological advancements have given cyber thieves tremendous tools to strengthen their misleading methods. The simulated court scenario might have included speech modulation software or deep fake technology to impersonate the voices or appearances of legal experts, judges, or law enforcement personnel. This technology made the deception even more believable, blurring the border between fact and fiction for the victim.
The use of technology in cybercriminals’ misleading techniques has considerably increased their capacity to fool and influence victims. Cybercriminals may develop incredibly realistic and persuasive simulations of judicial processes using speech modulation software, deep fake technology, digital evidence alteration, and real-time communication tools. Individuals must be attentive, gain digital literacy skills, and practice critical thinking when confronting potentially misleading circumstances online as technology advances. Individuals can better protect themselves against the expanding risks posed by cyber thieves by comprehending these technological breakthroughs.
What to do?
Seeking Help and Reporting Incidents: If you or anyone you know is the victim of cybercrime or is fooled by cybercrooks. When confronted with disturbing scenarios such as the imitation court scene staged by cybercrooks, victims must seek help and act quickly by reporting the occurrence. Prompt reporting serves various reasons, including increasing awareness, assisting with investigations, and preventing similar crimes from occurring again. Victims should take the following steps:
- Contact your local law enforcement: Inform local legal enforcement about the cybercrime event. Provide them with pertinent incident facts and proof since they have the experience and resources to investigate cybercrime and catch the offenders involved.
- Seek Assistance from a Cybersecurity specialist: Consult a cybersecurity specialist or respected cybersecurity business to analyse the degree of the breach, safeguard your digital assets, and obtain advice on minimising future risks. Their knowledge and forensic analysis can assist in gathering evidence and mitigating the consequences of the occurrence.
- Preserve Evidence: Keep any evidence relating to the event, including emails, texts, and suspicious actions. Avoid erasing digital evidence, and consider capturing screenshots or creating copies of pertinent exchanges. Evidence preservation is critical for investigations and possible legal procedures.
Conclusion
The setting fake court scene event shows how cybercriminals would deceive and abuse their victims. These criminals tried to use fear and weakness in the victim through social engineering methods, the fabrication of a false narrative, the manipulation of personal information, psychological manipulation, and the use of technology. Individuals can better defend themselves against cybercrooks by remaining watchful and sceptical.