#FactCheck: Viral Video Claiming IAF Air Chief Marshal Acknowledged Loss of Jets Found Manipulated

Introduction:

This Op-ed sheds light on the perspectives of the US and China regarding cyber espionage. Additionally, it seeks to analyze China's response to the US accusation regarding cyber espionage.

What is Cyber espionage?

Cyber espionage or cyber spying is the act of obtaining personal, sensitive, or proprietary information from individuals without their knowledge or consent. In an increasingly transparent and technological society, the ability to control the private information an individual reveals on the Internet and the ability of others to access that information are a growing concern. This includes storage and retrieval of e-mail by third parties, social media, search engines, data mining, GPS tracking, the explosion of smartphone usage, and many other technology considerations. In the age of big data, there is a growing concern for privacy issues surrounding the storage and misuse of personal data and non-consensual mining of private information by companies, criminals, and governments. 

Cyber espionage aims for economic, political, and technological gain. Fox example Stuxnet (2010) cyber-attack by the US and its allies Israel against Iran’s Nuclear facilities. Three espionage tools were discovered connected to Stuxnet, such as Gauss, FLAME and DuQu, for stealing data such as passwords, screenshots, Bluetooth, Skype functions, etc.

Cyber espionage is one of the most significant and intriguing international challenges globally. Many nations and international bodies, such as the US and China, have created their definitions and have always struggled over cyber espionage norms.

The US Perspective

In 2009, US officials (along with other allied countries) mentioned that cyber espionage was acceptable if it safeguarded national security, although they condemned economically motivated cyber espionage. Even the Director of National Intelligence said in 2013 that foreign intelligence capabilities cannot steal foreign companies' trade secrets to benefit their firms. This stance is consistent with the Economic Espionage Act (EEA) of 1996, particularly Section 1831, which prohibits economic espionage. This includes the theft of a trade secret that "will benefit any foreign government, foreign agent or foreign instrumentality. 

Second, the US advocates for cybersecurity market standards and strongly opposes transferring personal data extracted from the US Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to cybercrime markets. Furthermore, China has been reported to sell OPM data on illicit markets. It became a grave concern for the US government when the Chinese government managed to acquire sensitive details of 22.1 million US government workers through cyber intrusions in 2014.

Third, Cyber-espionage is acceptable unless it’s utilized for Doxing, which involves disclosing personal information about someone online without their consent and using it as a tool for political influence operations. However, Western academics and scholars have endeavoured to distinguish between doxing and whistleblowing. They argue that whistleblowing, exemplified by events like the Snowden Leaks and Vault 7 disclosures, serves the interests of US citizens. In the US, being regarded as an open society, certain disclosures are not promoted but rather required by mandate.

Fourth, the US argues that there is no cyber espionage against critical infrastructure during peacetime. According to the US, there are 16 critical infrastructure sectors, including chemical, nuclear, energy, defence, food, water, and so on. These sectors are considered essential to the US, and any disruption or harm would impact security, national public health and national economic security.

The US concern regarding China’s cyber espionage

According to James Lewis (a senior vice president at the Center for US-China Economic and Security Review Commission), the US faces losses between $ 20 billion and $30 billion annually due to China’s cyberespionage. The 2018 U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Section 301 report highlighted instances, where the Chinese government and executives from Chinese companies engaged in clandestine cyber intrusions to obtaining commercially valuable information from the U.S. businesses, such as in 2018 where officials from China’s Ministry of State Security, stole trade from General Electric aviation and other aerospace companies.    

China's response to the US accusations of cyber espionage

China's perspective on cyber espionage is outlined by its 2014 anti-espionage law, which was revised in 2023. Article 1 of this legislation is formulated to prevent, halt, and punish espionage actions to maintain national security. Article 4 addresses the act of espionage and does not differentiate between state-sponsored cyber espionage for economic purposes and state-sponsored cyber espionage for national security purposes. However, China doesn't make a clear difference between government-to-government hacking (spying) and government-to-corporate sector hacking, unlike the US. This distinction is less apparent in China due to its strong state-owned enterprise (SOE) sector. However, military spying is considered part of the national interest in the US, while corporate spying is considered a crime.

China asserts that the US has established cyber norms concerning cyber espionage to normalize public attribution as acceptable conduct. This is achieved by targeting China for cyber operations, imposing sanctions on accused Chinese individuals, and making political accusations, such as blaming China and Russia for meddling in US elections. Despite all this, Washington D.C has never taken responsibility for the infamous Flame and Stuxnet cyber operations, which were widely recognized as part of a broader collaborative initiative known as Operation Olympic Games between the US and Israel. Additionally, the US takes the lead in surveillance activities conducted against China, Russia, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, and several French presidents. Surveillance programs such as Irritant Horn, Stellar Wind, Bvp47, the Hive, and PRISM are recognized as tools used by the US to monitor both allies and adversaries to maintain global hegemony.

China urges the US to cease its smear campaign associated with Volt Typhoon’s cyberattack for cyber espionage, citing the publication of a report titled “Volt Typhoon: A Conspiratorial Swindling Campaign Targets with U.S. Congress and Taxpayers Conducted by U.S. Intelligence Community” by China's National Computer Virus Emergency Response Centre and the 360 Digital Security Group on 15 April. According to the report, 'Volt Typhoon' is a ransomware cyber criminal group self-identified as the 'Dark Power' and is not affiliated with any state or region. Multiple cybersecurity authorities in the US collaborated to fabricate this story just for more budgets from Congress. In the meantime, Microsoft and other U.S. cybersecurity firms are seeking more big contracts from US cybersecurity authorities. The reality behind “Volt Typhoon '' is a conspiratorial swindling campaign to achieve two objectives by amplifying the "China threat theory" and cheating money from the U.S. Congress and taxpayers.

Beijing condemned the US claims of cyber espionage without any solid evidence. China also blames the US for economic espionage by citing the European Parliament report that the National Security Agency (NSA) was also involved in assisting Boeing in beating Airbus for a multi-billion dollar contract. Furthermore, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff also accused the US authorities of spying against the state-owned oil company “Petrobras” for economic reasons.

Conclusion

In 2015, the US and China marked a milestone as both President Xi Jinping and Barack Obama signed an agreement, committing that neither country's government would conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets, intellectual property, or other confidential business information to grant competitive advantages to firms or commercial sectors. However, the China Cybersecurity Industry Alliance (CCIA) published a report titled 'US Threats and Sabotage to the Security and Development of Global Cyberspace' in 2024, highlighting the US escalating cyber-attack and espionage activities against China and other nations. Additionally, there has been a considerable increase in the volume and sophistication of Chinese hacking since 2016. According to a survey by the Center for International and Strategic Studies, out of 224 cyber espionage incidents reported since 2000, 69% occurred after Xi assumed office. Therefore, China and the US must address cybersecurity issues through dialogue and cooperation, utilizing bilateral and multilateral agreements.

‍

Executive Summary:

Several videos claiming to show bizarre, mutated animals with features such as seal's body and cow's head have gone viral on social media. Upon thorough investigation, these claims were debunked and found to be false. No credible source of such creatures was found and closer examination revealed anomalies typical of AI-generated content, such as unnatural leg movements, unnatural head movements and joined shoes of spectators. AI material detectors confirmed the artificial nature of these videos. Further, digital creators were found posting similar fabricated videos. Thus, these viral videos are conclusively identified as AI-generated and not real depictions of mutated animals.

‍

Claims:

Viral videos show sea creatures with the head of a cow and the head of a Tiger.

Fact Check:

On receiving several videos of bizarre mutated animals, we searched for credible sources that have been covered in the news but found none. We then thoroughly watched the video and found certain anomalies that are generally seen in AI manipulated images.

Taking a cue from this, we checked all the videos in the AI video detection tool named TrueMedia, The detection tool found the audio of the video to be AI-generated. We divided the video into keyframes, the detection found the depicting image to be AI-generated.

In the same way, we investigated the second video. We analyzed the video and then divided the video into keyframes and analyzed it with an AI-Detection tool named True Media.

It was found to be suspicious and so we analyzed the frame of the video.

The detection tool found it to be AI-generated, so we are certain with the fact that the video is AI manipulated. We analyzed the final third video and found it to be suspicious by the detection tool.

The detection tool found the frame of the video to be A.I. manipulated from which it is certain that the video is A.I. manipulated. Hence, the claim made in all the 3 videos is misleading and fake.

Conclusion:

The viral videos claiming to show mutated animals with features like seal's body and cow's head are AI-generated and not real. A thorough investigation by the CyberPeace Research Team found multiple anomalies in AI-generated content and AI-content detectors confirmed the manipulation of A.I. fabrication. Therefore, the claims made in these videos are false.

• Claim: Viral videos show sea creatures with the head of a cow, the head of a Tiger, head of a bull.
• Claimed on: YouTube
• Fact Check: Fake & Misleading

‍

‍

Introduction 

Digitalization in India has been a transformative force, India is also marked as the second country in the world in terms of active internet users. With this adoption of digitalization and technology, the country is becoming a digitally empowered society and knowledge-based economy. However, the number of cyber crimes in the country has also seen a massive spike recently with the sophisticated cyber attacks and manipulative techniques being used by cybercriminals to lure innocent individuals and businesses. 

As per recent reports, over 740,000 cybercrime cases were reported to the I4C, in the first four months of 2024, which raises serious concern on the growing nature of cyber crimes in the country. Recently Prime Minister Modi in his Mann Ki Baat address, cautioned the public about a particular rising cyber scam known as ‘digital arrest’ and highlighted the seriousness of the issue and urged people to be aware and alert about such scams to counter them. The government has been keen on making efforts to reduce and combat cyber crimes by introducing new measures and strengthening the regulatory landscape governing cyberspace in India.

Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre  

Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C) was established by the Ministry of Home Affairs  (MHA) to provide a framework and eco-system for law enforcement agencies (LEAs) to deal with cybercrime in a coordinated and comprehensive manner. I4C handles the ‘National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal’ (https://cybercrime.gov.in) and the 1930 Cyber Crime Helpline. Recently at the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) Foundation Day celebration, Union Home Minister Amit Shah launched the Cyber Fraud Mitigation Centre (CFMC), Samanvay platform (Joint Cybercrime Investigation Facilitation System), 'Cyber Commandos' program and Online Suspect Registry as efforts to combat the cyber crimes, establish cyber resilence and awareness and strengthening capabilities of law enforcement agencies.

Regulatory landscape Governing Cyber Crimes 

Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) and the rules made therein, the Intermediary Guidelines, Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 are the major legislation in India governing Cyber Laws.  

CyberPeace Recommendations

There has been an alarming uptick in cybercrimes in the country highlighting the need for proactive approaches to counter these emerging threats. The government should prioritise its efforts by introducing robust policies and technical measures to reduce cybercrime in the country. The law enforcement agencies' capabilities must be strengthened with advanced technologies to deal with cyber crimes especially considering the growing sophisticated nature of cyber crime tactics used by cyber criminals. 

The netizens must be aware of the manipulative tactics used by cyber criminals to target them. Social media companies must also implement robust measures on their respective platforms to counter and prevent cyber crimes. Coordinated approaches by all relevant authorities, including law enforcement, cybersecurity agencies, and regulatory bodies, along with increased awareness and proactive engagement by netizens, can significantly reduce cyber threats and online criminal activities. 

References

• https://www.statista.com/statistics/1499739/india-cyber-crime-cases-reported-to-i4c/#:~:text=Cyber%20crime%20cases%20registered%20by%20I4C%20India%202019%2D2024&text=Over%20740%2C000%20cases%20of%20cyber,related%20to%20online%20financial%20fraud
• https://www.deccanherald.com/india/parliament-panel-to-examine-probe-agencies-efforts-to-tackle-cyber-crime-illegal-immigration-3270314
• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2003158

‍