‘Cyber Mitra’ AI Chatbot launched by Surat Police

Executive Summary:

A misleading video claiming to show fireworks at Dubai International Cricket Stadium following India’s 2025 ICC Champions Trophy win has gone viral, causing confusion among viewers. Our investigation confirms that the video is unrelated to the cricket tournament. It actually depicts the fireworks display from the December 2024 Arabian Gulf Cup opening ceremony at Kuwait’s Jaber Al-Ahmad Stadium. This incident underscores the rapid spread of outdated or misattributed content, particularly in relation to significant sports events, and highlights the need for vigilance in verifying such claims.

‍

‍

Claim: 

The circulated video claims fireworks and a drone display at Dubai International Cricket Stadium after India's win in the ICC Champions Trophy 2025.

‍

Fact Check:

A reverse image search of the most prominent keyframes in the viral video led it back to the opening ceremony of the 26th Arabian Gulf Cup, which was hosted by Jaber Al-Ahmad International Stadium in Kuwait on December 21, 2024. The fireworks seen in the video correspond to the imagery in this event. A second look at the architecture of the stadium also affirms that the venue is not Dubai International Cricket Stadium, as asserted. Additional confirmation from official sources and media outlets verifies that there was no such fireworks celebration in Dubai after India's ICC Champions Trophy 2025 win. The video has therefore been misattributed and shared with incorrect context.

‍

Fig: Claimed Stadium Picture

‍

‍

Conclusion:

A viral video claiming to show fireworks at Dubai International Cricket Stadium after India's 2025 ICC Champions Trophy win is misleading. Our research confirms the video is from the December 2024 Arabian Gulf Cup opening ceremony at Kuwait’s Jaber Al-Ahmad Stadium. A reverse image search and architectural analysis of the stadium debunk the claim, with official sources verifying no such celebration took place in Dubai. The video has been misattributed and shared out of context.

• Claim: Fireworks in Dubai celebrate India’s Champions Trophy win.
• Claimed On: Social Media
• Fact Check: False and Misleading

‍

Introduction

As per the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) ‘Cyber Crime In India Report 2022’, A total of 65,893 cases were registered under Cyber Crimes, showing an increase of 24.4% in registration in comparison to 52,974 cases registered in 2021. The crime rate increased from 3.9 in 2021 to 4.8 in 2022. During 2022, 64.8% of cyber-crime cases registered were for the motive of fraud (42,710 out of 65,893 cases), followed by Extortion with 5.5% (3,648 cases) and Sexual Exploitation with 5.2% (3,434 cases). The statistics released by NCRB show the increased rate of cyber crimes in the country, which poses a significant question of safety in the online world. The rise in cybercrime indicates a rise in emerging criminal groups with malicious intentions, creating new cybercrime hotspots in the country where these groups target and commit cyber crimes despite limited resources.

Cyber Crime Hotspots

Police have recently arrested several cyber criminals in a specific region, indicating that certain areas have become hotspots for cybercrime. Mewat region is one such hotspot indicating a growing trend of cybercrime operating from this area. The Mewat gang's modus operandi is quite different; Cybercriminals in Mewat scam mobile owners just using smartphones and SIM cards without kingpins and targeting mobile owners. The scammers also lure people through online marketplaces such as OLX, in which they pretend to sell possessions and then either physically lure victims to pick-up locations or scam them virtually. 

A study conducted by Future Crime Research Foundation and IIT Kanpur in 2023 has revealed that Jamatara city, once considered the cyber crime capital of India, is no longer the epicentre. The study found that 35 hotspots in India are actively involved in cybercrime activities. The top 10 cybercrime hotspots in India collectively account for 80% of cybercrime-related cases in India. These districts are strategically located near India's capital or closer to the National Capital Region (NCR). These districts are strategically placed with multiple borders, making them easy targets for criminals.  

Online financial fraud and social media-related crimes are the most common in India. Cybercriminals exploit data as a gold mine, using it to commit crimes. For instance, they can obtain banking and insurance data, use simple AI tools to cheat victims, and they can easily impersonate identities to lure innocent people. In cybercrime hotspots, sextortion is a modern way for cybercriminals to record and demand money. Loan app fraud, OLX fraud, and job fraud also originate from these specific regions.

Recommendations 

To counter the challenges posed by emerging cybercrime hubs, the following recommendations are to be considered: 

• Advanced threat Intelligence: The digital landscape is evolving, and the threat landscape is becoming more complex. AI's role in cybersecurity is becoming increasingly critical, both positively and negatively, as it helps in understanding and addressing advanced threats. AI is capable of proactive threat hunting, real-time anomaly detection, and swift incident response.
• Enhancing capabilities of Law Enforcement Agencies: Law enforcement agencies must be sensitised to advanced tools or techniques to investigate cyber crime cases effectively. The development and implementation of advanced forensic tools and technologies need to be utilised or implemented to keep up with the evolving tactics of cybercrime perpetrators. 
• Continuous Monitoring: Continuous cybersecurity monitoring is crucial for detecting anomalies and preventing cyber-attacks. It involves analysing systems and data to establish baseline security, identify deviations, and investigate potential threats. Cybersecurity experts use data observability tools, artificial intelligence, and machine learning to detect unexpected dataset changes.
• Cyber Security Awareness: Public awareness needs to be higher. Cybercrime prevention and cybersecurity is a shared responsibility of all of us by being aware of the threats and following the best practices. The frequent interaction between law enforcement and the public is necessary to raise awareness about safeguarding personal and financial information. Effective campaigns on cyber security are necessary to educate netizens.

Safety Tips for Netizens

Install up-to-date security software and firewalls on devices, use strong passwords for accounts, and regularly update software and applications. Be cautious when clicking on links or downloading files from unknown sources, and be cautious of your personal information.

Conclusion

The rise of Cyber Crime Hotspots in specific regions or districts has significantly exacerbated the issue of increasing cybercrime rates. In order to combat cybercrime more effectively, it is necessary for law enforcement agencies to strengthen their coordination between different states and to adapt advanced technology methods to counter cybercrime threats effectively. Moreover, educating netizens about cyber crime threats and providing best practices is an effective method to counter these threats, considered the first line of defense against cybercrime.

References

• https://ncrb.gov.in/uploads/nationalcrimerecordsbureau/custom/1701607577CrimeinIndia2022Book1.pdf
• https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/no-kingpins-just-a-smartphone-and-sim-card-how-cybercriminals-in-mewat-scam-mobile-owners/articleshow/98062889.cms?from=mdr
• https://www.futurecrime.org/fcrf-cyber-crime-survey-2023
• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/jamtara-loses-crown-as-new-remote-districts-rewrite-indias-cybercrime-map/articleshow/104475868.cms?from=mdr
• https://government.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/secure-india/80-of-cyber-crimes-from-10-new-districts-iit-report/103921338
• https://www.dw.com/en/how-mewat-became-indias-new-hub-for-cyber-criminals/video-68674527
• https://www.indiatoday.in/from-india-today-magazine/story/into-cybercrime-hotspot-india-mewat-rajasthan-haryana-uttar-pradesh-2381545-2023-05-19
• https://frontline.thehindu.com/the-nation/spotlight-how-nuh-district-in-haryana-became-a-breeding-ground-for-cybercriminals/article67098193.ece
• https://www.opindia.com/2024/04/nuh-mewat-cyber-crime-haryana-police-crackdown/#google_vignette

‍

Introduction

In an era when misinformation spreads like wildfire across the digital landscape, the need for effective strategies to counteract these challenges has grown exponentially in a very short period. Prebunking and Debunking are two approaches for countering the growing spread of misinformation online. Prebunking empowers individuals by teaching them to discern between true and false information and acts as a protective layer that comes into play even before people encounter malicious content. Debunking is the correction of false or misleading claims after exposure, aiming to undo or reverse the effects of a particular piece of misinformation. Debunking includes methods such as fact-checking, algorithmic correction on a platform, social correction by an individual or group of online peers, or fact-checking reports by expert organisations or journalists. An integrated approach which involves both strategies can be effective in countering the rapid spread of misinformation online.

Brief Analysis of Prebunking 

Prebunking is a proactive practice that seeks to rebut erroneous information before it spreads. The goal is to train people to critically analyse information and develop ‘cognitive immunity’ so that they are less likely to be misled when they do encounter misinformation. 

The Prebunking approach, grounded in Inoculation theory, teaches people to recognise, analyse and avoid manipulation and misleading content so that they build resilience against the same. Inoculation theory, a social psychology framework, suggests that pre-emptively conferring psychological resistance against malicious persuasion attempts can reduce susceptibility to misinformation across cultures. As the term suggests, the MO is to help the mind in the present develop resistance to influence that it may encounter in the future. Just as medical vaccines or inoculations help the body build resistance to future infections by administering weakened doses of the harm agent, inoculation theory seeks to teach people fact from fiction through exposure to examples of weak, dichotomous arguments, manipulation tactics like emotionally charged language, case studies that draw parallels between truths and distortions, and so on. In showing people the difference, inoculation theory teaches them to be on the lookout for misinformation and manipulation even, or especially, when they least expect it. 

The core difference between Prebunking and Debunking is that while the former is preventative and seeks to provide a broad-spectrum cover against misinformation, the latter is reactive and focuses on specific instances of misinformation. While Debunking is closely tied to fact-checking, Prebunking is tied to a wider range of specific interventions, some of which increase motivation to be vigilant against misinformation and others increase the ability to engage in vigilance with success.

There is much to be said in favour of the Prebunking approach because these interventions build the capacity to identify misinformation and recognise red flags However, their success in practice may vary. It might be difficult to scale up Prebunking efforts and ensure their reach to a larger audience. Sustainability is critical in ensuring that Prebunking measures maintain their impact over time. Continuous reinforcement and reminders may be required to ensure that individuals retain the skills and information they gained from the Prebunking training activities. Misinformation tactics and strategies are always evolving, so it is critical that Prebunking interventions are also flexible and agile and respond promptly to developing challenges. This may be easier said than done, but with new misinformation and cyber threats developing frequently, it is a challenge that has to be addressed for Prebunking to be a successful long-term solution. 

Encouraging people to be actively cautious while interacting with information, acquire critical thinking abilities, and reject the effect of misinformation requires a significant behavioural change over a relatively short period of time. Overcoming ingrained habits and prejudices, and countering a natural reluctance to change is no mean feat. Developing a widespread culture of information literacy requires years of social conditioning and unlearning and may pose a significant challenge to the effectiveness of Prebunking interventions. 

Brief Analysis of Debunking 

Debunking is a technique for identifying and informing people that certain news items or information are incorrect or misleading. It seeks to lessen the impact of misinformation that has already spread. The most popular kind of Debunking occurs through collaboration between fact-checking organisations and social media businesses. Journalists or other fact-checkers discover inaccurate or misleading material, and social media platforms flag or label it. Debunking is an important strategy for curtailing the spread of misinformation and promoting accuracy in the digital information ecosystem. 

Debunking interventions are crucial in combating misinformation. However, there are certain challenges associated with the same. Debunking misinformation entails critically verifying facts and promoting corrected information. However, this is difficult owing to the rising complexity of modern tools used to generate narratives that combine truth and untruth, views and facts. These advanced approaches, which include emotional spectrum elements, deepfakes, audiovisual material, and pervasive trolling, necessitate a sophisticated reaction at all levels: technological, organisational, and cultural.

Furthermore, It is impossible to debunk all misinformation at any given time, which effectively means that it is impossible to protect everyone at all times, which means that at least some innocent netizens will fall victim to manipulation despite our best efforts.  Debunking is inherently reactive in nature, addressing misinformation after it has grown extensively. This reactionary method may be less successful than proactive strategies such as Prebunking from the perspective of total harm done. Misinformation producers operate swiftly and unexpectedly, making it difficult for fact-checkers to keep up with the rapid dissemination of erroneous or misleading information. Debunking may need continuous exposure to fact-check to prevent erroneous beliefs from forming, implying that a single Debunking may not be enough to rectify misinformation.  Debunking requires time and resources, and it is not possible to disprove every piece of misinformation that circulates at any particular moment. This constraint may cause certain misinformation to go unchecked, perhaps leading to unexpected effects. The misinformation on social media can be quickly spread and may become viral faster than Debunking pieces or articles. This leads to a situation in which misinformation spreads like a virus, while the antidote to debunked facts struggles to catch up.

Prebunking vs Debunking: Comparative Analysis

Prebunking interventions seek to educate people to recognise and reject misinformation before they are exposed to actual manipulation. Prebunking offers tactics for critical examination, lessening the individuals' susceptibility to misinformation in a variety of contexts. On the other hand, Debunking interventions involve correcting specific false claims after they have been circulated. While Debunking can address individual instances of misinformation, its impact on reducing overall reliance on misinformation may be limited by the reactive nature of the approach.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations for Tech/Social Media Platforms

With the rising threat of online misinformation, tech/social media platforms can adopt an integrated strategy that includes both Prebunking and Debunking initiatives to be deployed and supported on all platforms to empower users to recognise the manipulative messaging through Prebunking and be aware of the accuracy of misinformation through Debunking interventions. 

1. Gamified Inoculation: Tech/social media companies can encourage gamified inoculation campaigns, which is a competence-oriented approach to Prebunking misinformation. This can be effective in helping people immunise the receiver against subsequent exposures. It can empower people to build competencies to detect misinformation through gamified interventions. 
2. Promotion of Prebunking and Debunking Campaigns through Algorithm Mechanisms: Tech/social media platforms may promote and guarantee that algorithms prioritise the distribution of Prebunking materials to users, boosting educational content that strengthens resistance to misinformation. Platform operators should incorporate algorithms that prioritise the visibility of Debunking content in order to combat the spread of erroneous information and deliver proper corrections; this can eventually address and aid in Prebunking and Debunking methods to reach a bigger or targeted audience.
3. User Empowerment to Counter Misinformation: Tech/social media platforms can design user-friendly interfaces that allow people to access Prebunking materials, quizzes, and instructional information to help them improve their critical thinking abilities. Furthermore, they can incorporate simple reporting tools for flagging misinformation, as well as links to fact-checking resources and corrections.
4. Partnership with Fact-Checking/Expert Organizations: Tech/social media platforms can facilitate Prebunking and Debunking initiatives/campaigns by collaborating with fact-checking/expert organisations and promoting such initiatives at a larger scale and ultimately fighting misinformation with joint hands initiatives.

Conclusion

The threat of online misinformation is only growing with every passing day and so, deploying effective countermeasures is essential.  Prebunking and Debunking are the two such interventions. To sum up: Prebunking interventions try to increase resilience to misinformation, proactively lowering susceptibility to erroneous or misleading information and addressing broader patterns of misinformation consumption, while Debunking is effective in correcting a particular piece of misinformation and having a targeted impact on belief in individual false claims. An integrated approach involving both the methods and joint initiatives by tech/social media platforms and expert organizations can ultimately help in fighting the rising tide of online misinformation and establishing a resilient online information landscape. 

References

1. https://mark-hurlstone.github.io/THKE.22.BJP.pdf
2. https://futurefreespeech.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Empowering-Audiences-Through-%E2%80%98Prebunking-Michael-Bang-Petersen-Background-Report_formatted.pdf
3. https://newsreel.pte.hu/news/unprecedented_challenges_Debunking_disinformation
4. https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/global-vaccination-badnews/

‍