Delhi High Court Directs Centre to Nominate Members for Deepfake Committee
The Delhi High Court vide order dated 21st November 2024 directed the Centre to nominate members for a committee constituted to examine the issue of deepfakes. The court was informed by the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) that a committee had been formed on 20 November 2024 on deepfake matters. The Delhi High Court passed an order while hearing two writ petitions against the non-regulation of deepfake technology in the country and the threat of its potential misuse. The Centre submitted that it was actively taking measures to address and mitigate the issues related to deepfake technology. The court directed the central government to nominate the members within a week.
The court further stated that the committee shall examine and take into consideration the suggestions filed by the petitioners and consider the regulations as well as statutory frameworks in foreign countries like the European Union. The court has directed the committee to invite the experiences and suggestions of stakeholders such as intermediary platforms, telecom service providers, victims of deepfakes, and websites which provide and deploy deepfakes. The counsel for the petitioners stated that delay in the creation, detection and removal of deepfakes is causing immense hardship to the public at large. Further, the court has directed the said committee to submit its report, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months. The matter is further listed on 24th March 2025.
CyberPeace Outlook
Through the issue of misuse of deepfakes by bad actors, it has become increasingly difficult for users to differentiate between genuine and altered content created by deepfakes. This increasing misuse has led to a rise in cyber crimes and poses dangers to users' privacy. Bad actors use any number of random pictures or images collected from the internet to create such non-consensual deepfake content. Such deepfake videos further pose risks of misinformation and fake news campaigns with the potential to sway elections, cause confusion and mistrust in authorities, and more.
The conceivable legislation governing the deepfake is the need of the hour. It is important to foster regulated, ethical and responsible consumption of technology. The comprehensive legislation governing the issue can help ensure technology can be used in a better manner. The dedicated deepfake regulation and deploying ethical practices through a coordinated approach by concerned stakeholders can effectively manage the problems presented by the misuse of deepfake technology. Legal frameworks in this regard need to be equipped to handle the challenges posed by deepfake and AI. Accountability in AI is also a complex issue that requires comprehensive legal reforms. The government should draft policies and regulations that balance innovation and regulation. Through a multifaceted approach and comprehensive regulatory landscape, we can mitigate the risks posed by deepfakes and safeguard privacy, trust, and security in the digital age.
References
- https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/law-order/3168452-delhi-high-court-calls-for-action-on-deepfake-regulation
- https://images.assettype.com/barandbench/2024-11-23/w63zribm/Chaitanya_Rohilla_vs_Union_of_India.pdf
Related Blogs

Introduction
The term ‘super spreader’ is used to refer to social media and digital platform accounts that are able to quickly transmit information to a significantly large audience base in a short duration. The analogy references the medical term, where a small group of individuals is able to rapidly amplify the spread of an infection across a huge population. The fact that a few handful accounts are able to impact and influence many is attributed to a number of factors like large follower bases, high engagement rates, content attractiveness or virality and perceived credibility.
Super spreader accounts have become a considerable threat on social media because they are responsible for generating a large amount of low-credibility material online. These individuals or groups may create or disseminate low-credibility content for a number of reasons, running from social media fame to garnering political influence, from intentionally spreading propaganda to seeking financial gains. Given the exponential reach of these accounts, identifying, tracing and categorising such accounts as the sources of misinformation can be tricky. It can be equally difficult to actually recognise the content they spread for the misinformation that it actually is.
How Do A Few Accounts Spark Widespread Misinformation?
Recent research suggests that misinformation superspreaders, who consistently distribute low-credibility content, may be the primary cause of the issue of widespread misinformation about different topics. A study[1] by a team of social media analysts at Indiana University has found that a significant portion of tweets spreading misinformation are sent by a small percentage of a given user base. The researchers conducted a review of 2,397,388 tweets posted on Twitter (now X) that were flagged as having low credibility and details on who was sending them. The study found that it does not take a lot of influencers to sway the beliefs and opinions of large numbers. This is attributed to the impact of what they describe as superspreaders. The researchers collected 10 months of data, which added up to 2,397,388 tweets sent by 448,103 users, and then reviewed it, looking for tweets that were flagged as containing low-credibility information. They found that approximately a third of the low-credibility tweets had been posted by people using just 10 accounts, and that just 1,000 accounts were responsible for posting approximately 70% of such tweets.[2]
Case Study
- How Misinformation ‘Superspreaders’ Seed False Election Theories
During the 2020 U.S. presidential election, a small group of "repeat spreaders" aggressively pushed false election claims across various social media platforms for political gain, and this even led to rallies and radicalisation in the U.S.[3] Superspreaders accounts were responsible for disseminating a disproportionately large amount of misinformation related to the election, influencing public opinion and potentially undermining the electoral process.
In the domestic context, India was ranked highest for the risk of misinformation and disinformation according to experts surveyed for the World Economic Forum’s 2024 Global Risk Report. In today's digital age, misinformation, deep fakes, and AI-generated fakes pose a significant threat to the integrity of elections and democratic processes worldwide. With 64 countries conducting elections in 2024, the dissemination of false information carries grave implications that could influence outcomes and shape long-term socio-political landscapes. During the 2024 Indian elections, we witnessed a notable surge in deepfake videos of political personalities, raising concerns about the influence of misinformation on election outcomes.
- Role of Superspreaders During Covid-19
Clarity in public health communication is important when any grey areas or gaps in information can be manipulated so quickly. During the COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation related to the virus, vaccines, and public health measures spread rapidly on social media platforms, including Twitter (Now X). Some prominent accounts or popular pages on platforms like Facebook and Twitter(now X) were identified as superspreaders of COVID-19 misinformation, contributing to public confusion and potentially hindering efforts to combat the pandemic.
As per the Center for Countering Digital Hate Inc (US), The "disinformation dozen," a group of 12 prominent anti-vaccine accounts[4], were found to be responsible for a large amount of anti-vaccine content circulating on social media platforms, highlighting the significant role of superspreaders in influencing public perceptions and behaviours during a health crisis.
There are also incidents where users are unknowingly engaged in spreading misinformation by forwarding information or content which are not always shared by the original source but often just propagated by amplifiers, using other sources, websites, or YouTube videos that help in dissemination. The intermediary sharers amplify these messages on their pages, which is where it takes off. Hence such users do not always have to be the ones creating or deliberately popularising the misinformation, but they are the ones who expose more people to it because of their broad reach. This was observed during the pandemic when a handful of people were able to create a heavy digital impact sharing vaccine/virus-related misinformation.
- Role of Superspreaders in Influencing Investments and Finance
Misinformation and rumours in finance may have a considerable influence on stock markets, investor behaviour, and national financial stability. Individuals or accounts with huge followings or influence in the financial niche can operate as superspreaders of erroneous information, potentially leading to market manipulation, panic selling, or incorrect impressions about individual firms or investments.
Superspreaders in the finance domain can cause volatility in markets, affect investor confidence, and even trigger regulatory responses to address the spread of false information that may harm market integrity. In fact, there has been a rise in deepfake videos, and fake endorsements, with multiple social media profiles providing unsanctioned investing advice and directing followers to particular channels. This leads investors into dangerous financial decisions. The issue intensifies when scammers employ deepfake videos of notable personalities to boost their reputation and can actually shape people’s financial decisions.
Bots and Misinformation Spread on Social Media
Bots are automated accounts that are designed to execute certain activities, such as liking, sharing, or retweeting material, and they can broaden the reach of misinformation by swiftly spreading false narratives and adding to the virality of a certain piece of content. They can also artificially boost the popularity of disinformation by posting phony likes, shares, and comments, making it look more genuine and trustworthy to unsuspecting users. Bots can exploit social network algorithms by establishing false identities that interact with one another and with real users, increasing the spread of disinformation and pushing it to the top of users' feeds and search results.
Bots can use current topics or hashtags to introduce misinformation into popular conversations, allowing misleading information to acquire traction and reach a broader audience. They can lead to the construction of echo chambers, in which users are exposed to a narrow variety of perspectives and information, exacerbating the spread of disinformation inside restricted online groups. There are incidents reported where bot's were found as the sharers of content from low-credibility sources.
Bots are frequently employed as part of planned misinformation campaigns designed to propagate false information for political, ideological, or commercial gain. Bots, by automating the distribution of misleading information, can make it impossible to trace the misinformation back to its source. Understanding how bots work and their influence on information ecosystems is critical for combatting disinformation and increasing digital literacy among social media users.
CyberPeace Policy Recommendations
- Recommendations/Advisory for Netizens:
- Educating oneself: Netizens need to stay informed about current events, reliable fact-checking sources, misinformation counter-strategies, and common misinformation tactics, so that they can verify potentially problematic content before sharing.
- Recognising the threats and vulnerabilities: It is important for netizens to understand the consequences of spreading or consuming inaccurate information, fake news, or misinformation. Netizens must be cautious of sensationalised content spreading on social media as it might attempt to provoke strong reactions or to mold public opinions. Netizens must consider questioning the credibility of information, verifying its sources, and developing cognitive skills to identify low-credibility content and counter misinformation.
- Practice caution and skepticism: Netizens are advised to develop a healthy skepticism towards online information, and critically analyse the veracity of all information sources. Before spreading any strong opinions or claims, one must seek supporting evidence, factual data, and expert opinions, and verify and validate claims with reliable sources or fact-checking entities.
- Good netiquette on the Internet, thinking before forwarding any information: It is important for netizens to practice good netiquette in the online information landscape. One must exercise caution while sharing any information, especially if the information seems incorrect, unverified or controversial. It's important to critically examine facts and recognise and understand the implications of sharing false, manipulative, misleading or fake information/content. Netizens must also promote critical thinking and encourage their loved ones to think critically, verify information, seek reliable sources and counter misinformation.
- Adopting and promoting Prebunking and Debunking strategies: Prebunking and debunking are two effective strategies to counter misinformation. Netizens are advised to engage in sharing only accurate information and do fact-checking to debunk any misinformation. They can rely on reputable fact-checking experts/entities who are regularly engaged in producing prebunking and debunking reports and material. Netizens are further advised to familiarise themselves with fact-checking websites, and resources and verify the information.
- Recommendations for tech/social media platforms
- Detect, report and block malicious accounts: Tech/social media platforms must implement strict user authentication mechanisms to verify account holders' identities to minimise the formation of fraudulent or malicious accounts. This is imperative to weed out suspicious social media accounts, misinformation superspreader accounts and bots accounts. Platforms must be capable of analysing public content, especially viral or suspicious content to ascertain whether it is misleading, AI-generated, fake or deliberately misleading. Upon detection, platform operators must block malicious/ superspreader accounts. The same approach must apply to other community guidelines’ violations as well.
- Algorithm Improvements: Tech/social media platform operators must develop and deploy advanced algorithm mechanisms to detect suspicious accounts and recognise repetitive posting of misinformation. They can utilise advanced algorithms to identify such patterns and flag any misleading, inaccurate, or fake information.
- Dedicated Reporting Tools: It is important for the tech/social media platforms to adopt robust policies to take action against social media accounts engaged in malicious activities such as spreading misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda. They must empower users on the platforms to flag/report suspicious accounts, and misleading content or misinformation through user-friendly reporting tools.
- Holistic Approach: The battle against online mis/disinformation necessitates a thorough examination of the processes through which it spreads. This involves investing in information literacy education, modifying algorithms to provide exposure to varied viewpoints, and working on detecting malevolent bots that spread misleading information. Social media sites can employ similar algorithms internally to eliminate accounts that appear to be bots. All stakeholders must encourage digital literacy efforts that enable consumers to critically analyse information, verify sources, and report suspect content. Implementing prebunking and debunking strategies. These efforts can be further supported by collaboration with relevant entities such as cybersecurity experts, fact-checking entities, researchers, policy analysts and the government to combat the misinformation warfare on the Internet.
References:
- https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0302201 {1}
- https://phys.org/news/2024-05-superspreaders-responsible-large-portion-misinformation.html#google_vignette {2}
- https://phys.org/news/2024-05-superspreaders-responsible-large-portion-misinformation.html#google_vignette {3}
- https://counterhate.com/research/the-disinformation-dozen/ {4}
- https://phys.org/news/2024-05-superspreaders-responsible-large-portion-misinformation.html#google_vignette
- https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0302201
- https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/23/technology/election-misinformation-facebook-twitter.html
- https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2021/08/06/vaccine-misinformation-and-a-look-inside-the-disinformation-dozen
- https://healthfeedback.org/misinformation-superspreaders-thriving-on-musk-owned-twitter/
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8139392/
- https://www.jmir.org/2021/5/e26933/
- https://www.yahoo.com/news/7-ways-avoid-becoming-misinformation-121939834.html

Introduction
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. The Indian Ministry of Home Affairs approved a scheme for the establishment of the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) in October2018, which was inaugurated by Home Minister Amit Shah in January 2020. I4C is envisaged to act as the nodal point to curb Cybercrime in the country. Recently, on 13th March2024, the Centre designated the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) as an agency of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to perform the functions under the Information Technology Act, 2000, to inform about unlawful cyber activities.
The gazetted notification dated 13th March 2024 read as follows:
“In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 79 of the Information Technology Act 2000, Central Government being the appropriate government hereby designate the Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C), to be the agency of the Ministry of Home Affairs to perform the functions under clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section79 of Information Technology Act, 2000 and to notify the instances of information, data or communication link residing in or connected to a computer resource controlled by the intermediary being used to commit the unlawful act.”
Impact
Now, the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) is empowered to issue direct takedown orders under 79(b)(3) of the IT Act, 2000. Any information, data or communication link residing in or connected to a computer resource controlled by any intermediary being used to commit unlawful acts can be notified by the I4C to the intermediary. If an intermediary fails to expeditiously remove or disable access to a material after being notified, it will no longer be eligible for protection under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000.
Safe Harbour Provision
Section79 of the IT Act also serves as a safe harbour provision for the Intermediaries. The safe harbour provision under Section 79 of the IT Act states that "an intermediary shall not be liable for any third-party information, data, or communication link made available or hosted by him". However, it is notable that this legal immunity cannot be granted if the intermediary "fails to expeditiously" take down a post or remove a particular content after the government or its agencies flag that the information is being used to commit something unlawful. Furthermore, Intermediaries are also obliged to perform due diligence on their platforms and comply with the rules & regulations and maintain and promote a safe digital environment on the respective platforms.
Under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, The government has also mandated that a ‘significant social media intermediary’ must appoint a Chief Compliance Officer (CCO), Resident Grievance Officer (RGO), and Nodal Contact Person and publish periodic compliance report every month mentioning the details of complaints received and action taken thereon.
I4C's Role in Safeguarding Cyberspace
The Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) is actively working towards initiatives to combat the emerging threats in cyberspace. I4C is one of the crucial extensions of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, working extensively to combat cyber crimes and ensure the overall safety of netizens. The ‘National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal’ equipped with a 24x7 helpline number 1930, is one of the key component of the I4C.
Components Of The I4C
- National Cyber Crime Threat Analytics Unit
- National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal
- National Cyber Crime Training Centre
- Cyber Crime Ecosystem Management Unit
- National Cyber Crime Research and Innovation Centre
- National Cyber Crime Forensic Laboratory Ecosystem
- Platform for Joint Cyber Crime Investigation Team.
Conclusion
I4C, through its initiatives and collaborative efforts, plays a pivotal role in safeguarding cyberspace and ensuring the safety of netizens. I4C reinforces India's commitment to combatting cybercrime and promoting a secure digital environment. The recent development by designating the I4C as an agency to notify the instances of unlawful activities in cyberspace serves as a significant step to counter cybercrime and promote an ethical and safe digital environment for netizens.
References
- https://www.deccanherald.com/india/centre-designates-i4c-as-agency-of-mha-to-notify-unlawful-activities-in-cyber-world-2936976
- https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/home-ministry-authorises-i4c-to-issue-takedown-notices-under-it-act-124031500844_1.html
- https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/it-ministry-empowers-i4c-to-notify-instances-of-cybercrime-101710443217873.html
- https://i4c.mha.gov.in/about.aspx#:~:text=Objectives%20of%20I4C,identifying%20Cybercrime%20trends%20and%20patterns
.webp)
Incident Overview
Earlier this week, the Chinese media reported that several ‘Macau’ government websites were hacked, indicating a significant targeted cyberattack. The hacked website includes those of the office of the Secretary for Security, the public security police, the fire services department and the Security Forces Services Bureau. It was reported that the police have launched a criminal investigation to trace the source of the crime. Furthermore, officials believe the source of the intrusion was likely from overseas, and authorities have carried out an emergency response in conjunction with telecommunication operators to restore affected services on a priority basis. The densely populated Macau is a special administrative region on the south coast of China and the cyber attacks on the essential government website of China raise a serious concern.
Response and Mitigation
Macau's authorities carried out an emergency response in collaboration with telecommunication operators to restore regular services as a distributed denial-of-service attack (DDoS) was reported to be carried out on certain government websites which resulted in the inactivity of those several websites. The country's security forces instructed Macau Telecom to investigate the incident and submit a report and improvement plan to prevent similar attacks in the future.
Context and Implications
The hack on the government websites of Macau is not a single incident; rather, it is a part of an increasing pattern of cyberattacks on the region's vital infrastructure. According to a recent report, the frequency of cybercrimes has tripled since 2020, targeting Macau's critical infrastructure, which is worrying. This pattern draws attention to the growing threats that public sector organisations and governments throughout the world confront.
Final Words
In light of such sophisticated attacks targeting vital infrastructure or critical government operations, it is imperative that the country ensure powerful cybersecurity strategies and measures. Implementing robust cybersecurity measures, developing incident response planning, regular security checks, employee training on cyber hygiene, public awareness and capacity building and international collaboration to jointly develop and plan counteract strategies is a crucial step to build safeguards against such cyber threats.
The incident of a cyberattack on the government websites of Macau serves stark reminder of the evolving threats and cybersecurity challenges, it is a serious concern when critical government websites are compromised by malicious actors. It highlights the necessity for continuous vigilance and cybersecurity measures in place to counter such cyber attacks. A comprehensive approach to cybersecurity, the government can enhance their overall cybersecurity posture, establish resilience against such threats in future, and save the functionality of essential government websites.
References:
- https://macaudailytimes.com.mo/websites-of-office-of-the-secretary-for-security-targeted-in-a-cyber-attack.html
- https://www.reuters.com/world/china/several-macau-government-websites-hacked-says-chinese-state-media-2024-07-11/
- https://4imag.com/several-macau-government-websites-hacked-says-chinese-state-media/
- https://www.aol.com/news/several-macau-government-websites-hacked-001435511.htmlhttps://therecord.media/macau-government-websites-hit-with-cyberattack
- https://macaonews.org/news/city/macau-cyberattacks-cyber-security-attacks-macao/