#Fact Check: Pakistan’s Airstrike Claim Uses Video Game Footage
Executive Summary:
A widely circulated claim on social media, including a post from the official X account of Pakistan, alleges that the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) carried out an airstrike on India, supported by a viral video. However, according to our research, the video used in these posts is actually footage from the video game Arma-3 and has no connection to any real-world military operation. The use of such misleading content contributes to the spread of false narratives about a conflict between India and Pakistan and has the potential to create unnecessary fear and confusion among the public.
Claim:
Viral social media posts, including the official Government of Pakistan X handle, claims that the PAF launched a successful airstrike against Indian military targets. The footage accompanying the claim shows jets firing missiles and explosions on the ground. The video is presented as recent and factual evidence of heightened military tensions.
Fact Check:
As per our research using reverse image search, the videos circulating online that claim to show Pakistan launching an attack on India under the name 'Operation Sindoor' are misleading. There is no credible evidence or reliable reporting to support the existence of any such operation. The Press Information Bureau (PIB) has also verified that the video being shared is false and misleading. During our research, we also came across footage from the video game Arma-3 on YouTube, which appears to have been repurposed to create the illusion of a real military conflict. This strongly indicates that fictional content is being used to propagate a false narrative. The likely intention behind this misinformation is to spread fear and confusion by portraying a conflict that never actually took place.
Conclusion:
It is true to say that Pakistan is using the widely shared misinformation videos to attack India with false information. There is no reliable evidence to support the claim, and the videos are misleading and irrelevant. Such false information must be stopped right away because it has the potential to cause needless panic. No such operation is occurring, according to authorities and fact-checking groups.
- Claim: Viral social media posts claim PAF attack on India
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs
CyberPeace | Automotive Cybersecurity & Digital Forensics
Introduction
After a crash, the story usually comes from the driver, a witness or a police report. But a modern vehicle can leave another version behind - a digital one. An Event Data Recorder (EDR), commonly called a car's black box, can preserve selected information from the seconds around a crash. NHTSA describes EDRs as recording vehicle dynamics, driver inputs, crash characteristics, restraint status and some post-crash information.[1] The exact fields depend on the vehicle. A black box is not a magical device that records everything; it is one evidence source inside a much larger vehicle.
A modern vehicle can also contain safety controllers, diagnostic interfaces, ADAS, telematics and software-update systems. For an investigator, the question is what evidence can be linked to the EDR and what that combined record can actually support.
What Is Actually in the Black Box?
An EDR is best understood as a short event record, not a continuous driving diary. Depending on the vehicle and its configuration, forensic extraction may reveal items such as speed, acceleration, delta-V, engine RPM, throttle position, brake status, steering input, ABS or stability-control activity, seat-belt status and airbag or restraint events. NHTSA's published EDR material shows that data elements can include longitudinal and lateral acceleration, delta-V, vehicle speed, engine speed, throttle, service-brake status, roll/pitch/yaw information and steering input.[2] Do not overread the data: A field that exists in one model should not automatically be assumed to exist in another. A forensic report must identify exactly which module and fields were available and actually recovered.
What Can a Forensic Examination Recover?
A Brake Failure Example
Consider a driver who reports: “I pressed the brake, but nothing happened.” The statement should be preserved, but a forensic investigation should test it. Was brake status captured? What was the speed before the event? Did ABS activate? What were the acceleration and delta-V patterns? Were there relevant fault codes? Was the vehicle recently repaired or updated? Suppose the recovered records show a brake input, ABS activity and a change in vehicle speed before impact. That does not prove the brakes were mechanically perfect. It does, however, make the sentence “nothing happened” too simple. Conversely, a relevant fault appearing just before the event may give investigators a stronger lead. The important part is the comparison: human account, vehicle record, physical evidence and technical history should be examined together.
Smart Vehicles, Digital Evidence and Cybersecurity Investigation
A connected vehicle can communicate through cellular networks, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, mobile applications, workshop tools and cloud services. If unusual activity appears around a safety-critical incident, investigators may need to look beyond the EDR. Useful questions include:
• Was there unusual diagnostic or service activity before the incident?
• Was a software update or configuration change recently applied?
• Do timestamps from different modules line up, or is there clock drift?
• Can the extracted record be tied back to the original vehicle and module?
• Is there a non-cyber explanation - such as a hardware fault or software defect - that fits the evidence better?
The mindset matters: A cyberattack should be a conclusion supported by evidence, not the default explanation for strange vehicle behaviour.
The Forensic View: From Data to Evidence
Automotive forensics is not simply plugging in a tool and exporting a report. The investigator should document the vehicle identity, module involved, extraction method, tool version, acquisition time and evidence-preservation steps. The goal is to make the work repeatable and defensible.
• Identify the relevant modules and evidence sources.
• Preserve the vehicle and extracted data against unnecessary alteration.
• Acquire data using a documented and appropriate method.
• Validate provenance, integrity, timestamps and completeness.
• Correlate EDR, diagnostics, software history, connected records and physical evidence.
• Report both findings and uncertainty.
A useful forensic rule: “Recorded” does not mean “proven.” Evidence becomes persuasive when its source, integrity and context are clear.
What the Law and Standards Are Changing
India is moving toward a more formal automotive cybersecurity lifecycle. IS-189 focuses on vehicle cybersecurity and the Cyber Security Management System (CSMS), while AIS-190 deals with software updates and the Software Update Management System (SUMS).[4][5] The wider statutory and type-approval framework is provided by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. For vehicle prototypes, Rule 126 provides for testing and approval by authorized testing agencies.[6][7]
In June 2026, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) came out with draft G.S.R. 503(E). The draft proposes new CMVR Rules 125-T and 125-U covering cybersecurity and software-update requirements. Since G.S.R. 503(E) is still a draft notification, its proposed requirements and the dates from which they may apply should be verified with the latest final notification before treating them as applicable law.[8]
At the international level, UN Regulation No. 155 addresses vehicle cybersecurity, while UN Regulation No. 156 covers software updates and their management.[9][10] This matters to forensics because lifecycle cybersecurity creates an expectation that manufacturers should be able to understand and manage security risks over time. In other words, logs, software-state information, vulnerability records and incident evidence can become part of the security story, not merely post-incident paperwork.
The Real Takeaway
The black box is valuable because it can reduce guesswork. It may tell us how fast the vehicle was moving, whether the driver applied the brake, how the vehicle responded, and what certain safety systems were doing around the event. But it rarely answers the whole case on its own. The strongest investigation is built by joining several pieces: EDR data, diagnostics, software context, connected-system evidence and what was found at the crash scene.
For cybersecurity professionals, the lesson is simple: a secure vehicle should not only resist attacks. It should also leave trustworthy evidence when something goes wrong. Good access controls, reliable timestamps and careful evidence handling help turn “something failed” into a defensible explanation.
Conclusion
The phrase “car black box” sounds simple, but the evidence behind it is not. An EDR can preserve a small but valuable window into a crash. During forensic examination, investigators may also be able to recover diagnostic, safety-system, software and connected-vehicle information, depending on the vehicle and what has been retained. The job is not to collect the largest possible amount of data. It is to collect the right data, preserve it properly and understand what each record can - and cannot - prove.
That is where automotive cybersecurity and digital forensics meet. As vehicles become more connected and software-driven, the ability to reconstruct an incident becomes part of security itself.
References
1. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Event Data Recorder (EDR) overview and research resources.
2. NHTSA, Use of Event Data Recorder (EDR) Technology for Highway Crash Data Analysis.
3. NHTSA, Light-Vehicle Event Data Recorder Technologies Update.
4. Automotive Research Association of India (ARAI), AIS-189, Approval of Vehicles with Regards to Cyber Security and Cyber Security Management System, April 2024.
5. Automotive Research Association of India (ARAI), AIS-190, Approval of Vehicles with Regards to Software Update and Software Update Management System, April 2024.
6. Government of India, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
7. Government of India, Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, Rule 126.
8. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, G.S.R. 503(E), 17 June 2026, draft Central Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Rules concerning cybersecurity and software updates.
9. UNECE, UN Regulation No. 155, Cyber Security and Cyber Security Management System.
10. UNECE, UN Regulation No. 156, Software Update and Software Update Management System.
11. NIST, SP 800-86, Guide to Integrating Forensic Techniques into Incident Response.
Executive Summary
A social media post is being widely circulated claiming that Delhi Police personnel Amit died during the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) ‘Sansad Chalo’ protest held on July 20, 2026. The post attempts to link his death to violence that allegedly took place during the demonstration. CyberPeace Research Wing’s research found the claim to be false. The research revealed that the death of Head Constable Amit was not related to the CJP protest held on July 20. He died on July 15 after being hit by a speeding vehicle while on duty at Singhu Border. An old accident has been falsely linked to the recent protest through a misleading claim.
Claim:
A Facebook user shared a post on July 23, 2026, claiming that a police personnel was martyred during the alleged protest carried out by “student goons and their supporters from Congress and Kejriwal’s party” on July 20. The user further claimed that the protest was responsible for the death of a police personnel and questioned criticism over alleged police action against protesters.
The post’s link, archive link and screenshot are provided below:
https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=3562630610568369&set=a.100838436747621
https://ghostarchive.org/archive/m8QM8
Fact Check:
To verify the authenticity of the viral claim, the Desk first examined the official social media accounts of Delhi Police. During the research, the Desk found a post shared on Delhi Police’s official Instagram account on July 16, 2026, which contained the same image being circulated in the viral post.
https://www.instagram.com/p/Da19BQxEmQv/?igsh=cnN1bXZhaHg5OWRs
In the next stage of the research, the Desk found an NDTV report published on July 16, 2026. According to the report, Delhi Police had arrested two accused in connection with the death of Head Constable Amit. The arrested individuals were identified as Kuldeep alias Karan and Neeraj. The report stated that police had also seized the vehicle bearing registration number DL11CG2268, which was involved in the accident. An FIR was registered at Alipur Police Station and further research was underway.
Further research led the Desk to a related post on the Facebook page of Delhi Samachar TV. According to the post, the hit-and-run case involving Head Constable Amit, who was hit while performing duty at Singhu Border (NH-44), was solved by Delhi Police within hours. The police team arrested two accused and recovered the vehicle used in the incident.
The post’s link and screenshot are provided below:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1006635078843860
Conclusion:
The research established that the death of Delhi Police Head Constable Amit was not connected to the CJP ‘Sansad Chalo’ protest held on July 20, 2026. Amit died on July 15 after being hit by a speeding vehicle while on duty at Singhu Border. The old accident is being falsely linked to the recent protest with a misleading claim.
Introduction
To combat the problem of annoying calls and SMS, telecom regulator TRAI has urged service providers to create a uniform digital platform in two months that will allow them to request, maintain, and withdraw customers’ approval for promotional calls and messages. In the initial stage, only subscribers will be able to initiate the process of registering their consent to receive promotional calls and SMS, and later, business entities will be able to contact customers to seek their consent to receive promotional messages, according to a statement issued by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) on Saturday.
TRAI Directs Telecom Providers to Set Up Digital Platform
TRAI has now directed all access providers to develop and deploy the Digital Consent Acquisition (DCA) facility for creating a unified platform and process to digitally register customers’ consent across all service providers and principal entities. Consent is received and maintained under the current system by several key entities such as banks, other financial institutions, insurance firms, trading companies, business entities, real estate businesses, and so on.
The purpose, scope of consent, and the principal entity or brand name shall be clearly mentioned in the consent-seeking message sent over the short code,” according to the statement.
It stated that only approved online or app links, call-back numbers, and so on will be permitted to be used in consent-seeking communications.
TRAI issued guidelines to guarantee that all voice-based Telemarketers are brought under a single Distributed ledger technology (DLT) platform for more efficient monitoring of nuisance calls and unwanted communications. It also instructs operators to actively deploy AI/ML-based anti-phishing systems as well as to integrate tech solutions on the DLT platform to deal with malicious calls and texts.
TRAI has issued two separate Directions to Access Service Providers under TCCCPR-2018 (Telecom Commercial Communications Customer Preference Regulations) to ensure that all promotional messages are sent through Registered Telemarketers (RTMs) using approved Headers and Message Templates on Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLT) platform, and to stop misuse of Headers and Message Templates,” the regulator said in a statement.
Users can already block telemarketing calls and texts by texting 1909 from their registered mobile number. By dialing 1909, customers can opt out of getting advertising calls by activating the do not disturb (DND) feature.
Telecom providers operate DLT platforms, and businesses involved in sending bulk promotional or transactional SMS must register by providing their company information, including sender IDs and SMS templates.
According to the instructions, telecom companies will send consent-seeking messages using the common short code 127. The goal, extent of consent, and primary entity/brand name must be clearly stated in the consent-seeking message delivered via the shortcode.
TRAI stated that only whitelisted URLs/APKs (Android package kits file format)/OTT links/call back numbers, etc., shall be used in consent-seeking messages.
Telcos must “ensure that promotional messages are not transmitted by unregistered telemarketers or telemarketers using telephone numbers (10 digits numbers).” Telecom providers have been urged to act against all erring telemarketers in accordance with the applicable regulations and legal requirements.
Users can, however, refuse to receive any consent-seeking messages launched by any significant Telcos have been urged to create an SMS/IVR (interactive voice response)/online service for this purpose.
According to TRAI’s timeline, the consent-taking process by primary companies will begin on September 1.According to a nationwide survey conducted by a local circle, 66% of mobile users continue to receive three or more bothersome calls per day, the majority of which originate from personal cell numbers.
There are scams surfacing on the internet with new types of scams, like WhatsApp international call scams. The latest scam is targeting Delhi police, the scammers pretend to be police officials of Delhi and ask for the personal details of the users and the calling them from a 9-digit number.
A recent scam
A Twitter user reported receiving an automated call from +91 96681 9555, stating, “This call is from Delhi Police.” It went on to ask her to stay in the queue since some of her documents needed to be picked up. Then he said he is a sub-inspector at New Delhi’s Kirti Nagar police station. He then questioned if she had lately misplaced her Aadhaar card, PAN card, or ATM card, to which she replied ‘no’. The fraudster then claims to be a cop and asks her to validate the final four digits of her card because they have discovered a card with her name on it. And so many other people tweeted about this.
The scams are constantly increasing as earlier these scammers asked for account details and claimed to be Delhi police and used 9-digit numbers for scamming people.
TRAI’s new guidelines regarding the consent to receive any promotional calls and messages to telecommunication providers will be able to curb the scams.
The e- KYC is an essential requirement as e-KYC offers a more secure identity verification process in an increasingly digital age that uses biometric technologies to provide quick results.
Conclusion
The aim is to prevent unwanted calls and communications sent to customers via digital methods without their permission. Once this platform is implemented, an organization can only send promotional calls or messages with the customer’s explicit approval. Companies use a variety of methods to notify clients about their products, including phone calls, text messages, emails, and social media. Customers, however, are constantly assaulted with the same calls and messages as a result of this practice. With the constant increase in scams, the new guideline of TRAI will also curb the calling of Scams. digital KYC prevents SIM fraud and offers a more secure identity verification method.
