#FactCheck - False Claim of Italian PM Congratulating on Ram Temple, Reveals Birthday Thanks

Introduction

‍

Law grows by confronting its absences, it heals through its own gaps. States often find themselves navigating a shared frontier without a mutual guide or lines of law in an era of expanding digital boundaries and growing cyber damages. The United Nations General Assembly ratified the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime on December 24, 2024, and more than sixty governments were in attendance in the signing ceremony on 24th & 25th October this year, marking a moment of institutional regeneration and global commitment. 

‍

A new Lexicon for Global Order

The old liberal order is being strained by growing nationalism, economic fracturing, populism, and great-power competition as often emphasised in the works of scholars like G. John Iken berry and John Mearsheimer. Multilateral arrangements become more brittle in such circumstances. Therefore, the new cybercrimes convention represents not only a legal tool but also a resurgence of international promise, a significant win for collective governance in an uncertain time. It serves as a reminder that institutions can be rebuilt even after they have been damaged. 

‍

In Discussion: The Fabric of the Digital Polis

‍

The digital sphere has become a contentious area. On the one hand, the US and its allies support stakeholder governance, robust individual rights, and open data flows. On the other hand, nations like China and Russia describe a “post-liberal cyber order” based on state mediation, heavily regulated flows, and sovereignty. Instead of focusing on ideological dichotomies, India, which is positioned as both a rising power and a voice of the Global South, has offered a viewpoint based on supply-chain security, data localisation, and capacity creation. Thus, rather than being merely a regulation, the treaty arises from a framework of strategic recalibration. 

‍

What Changed & Why it Matters

‍

There have been regional cybercrime accords up to this point, such as the Budapest Convention. The goal of this new international convention, which is accessible to all UN members, is to standardise definitions, evidence sharing and investigation instruments. 72 states signed the Hanoi signature event in October, 2025, demonstrating an unparalleled level of scope and determination. In addition to establishing structures for cooperative investigations, extradition, and the sharing of electronic evidence, it requires signatories to criminalise acts such as fraud, unlawful access to systems, data interference, and online child exploitation. 

For the first time, a legally obligatory global architecture aims to harmonise cross-border evidence flows, mutual legal assistance, and national procedural laws. Cybercrime offers genuine promise for community defence at a time when it is no longer incidental but existential, attacks on hospitals, schools and infrastructure are now common, according to the Global Observatory.

‍

Holding the Line: India’s Deliberate Path in the Age of Cyber Multilateralism 

‍

India takes a contemplative rather than a reluctant stance towards the UN Cybercrime Treaty. Though it played an active role during the drafting sessions and lent its voice to the shaping of global cyber norms, New Delhi is yet to sign the convention. Subtle but intentional, the reluctance suggests a more comprehensive reflection, an evaluation of how international obligations correspond with domestic constitutional protections, especially the right to privacy upheld by the Supreme Court in Puttaswamy v. UOI (2017). 

Prudence is the reason for this halt. Policy circles speculate that the government is still assessing the treaty’s consequences for national data protection, surveillance regimes, and territorial sovereignty. Officials have not provided explicit justifications for India’s refusal to join. India’s position has frequently been characterised by striking a careful balance between digital sovereignty and taking part in cooperative international regimes. In earlier negotiations, India had even proposed including clauses to penalise “offensive messages” on social media, echoing the erstwhile Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000, but the suggestion found little international traction. 

Advocates for digital rights such as Raman Jit Singh Chima of Access Now have warned that ensuring that the treaty’s implementation upholds constitutional privacy principles may be necessary for India to eventually endorse it. He contends that the treaty’s wording might not entirely meet India’s legal requirements in the absence of such voluntary pledges. 

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres praised the agreement as “a powerful, legally binding instrument to strengthen our collective defences against “cybercrime” during its signing in Hanoi. The issue for India is to make sure that multilateral collaboration develops in accordance with constitutional values rather than to reject that vision. Therefore, the path forward is one of assertion rather than absence, careful march towards a cyber future that protects freedom and sovereignty. 

‍

Sources: 

• https://www.icwa.in/show_content.php?lang=1&level=3&ls_id=12244&lid=7470 
• https://www.medianama.com/2025/10/223-72-nations-un-first-cybercrime-treaty-india-abstains-privacy/ ‍
• https://therecord.media/us-declines-signing-cybercrime-treaty

Introduction

Beginning with the premise that the advent of the internet has woven a rich but daunting digital web, intertwining the very fabric of technology with the variegated hues of human interaction, the EU has stepped in as the custodian of this ever-evolving tableau. It is within this sprawling network—a veritable digital Minotaur's labyrinth—that the European Union has launched a vigilant quest, seeking not merely to chart its enigmatic corridors but to instil a sense of order in its inherent chaos.

The Digital Services Act (DSA) is the EU's latest testament to this determined pilgrimage, a voyage to assert dominion over the nebulous realms of cyberspace. In its latest sagacious move, the EU has levelled its regulatory lance at the behemoths of digital indulgence—Pornhub, XVideos, and Stripchat—monarchs in the realm of adult entertainment, each commanding millions of devoted followers.

Applicability of DSA

Graced with the moniker of Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs), these titans of titillation are now facing the complex weave of duties delineated by the DSA, a legislative leviathan whose coils envelop the shadowy expanses of the internet with an aim to safeguard its citizens from the snares and pitfalls ensconced within. Like a vigilant Minotaur, the European Commission, the EU's executive arm, stands steadfast, enforcing compliance with an unwavering gaze.

The DSA is more than a mere compilation of edicts; it encapsulates a deeper, more profound ethos—a clarion call announcing that the wild frontiers of the digital domain shall be tamed, transforming into enclaves where the sanctity of individual dignity and rights is zealously championed. The three corporations, singled out as the pioneers to be ensnared by the DSA's intricate net, are now beckoned to embark on an odyssey of transformation, realigning their operations with the EU's noble envisioning of a safeguarded internet ecosystem.

The Paradigm Shift

In a resolute succession, following its first decree addressing 19 Very Large Online Platforms and Search Engines, the Commission has now ensconced the trinity of adult content purveyors within the DSA's embrace. The act demands that these platforms establish intuitive user mechanisms for reporting illicit content, prioritize communications from entities bestowed with the 'trusted flaggers' title, and elucidate to users the rationale behind actions taken to restrict or remove content. Paramount to the DSA's ethos, they are also tasked with constructing internal mechanisms to address complaints, forthwith apprising law enforcement of content hinting at criminal infractions, and revising their operational underpinnings to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and security of minors.

But the aspirations of the DSA stretch farther, encompassing a realm where platforms are agents against deception and manipulation of users, categorically eschewing targeted advertisement that exploits sensitive profiling data or is aimed at impressionable minors. The platforms must operate with an air of diligence and equitable objectivity, deftly applying their terms of use, and are compelled to reveal their content moderation practices through annual declarations of transparency.

The DSA bestows upon the designated VLOPs an even more intensive catalogue of obligations. Within a scant four months of their designation, Pornhub, XVideos, and Stripchat are mandated to implement measures that both empower and shield their users—especially the most vulnerable, minors—from harms that traverse their digital portals. Augmented content moderation measures are requisite, with critical risk analyses and mitigation strategies directed at halting the spread of unlawful content, such as child exploitation material or the non-consensual circulation of intimate imagery, as well as curbing the proliferation and repercussions of deepfake-generated pornography.

The New Rules

The DSA enshrines the preeminence of protecting minors, with a staunch requirement for VLOPs to contrive their services so as to anticipate and enfeeble any potential threats to the welfare of young internet navigators. They must enact operational measures to deter access to pornographic content by minors, including the utilization of robust age verification systems. The themes of transparency and accountability are amplified under the DSA's auspices, with VLOPs subject to external audits of their risk assessments and adherence to stipulations, the obligation to maintain accessible advertising repositories, and the provision of data access to rigorously vetted researchers.

Coordinated by the Commission in concert with the Member States' Digital Services Coordinators, vigilant supervision will be maintained to ensure the scrupulous compliance of Pornhub, Stripchat, and XVideos with the DSA's stringent directives. The Commission's services are poised to engage with the newly designated platforms diligently, affirming that initiatives aimed at shielding minors from pernicious content, as well as curbing the distribution of illegal content, are effectively addressed.

The EU's monumental crusade, distilled into the DSA, symbolises a pledge—a testament to its steadfast resolve to shepherd cyberspace, ensuring the Minotaur of regulation keeps the bedlam at a manageable compass and the sacrosanctity of the digital realm inviolate for all who meander through its infinite expanses. As we cast our gazes toward February 17, 2024—the cusp of the DSA's comprehensive application—it is palpable that this legislative milestone is not simply a set of guidelines; it stands as a bold, unflinching manifesto. It beckons the advent of a novel digital age, where every online platform, barring small and micro-enterprises, will be enshrined in the lofty ideals imparted by the DSA.

Conclusion

As we teeter on the edge of this nascent digital horizon, it becomes unequivocally clear: the European Union's Digital Services Act is more than a mundane policy—it is a pledge, a resolute statement of purpose, asserting that amid the vast, interwoven tapestry of the internet, each user's safety, dignity, and freedoms are enshrined and hold the intrinsic significance meriting the force of the EU's legislative guard. Although the labyrinth of the digital domain may be convoluted with complexity, guided by the DSA's insightful thread, the march toward a more secure, conscientious online sphere forges on—resolute, unerring, one deliberate stride at a time.

References

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_6763https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/three-of-the-biggest-porn-sites-must-verify-ages-under-eus-new-digital-law-1566874.html

Introduction

The hospitality industry is noted to be one of the industries most influenced by technology. Hotels, restaurants, and travel services are increasingly reliant on digital technologies to automate core operations and customer interactions. The shift to electronic modes of conducting business has made the industry a popular target for cyber threats. In light of increasing cyber threats, safeguarding personal and sensitive personal data on the part of the hospitality industry becomes significant not only from a customer standpoint but also from an organisational and legal perspective.

Role of cybersecurity in the hospitality industry

A hospitality industry-based entity (“HI entity”) deploys several technologies not only to automate operations but to also deliver excellent customer experiences. Technologies such as IoTs that enable smart controls in rooms, Point-of-Sale systems that manage reservations, Call Accounting Systems that track and record customer calls, keyless entry systems, and mobile apps that facilitate easy booking and service requests are popularly used in addition to operative technologies such as Property Management Systems, Hotel Accounting Systems, Local Area Networks (LAN).{1} These technologies collect vast volumes of data daily due to the nature of operations. Such data necessarily includes personal information such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email IDs etc. and sensitive information such as gender, bank account and payment details, health information pertaining to food allergens etc. Resultantly, the breach and loss of such critical data impacts customer trust and loyalty and in turn, their retention within the business. Lack of adequate cybersecurity measures also impacts the reputation and goodwill of an HI entity since customers are more likely to opt for establishments that prioritise the protection of their data. In 2022, cybercriminals syphoned 20GB of internal documents and customer data from Marriott Hotels, which included credit card information and staff information such as wage data, corporate card number and even a personnel assessment file. A much larger breach was seen in 2018, where 383 million booking records and 5.3 million unencrypted passport numbers were stolen from Marriott’s servers.{2}

Cybersecurity is also central to safeguarding trade secrets and key confidential trade information. An estimate of US $6 trillion per year on average amounts to losses generated from cybercrimes.{3} The figure, however, does not include the cost of breach, expenses related to incident response, legal fees, regulatory fines etc which may be significantly higher for a HI entity when loss of potential profits is factored in.

Cybersecurity is also central from a legal standpoint. Legal provisions in various jurisdictions mandate the protection of guest data. In India, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023, imposes a penalty of up to Rs. 50 Crores on a breach in observing obligations to take reasonable security safeguards to prevent personal data breach.{4} Similarly, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union also has guidelines for protecting personal data. Several other industry-specific rules, such as those pertaining to consumer protection,  may also be applicable.

Breaches and Mitigation

There are several kinds of cyber security threats faced by an HI entity. “Fake Booking” is a popular method of cyber attack, whereby attackers build and design a website that is modelled exactly after the hotel’s legitimate website. Many customers end up using such malicious phishing websites thereby exposing their personal and sensitive personal data to threats. Additionally, the provision of free wifi within hotel premises, usually accessible freely to the public, implies that a malicious actor may introduce viruses and updates bearing malware. Other common cyber threats include denial of service (DoS) attacks, supply chain attacks, ransomware threats, SQL injection attacks (a type of attack where malicious code is inserted into a database to manipulate data and gain access to information), buffer overflow or buffer overrun (when the amount of data exceeds its storage capacity, implying that the excess data overflows into other memory locations and corrupt or overwrites data in those locations). 

One of the best ways to manage data breaches is to leverage newer technologies that operate on a “privacy by design” model. An HI entity must deploy web application firewalls (WAF) that differ from regular firewalls since they can filter the content of specific web applications and prevent cyber attacks. Another method to safeguard data is by deploying a digital certificate which binds a message/instruction to the owner/generator of the message. This is useful in preventing any false claims fraud by customers. Digital certificates may be deployed on distributed ledger technologies such as blockchain, that are noted for their immutability, transparency and security. Self-sovereign identities or Identifiers (SSI) are also a security use-concept of blockchain whereby individuals own and control their personal data, thereby eliminating reliance on central authorities.{5} In the hospitality industry, SSIs enhance cybersecurity by securely storing identity-related information on a decentralised network, thereby reducing the risk of data breaches. Users can selectively share their information, ensuring privacy and minimising data exposure. This approach not only protects guests' personal details but also streamlines authentication processes, making interactions safer and more efficient.

From a less technical standpoint, cybersecurity insurance may be opted for by a hotel to secure themselves and customer information against breach. Through such insurance, a hotel may cover the liability that arises from breaches caused by both first- and third-party actions.{6} Additionally, Payment Cards Industry Data Security Standards should be adhered to, since these standards ensure that businesses should apply best practices when processing credit card data through optimised security. Employee training and upskilling in basic, practical cybersecurity measures and good practices is also a critical component of a comprehensive cybersecurity strategy.

References:

• [1]  The Growing Importance of Cybersecurity in the Hospitality Industry”, Alfatec, 11 September 2023 https://www.alfatec.ai/academy/resource-library/the-growing-importance-of-cybersecurity-in-the-hospitality-industry
• [2]  Vigliarolo, Brandon, “Marriott Hotels admit to third data breach in 4 years”, 6 July 2022 https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/06/marriott_hotels_suffer_yet_another/#:~:text=In%20the%20case%20of%20the,of%20an%20individual%20organization%20ever. 

• [3] Shabani, Neda & Munir, Arslan. (2020). A Review of Cyber Security Issues in the Hospitality Industry. 10.1007/978-3-030-52243-8_35. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342683038_A_Review_of_Cyber_Security_Issues_in_Hospitality_Industry/citation/download    
• [4] The Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Digital%20Personal%20Data%20Protection%20Act%202023.pdf 
• [5]  “What is self-sovereign identity?”, Sovrin, 6 December 2018 https://sovrin.org/faq/what-is-self-sovereign-identity/ 
• [6] Yasar, Kinza, “Cyber Insurance”, Tech Target https://www.techtarget.com/searchsecurity/definition/cybersecurity-insurance-cybersecurity-liability-insurance