#FactCheck - Viral image circulating on social media depicts a natural optical illusion from Epirus, Greece.
Executive Summary:
A viral image circulating on social media claims it to be a natural optical illusion from Epirus, Greece. However, upon fact-checking, it was found that the image is an AI-generated artwork created by Iranian artist Hamidreza Edalatnia using the Stable Diffusion AI tool. CyberPeace Research Team found it through reverse image search and analysis with an AI content detection tool named HIVE Detection, which indicated a 100% likelihood of AI generation. The claim of the image being a natural phenomenon from Epirus, Greece, is false, as no evidence of such optical illusions in the region was found.

Claims:
The viral image circulating on social media depicts a natural optical illusion from Epirus, Greece. Users share on X (formerly known as Twitter), YouTube Video, and Facebook. It’s spreading very fast across Social Media.

Similar Posts:


Fact Check:
Upon receiving the Posts, the CyberPeace Research Team first checked for any Synthetic Media detection, and the Hive AI Detection tool found it to be 100% AI generated, which is proof that the Image is AI Generated. Then, we checked for the source of the image and did a reverse image search for it. We landed on similar Posts from where an Instagram account is linked, and the account of similar visuals was made by the creator named hamidreza.edalatnia. The account we landed posted a photo of similar types of visuals.

We searched for the viral image in his account, and it was confirmed that the viral image was created by this person.

The Photo was posted on 10th December, 2023 and he mentioned using AI Stable Diffusion the image was generated . Hence, the Claim made in the Viral image of the optical illusion from Epirus, Greece is Misleading.
Conclusion:
The image claiming to show a natural optical illusion in Epirus, Greece, is not genuine, and it's False. It is an artificial artwork created by Hamidreza Edalatnia, an artist from Iran, using the artificial intelligence tool Stable Diffusion. Hence the claim is false.
Related Blogs

Executive Summary:
A video circulating online claims to show a man being assaulted by BSF personnel in India for selling Bangladesh flags at a football stadium. The footage has stirred strong reactions and cross border concerns. However, our research confirms that the video is neither recent nor related to the incident that occurred in India. The content has been wrongly framed and shared with misleading claims, misrepresenting the actual incident.
Claim:
It is being claimed through a viral post on social media that a Border Security Force (BSF) soldier physically attacked a man in India for allegedly selling the national flag of Bangladesh in West Bengal. The viral video further implies that the incident reflects political hostility towards Bangladesh within Indian territory.

Fact Check:
After conducting thorough research, including visual verification, reverse image searching, and confirming elements in the video background, we determined that the video was filmed outside of Bangabandhu National Stadium in Dhaka, Bangladesh, during the crowd buildup prior to the AFC Asian Cup. A match featuring Bangladesh against Singapore.

Second layer research confirmed that the man seen being assaulted is a local flag-seller named Hannan. There are eyewitness accounts and local news sources indicating that Bangladeshi Army officials were present to manage the crowd on the day under review. During the crowd control effort a soldier assaulted the vendor with excessive force. The incident created outrage to which the Army responded by identifying the officer responsible and taking disciplinary measures. The victim was reported to have been offered reparations for the misconduct.

Conclusion:
Our research confirms that the viral video does not depict any incident in India. The claim that a BSF officer assaulted a man for selling Bangladesh flags is completely false and misleading. The real incident occurred in Bangladesh, and involved a local army official during a football event crowd-control situation. This case highlights the importance of verifying viral content before sharing, as misinformation can lead to unnecessary panic, tension, and international misunderstanding.
- Claim: Viral video claims BSF personnel thrashing a person selling Bangladesh National Flag in West Bengal
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading

Introduction
Regulatory agencies throughout Europe have stepped up their monitoring of digital communication platforms because of the increased use of Artificial Intelligence in the digital domain. Messaging services have evolved into being more than just messaging systems, they now serve as a gateway for Artificial Intelligence services, Business Tools and Digital Marketplaces. In light of this evolution, the Competition Authority in Italy has taken action against Meta Platforms and ordered Meta to cease activities on WhatsApp that are deemed to restrict the ability of other companies to sell AI-based chatbots. This action highlights the concerns surrounding Gatekeeping Power, Market Foreclosure and Innovation Suppression. This proceeding will also raise questions regarding the application of Competition Law to the actions of Dominant Digital Platforms, where they leverage their own ecosystems to promote their own AI products to the detriment of competitors.
Background of the Case
In December 2025, Italy’s competition authority, the Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM), ordered Meta Platforms to suspend certain contractual terms governing WhatsApp. These terms allegedly prevented or restricted the operation of third-party AI chatbots on WhatsApp’s platform.
The decision was issued as an interim measure during an ongoing antitrust investigation. According to the AGCM, the disputed terms risked excluding competing AI chatbot providers from accessing a critical digital channel, thereby distorting competition and harming consumer choice.
Why WhatsApp Matters as a Digital Gateway
WhatsApp is situated uniquely within the European digital landscape. It has hundreds of millions of users throughout the entire European Union; therefore, it is an integral part of the communication infrastructure that supports communications between individual consumers and companies as well as between companies and their service providers. AI chatbot developers depend heavily upon WhatsApp as it provides the ability to connect directly with consumers in real-time, which is critical to their success as business offers.
According to the Italian regulator's opinion, a corporation that controls the ability to communicate via such a popular platform has a tremendous influence over innovation within that market as it essentially operates as a gatekeeper between the company creating an innovative service and the consumer using that service. If Meta is permitted to stop competing AI chatbot developers while providing more productive and useful offers than those offered by competing developers, it is likely that competing developers will be unable to market and distribute their innovative products at sufficient scale to remain competitive.
Alleged Abuse of Dominant Position
Under EU and national competition law, companies holding a dominant market position bear a special responsibility not to distort competition. The AGCM’s concern is that Meta may have abused WhatsApp’s dominance by:
- Restricting market access for rival AI chatbot providers
- Limiting technical development by preventing interoperability
- Strengthening Meta’s own AI ecosystem at the expense of competitors
Such conduct, if proven, could amount to an abuse under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Importantly, the authority emphasised that even contractual terms—rather than explicit bans—can have exclusionary effects when imposed by a dominant platform.
Meta’s Response and Infrastructure Argument
Meta has openly condemned the Italian ruling as “fundamentally flawed,” arguing that third-party AI chatbots represent a major economic burden to the infrastructure and risk the performance, safety, and user enjoyment of WhatsApp.
Although the protection of infrastructure is a valid issue of concern, competition authorities commonly look at whether the justifications for such restrictions are appropriate and non-discriminatory. One of the principal legal issues is whether the restrictions imposed by Meta were applied in a uniform manner or whether they were selectively imposed in favour of Meta's AI services. If the restrictions are asymmetrical in application, they may be viewed as anti-competitive rather than as legitimate technical safeguards.
Link to the EU’s Digital Markets Framework
The Italian case fits into a wider EU context in relation to their efforts to regulate the actions of large technology companies with the use of prior (ex-ante) regulation as contained in the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The DMA has put in place obligations on a set of gatekeepers to make available to third parties on a non-discriminatory basis in order to maintain equitable access, interoperability and no discrimination against those parties.
While the Italian case has been brought pursuant to an Italian competition law, its philosophy is consistent with that of the DMA in that dominant digital platforms should not undertake actions that use their control over their core products and services to prevent other companies from being able to innovate. The trend with some EU national regulators is to be increasingly willing to take swift action through the application of interim measures rather than await many years for final decisions.
Implications for AI Developers and Platforms
The Italian order signifies to developers of AI-based chatbots that competitive access to AI technology via messaging services is an important factor for regulatory bodies. The order also serves as a warning to the large incumbent organisations that are establishing a foothold in the messaging services market to integrate AI into their already established platforms that they will not be protected from competition laws.
Additionally, the overall case showcases the growing consensus amongst regulatory agencies regarding the role of competition in the development of AI. If a handful of large companies are allowed to control both the infrastructure and the AI technology being operated on top of that infrastructure, the result will likely be the development of closed ecosystems that eliminate or greatly reduce the potential for technology diversity.
Conclusion
Italy's move against Meta highlights a significant intersection between competitive laws and artificial intelligence. The Italian antitrust authority has reinforced the principle that digital gatekeepers cannot use contractual methods to block off access to competition in targeting WhatsApp's restrictive terms. As AI becomes a larger part of our day to day digital services, regulatory bodies will likely continue to increase their scrutiny on platform behaviour. The result of this investigation will impact not just the Metaverse's AI strategy, but also create a baseline for future European regulators' methods of balancing innovation versus competition versus consumer choice in an increasingly AI-driven digital marketplace.
References
- https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/italy-watchdog-orders-meta-halt-whatsapp-terms-barring-rival-ai-chatbots-2025-12-24/
- https://techcrunch.com/2025/12/24/italy-tells-meta-to-suspend-its-policy-that-bans-rival-ai-chatbots-from-whatsapp/
- https://www.communicationstoday.co.in/italy-watchdog-orders-meta-to-halt-whatsapp-terms-barring-rival-ai-chatbots/
- https://www.techinasia.com/news/italy-watchdog-orders-meta-halt-whatsapp-terms-ai-bot

Introduction
The ramifications of cybercrime can be far-reaching. Depending on the size of the attack, even entire countries can be affected if their critical infrastructure is connected to the internet. The vast majority of security breaches start within the perimeter and most internet attacks are socially engineered. Unwittingly trusting any email or web request from an unknown sender creates a potential danger for those organisations that depend on the Internet for their business functions. In this ever-evolving digital downtown yet another group has emerged from its darkest corners of targeting the UK’s very bastion of British and global heritage; a treasure trove of around 14 million volumes, ancient manuscripts, in the precious British Library. A group self-identified as Rhysida. Their bold maneuver, executed with the stealth of seasoned cyber brigands, has cast a shadow as long and dark as those found in the Gothic novels that rest on the library's shelves. The late October cyber-attack has thrust the British Library into an unnerving state of chaos, a situation more commonly aligned with works of dystopian fiction than the everyday reality of a revered institution.
The Modus Operandi
The gang uses all-new Rhysida ransomware to jeopardize Virtual Private Networks, which is typically used by library staff to gain access to their employee’s systems remotely. The Ransomware presents itself as a regular decoy file in a familiar fashion as regular phishing attacks in an email, tricking its victim and downloading itself into the host system. Once the malware enters the system it stays dormant and lurks around the system for a period of time. The new malware has significantly reduced the dwell time from 4 days to less than 24 hours which enables it to evade periodic system checks to avoid detection.
Implications of Cyber Attack
Implications of the cyber-attack have been sobering and multifaceted. The library's systems, which serve as the lifeline for countless scholars, students, and the reading public, were left in disarray, unsettlingly reminiscent of a grand mansion invaded by incorporeal thieves. The violation has reverberated through the digital corridors of this once-impenetrable fortress, and the virtual aftershocks are ongoing. Patrons, who traverse a diverse spectrum of society, but share a common reverence for knowledge, received unsettling news: the possibility that their private data has been compromised—a sanctity breached, revealing yet again how even the most hallowed of spaces are not impervious to modern threats.
It is with no small sense of irony that we consider the nature of the stolen goods—names, email addresses, and the like. It is not the physical tomes of inestimable value that have been ransacked, but rather the digital footprints of those who sought the wisdom within the library's walls. This virtual Pandora's Box, now unleashed onto the dark web, has been tagged with a monetary value. Rhysida has set the ominous asking price of a staggering $740,000 worth of cryptocurrency for the compromised data, flaunting their theft with a hubris that chills the spine.
Yet, in this convoluted narrative unfolds a subplot that offers some measure of consolation. Payment information purports the library has not been included in this digital heist, offering a glint of reassurance amidst the prevailing uncertainty. This digital storm has had seismic repercussions: the library's website and interconnected systems have been besieged and access to the vast resources significantly hampered. The distressing notice of a 'major technology outage' transformed the digital facade from a portal for endless learning to a bulletin of sorrow, projecting the sombre message across virtual space.
The Impact
The impact of this violation will resonate far beyond the mere disruption of services; it signals the dawn of an era where venerable institutions of culture and learning must navigate the depths of cybersecurity. As the library grapples with the breach, a new front has opened in the age-old battle for the preservation of knowledge. The continuity of such an institution in a digitised world will be tested, and the outcome will define the future of digital heritage management. As the institution rallies, led by Roly Keating, its Chief Executive, one observes not a defeatist retreat, but a stoic, strategic regrouping. Gratitude is extended to patrons and partners whose patience has become as vital a resource as the knowledge the library preserves. The reassurances given, while acknowledging the laborious task ahead, signal not just an intention to repair but to fortify, to adapt, to evolve amidst adversity.
This wretched turn of events serves as a portentous reminder that threats to our most sacred spaces have transformed. The digital revolution has indeed democratised knowledge but has also exposed it to neoteric threats. The British Library, a repository of the past, must now confront a distinctly modern adversary. It requires us to posit whether our contemporary guardians of history are equipped to combat those who wield malicious code as their weapons of choice.
Best Practices for Cyber Resilience
It is crucial to keep abreast with recent developments in cyberspace and emerging trends. Libraries in the digital age must ensure the protection of their patron’s data by applying comprehensive security protocols to safeguard the integrity, availability and confidentiality of sensitive information of their patrons. A few measures that can be applied by libraries include.
- Secured Wi-Fi networks: Libraries offering public Wi-Fi facilities must secure them with strong encryption protocols such as WPA 3. Libraries should establish separate networks for internal operations allowing separation of staff and public networks to protect sensitive information.
- Staff Training Programs: To avoid human error it is imperative that comprehensive training programs are conducted on a regular basis to generate greater awareness of cyber threats among staff and educate them about best practices of cyber hygiene and data security.
- Data Backups and Recovery Protocols: Patrons' sensitive data should be updated and backed up regularly. Proper verification of the user’s data integrity is crucial and should be stored securely in a dedicated repository to ensure full recovery of the user’s data in the event of a breach.
- Strong Authentication: Strong authentication to enhance library defenses is crucial to combat cyber threats. Staff and Patrons should be educated on strong password usage and the implementation of Multi-Factor Authentication to add an extra layer of security.
Conclusion
Finally, whatever the future holds, what remains unassailable is the cultural edifice that is the British Library. Its trials and tribulations, like those of the volumes it safeguards, become a part of a larger narrative of endurance and defiance. In the canon of history—filled with conflicts and resolutions—the library, like the lighter anecdotes and tragic tales it harbours, will decidedly hold its place. And perhaps, with some assurance, we might glean from the sentiment voiced by Milton—an assurance that the path from turmoil to enlightenment, though fraught with strenuous challenges, is paved with lessons learned and resilience rediscovered. Cyberspace is constantly evolving hence it is in our best interest to keep abreast of all developments in this digital sphere. Maximum threats can be avoided if we are vigilant.
References: