#FactCheck - "Viral Video Misleadingly Claims Surrender to Indian Army, Actually Shows Bangladesh Army”

Introduction:

Welcome to the third edition of our blog on digital forensics series. In our previous blog we discussed the difference between copying, cloning, and imaging in the context of Digital Forensics, and found out why imaging is a better process. Today we will discuss the process of evidence collection in Digital Forensics. The whole process starts with making sure the evidence collection team has all necessary tools required for the task.

Investigating Tools and Equipment:

Below are some mentioned tools that the team should carry with them for a successful evidence collection:

• Anti-static bags
• Faraday bags
• Toolkit having screwdrivers(nonmagnetic), scissors, pins, cutters, forceps, clips etc.
• Rubber gloves
• Incident response toolkit (Software)
• Converter/Adapter: USB, SATA, IDE, SCSI
• Imaging software
• Volatile data collection tools (FTK Imager, Magnet Forensics RAM Capture)
• Pens, permanent markers
• Storage containers
• Batteries
• Video cameras
• Note/sketch pads
• Blank storage media
• Write-Blocker device
• Labels
• Crime scene security tapes
• Camera

What sources of Data are necessary for Digital Evidence?

• Hard-Drive (Desktop, Laptop, External, Server)
• Flash Drive
• SD Cards
• Floppy Disks
• Optical Media (CD, DVD)
• CCTV/DVR
• Internal Storage of Mobile Device
• GPS (Mobile/Car)
• Call Site Track (Towers)
• RAM

‍

‍

Evidence Collection

The investigators encounter two primary types of evidence during the course of gathering evidence: non-electronic and electronic evidence.

The following approaches could be used to gather non-electronic evidence:

• In the course of looking into electronic crimes, recovering non-electronic evidence can be extremely important.  Be cautious to make sure that this kind of evidence is retrieved and kept safe. Items that may be relevant to a later review of electronic evidence include passwords, papers or printouts, calendars, literature, hardware and software manuals, text or graphical computer printouts, and photos.  These items should be secured and kept for further examination.
• They are frequently found close to the computer or other related hardware.  Locating, securing, and preserving all evidence is required by departmental procedures.

Three scenarios arise for the collection of digital evidence from computers: 

Situation 1: The desktop is visible, and the monitor is on.

• Take a picture of the screen and note the data that is visible. 
• Utilize tools for memory capturing to gather volatile data.
• Look for virtual disks. If so, gather mounted data's logical copies.
• Give each port and connection a label.
• Take a picture of them.
• Turn off network access to stop remote access.
• Cut off the power or turn it off.
• Locate and disconnect the hard drive by opening the CPU chassis.
• Take all evidence and place it in anti-magnetic (Faraday) bags.
• Deliver the evidence to the forensic lab.
• Keep the chain of custody intact.

Situation 2: The monitor is turned on, but it either has a blank screen (sleep mode) or an image for the screensaver.

• Make a small mouse movement (without pressing buttons). The work product should appear on the screen, or it should ask for a password.
• If moving the mouse does not result in a change to the screen, stop using the mouse and stop all keystrokes.
• Take a picture of the screen and note the data that is visible.
• Use memory capturing tools to gather volatile data (always use a write blocker to prevent manipulation during data collection).
• Proceed further in accordance with Situation 1.

Situation 3: The Monitor Is Off

• Write down the "off" status.
• After turning on the monitor, check to see if its status matches that of situations 1 or 2 above, and then take the appropriate action.
• Using a phone modem, cable, confirm that you are connected to the outside world. Try to find the phone number if there is a connection to the phone.
• To protect evidence, take out the floppy disks that might be there, package each disk separately, and label the evidence.  Put in a blank floppy disk or a seizure disk, if one is available. Avoid touching the CD drive or taking out CDs.
• Cover the power connector and every drive slot with tape.
• Note the serial number, make, and model.
• Take a picture of the computer's connections and make a diagram with the relevant cables.
• To enable precise reassembly at a later date, label all connectors and cable ends, including connections to peripheral devices. Put "unused" on any connection ports that are not in use.  Recognize docking stations for laptop computers in an attempt to locate additional storage media.
• All evidence should be seized and placed in anti-magnetic (Faraday) bags.
• All evidence should be seized and placed in anti-magnetic (Faraday) bags.
• Put a tag or label on every bag.
• Deliver the evidence to the forensic lab.
• Keep the chain of custody intact. 

Following the effective gathering of data, the following steps in the process are crucial: data packaging, data transportation, and data storage.

The following are the steps involved in data packaging, transportation, and storage:

Packaging:

• Label every computer system that is gathered so that it can be put back together exactly as it was found

When gathering evidence at a scene of crime,

• Before packing, make sure that every piece of evidence has been appropriately  labeled and documented.
• Latent or trace evidence requires particular attention, and steps should be taken to preserve it.
• Use paper or antistatic plastic bags for packing magnetic media to prevent static electricity. Do not use materials like regular plastic bags (instead use faraday bags) that can cause static electricity. 
• Be careful not to bend, fold, computer media like tapes, or CD-ROM.
• Make sure that the labels on every container used to store evidence are correct.

Transporting

• Make sure devices are not packed in containers and are safely fastened inside the car to avoid shock and excessive vibrations. Computers could be positioned on the floor of the car,and monitors could be mounted on the seat with the screen down .

When transporting evidence—

• Any electronic evidence should be kept away from magnetic sources.  Radiation transmitters, speaker magnets, and heated seats are a few examples of items that can contaminate electronic evidence.
• Avoid leaving electronic evidence in your car for longer than necessary. Electronic devices can be harmed by extremes in temperature, humidity.
• Maintain the integrity of the chain of custody while transporting any evidence.

Storing

• Evidence should be kept safe and away from extremes in humidity and temperature. Keep it away from dust, moisture, magnetic devices, and other dangerous impurities.  Be advised that extended storage may cause important evidence—like dates, times, and system configurations—to disappear. Because batteries have a finite lifespan, data loss may occur if they malfunction. Whenever the battery operated device needs immediate attention, it should be informed to the relevant authority (eg., the chief of laboratory, the forensic examiner, and the custodian of the evidence). 

CONCLUSION:

Thus, securing the crime scene to packaging, transportation and storage of data are the important steps in the process of collecting digital evidence in forensic investigations. Keeping the authenticity during the process along with their provenance is critical during this phase. It is also important to ensure the admissibility of evidence in legal proceedings. This systematic approach is essential for effectively investigating and prosecuting digital crimes.

‍

Introduction

In the age of digital technology, the concept of net neutrality has become more crucial for preserving the equity and openness of the internet. Thanks to net neutrality, all internet traffic is treated equally, without difference or preferential treatment. Thanks to this concept, users can freely access and distribute content, which promotes innovation, competition, and the democratisation of knowledge. India has seen controversy over net neutrality, which has led to a legal battle to protect an open internet. In this blog post, we’ll look at the challenges of the law and the efforts made to safeguard net neutrality in India.

Background on Net Neutrality in India

Net neutrality became a hot topic in India after a major telecom service provider suggested charging various fees for accessing different parts of the internet. Internet users, activists, and organisations in favour of an open internet raised concern over this. Millions of comments were made on the consultation document by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) published in 2015, highlighting the significance of net neutrality for the country’s internet users.

Legal Battle and Regulatory Interventions

The battle for net neutrality in India acquired notoriety when TRAI released the “Prohibition of Discriminatory Tariffs for Data Services Regulations” in 2016. These laws, often known as the “Free Basics” prohibition, were created to put an end to the usage of zero-rating platforms, which exempt specific websites or services from data expenses. The regulations ensured that all data on the internet would be handled uniformly, regardless of where it originated.

But the legal conflict didn’t end there. The telecom industry challenged TRAI’s regulations, resulting in a flurry of legal conflicts in numerous courts around the country. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act and its provisions of it that control TRAI’s ability to regulate internet services were at the heart of the legal dispute.

The Indian judicial system greatly helped the protection of net neutrality. The importance of non-discriminatory internet access was highlighted in 2018 when the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) upheld the TRAI regulations and ruled in favour of net neutrality. The TDSAT ruling created a crucial precedent for net neutrality in India. In 2019, after several rounds of litigation, the Supreme Court of India backed the principles of net neutrality, declaring that it is a fundamental idea that must be protected. The nation’s legislative framework for preserving a free and open internet was bolstered by the ruling by the top court.

Ongoing Challenges and the Way Forward

Even though India has made great strides towards upholding net neutrality, challenges persist. Because of the rapid advancement of technology and the emergence of new services and platforms, net neutrality must always be safeguarded. Some practices, such as “zero-rating” schemes and service-specific data plans, continue to raise questions about potential violations of net neutrality principles. Regulatory efforts must be proactive and under constant watch to allay these worries. The regulatory organisation, TRAI, is responsible for monitoring for and responding to breaches of the net neutrality principles. It’s crucial to strike a balance between promoting innovation and competition and maintaining a free and open internet.

Additionally, public awareness and education on the issue are crucial for the continuation of net neutrality. By informing users of their rights and promoting involvement in the conversation, a more inclusive and democratic decision-making process is assured. Civil society organisations and advocacy groups may successfully educate the public about net neutrality and gain their support.

Conclusion

The legal battle for net neutrality in India has been a significant turning point in the campaign to preserve an open and neutral internet. A robust framework for net neutrality in the country has been established thanks to legislative initiatives and judicial decisions. However, due to ongoing challenges and the dynamic nature of technology, maintaining net neutrality calls for vigilant oversight and strong actions. An open and impartial internet is crucial for fostering innovation, increasing free speech, and providing equal access to information. India’s attempts to uphold net neutrality should motivate other nations dealing with similar issues. All parties, including politicians, must work together to protect the principles of net neutrality and ensure that the Internet is accessible to everyone.

Introduction

An age of unprecedented problems has been brought about by the constantly changing technological world, and misuse of deepfake technology has become a reason for concern which has also been discussed by the Indian Judiciary. Supreme Court has expressed concerns about the consequences of this quickly developing technology, citing a variety of issues from security hazards to privacy violations to the spread of disinformation. In general, misuse of deepfake technology is particularly dangerous since it may fool even the sharpest eye because they are almost identical to the actual thing.

SC judge expressed Concerns: A Complex Issue

During a recent speech, Supreme Court Justice Hima Kohli emphasized the various issues that deepfakes present. She conveyed grave concerns about the possibility of invasions of privacy, the dissemination of false information, and the emergence of security threats. The ability of deepfakes to be created so convincingly that they seem to come from reliable sources is especially concerning as it increases the potential harm that may be done by misleading information.

Gender-Based Harassment Enhanced

In this internet era, there is a concerning chance that harassment based on gender will become more severe, as Justice Kohli noted. She pointed out that internet platforms may develop into epicentres for the quick spread of false information by anonymous offenders who act worrisomely and freely. The fact that virtual harassment is invisible may make it difficult to lessen the negative effects of toxic online postings. In response, It is advocated that we can develop a comprehensive policy framework that modifies current legal frameworks—such as laws prohibiting sexual harassment online —to adequately handle the issues brought on by technology breakthroughs.

Judicial Stance on Regulating Deepfake Content

In a different move, the Delhi High Court voiced concerns about the misuse of deepfake and exercised judicial intervention to limit the use of artificial intelligence (AI)-generated deepfake content. The intricacy of the matter was highlighted by a division bench. The bench proposed that the government, with its wider outlook, could be more qualified to handle the situation and come up with a fair resolution. This position highlights the necessity for an all-encompassing strategy by reflecting the court's acknowledgement of the technology's global and borderless character.

PIL on Deepfake 

In light of these worries, an Advocate from Delhi has taken it upon himself to address the unchecked use of AI, with a particular emphasis on deepfake material. In the event that regulatory measures are not taken, his Public Interest Litigation (PIL), which is filed at the Delhi High Court, emphasises the necessity of either strict limits on AI or an outright prohibition. The necessity to discern between real and fake information is at the center of this case. Advocate suggests using distinguishable indicators, such as watermarks, to identify AI-generated work, reiterating the demand for openness and responsibility in the digital sphere.

The Way Ahead: 

Finding a Balance

• The authorities must strike a careful balance between protecting privacy, promoting innovation, and safeguarding individual rights as they negotiate the complex world of deepfakes. The Delhi High Court's cautious stance and Justice Kohli's concerns highlight the necessity for a nuanced response that takes into account the complexity of deepfake technology.
• Because of the increased complexity with which the information may be manipulated in this digital era, the court plays a critical role in preserving the integrity of the truth and shielding people from the possible dangers of misleading technology. The legal actions will surely influence how the Indian judiciary and legislature respond to deepfakes and establish guidelines for the regulation of AI in the nation. The legal environment needs to change as technology does in order to allow innovation and accountability to live together.

Collaborative Frameworks: 

• Misuse of deepfake technology poses an international problem that cuts beyond national boundaries. International collaborative frameworks might make it easier to share technical innovations, legal insights, and best practices. A coordinated response to this digital threat may be ensured by starting a worldwide conversation on deepfake regulation.

Legislative Flexibility: 

• Given the speed at which technology is advancing, the legislative system must continue to adapt. It will be required to introduce new legislation expressly addressing developing technology and to regularly evaluate and update current laws. This guarantees that the judicial system can adapt to the changing difficulties brought forth by the misuse of deepfakes.

AI Development Ethics: 

• Promoting moral behaviour in AI development is crucial. Tech businesses should abide by moral or ethical standards that place a premium on user privacy, responsibility, and openness. As a preventive strategy, ethical AI practices can lessen the possibility that AI technology will be misused for malevolent purposes.

Government-Industry Cooperation: 

• It is essential that the public and commercial sectors work closely together. Governments and IT corporations should collaborate to develop and implement legislation. A thorough and equitable approach to the regulation of deepfakes may be ensured by establishing regulatory organizations with representation from both sectors.

Conclusion

A comprehensive strategy integrating technical, legal, and social interventions is necessary to navigate the path ahead. Governments, IT corporations, the courts, and the general public must all actively participate in the collective effort to combat the misuse of deepfakes, which goes beyond only legal measures. We can create a future where the digital ecosystem is safe and inventive by encouraging a shared commitment to tackling the issues raised by deepfakes. The Government is on its way to come up with dedicated legislation to tackle the issue of deepfakes. Followed by the recently issued government advisory on misinformation and deepfake.

References:

• https://www.medianama.com/2023/12/223-chaitanya-rohilla-petition-deepfakes-delhi-hc/
• https://legal.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/litigation/sc-judge-voices-concern-over-online-harassment-says-deepfake-tech-raises-privacy-invasion-alarms/105872768