#FactCheck -Mock drill video falsely shared as terrorist attack on Patna ISKCON Temple
Executive Summary
A video is being widely shared on social media with the claim that a terrorist attack took place at the ISKCON Temple in Patna. The posts claim that terrorists opened indiscriminate fire at security personnel deployed at the main gate, carried out bomb blasts, and took two priests hostage. CyberPeace Research Wing’s research found that the claim of a terrorist attack on the ISKCON Temple in Patna is false. The viral video is not from an actual attack but from a security mock drill conducted at the temple.
Claim
A Facebook post shared a video claiming: "Three suspected terrorists entered the ISKCON Temple! Security guards were shot at the gate. Three suspected terrorists carrying modern weapons and hand grenades suddenly entered the Patna ISKCON Temple in the morning and killed the security personnel deployed at the gate. They then carried out a bomb blast, creating panic inside the temple campus."
The Facebook post archive can be accessed here. Similar posts can be found here and here.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/2501959103601059
Factcheck
To verify the claim, we extracted keyframes from the viral video and conducted a reverse image search. During the search, we found reports from several credible media organisations clarifying that the video was not related to any real terrorist attack but was from a mock drill conducted to assess the preparedness of security forces. According to a Dainik Bhaskar report published on July 29, a security mock drill was conducted at the ISKCON Temple in Patna. During the exercise, a simulated emergency situation was created in which police personnel were assigned the role of suspected terrorists and were made to enter the temple premises. The drill involved personnel from Kotwali, Jakkanpur and Buddha Colony police stations, along with magistrates and around 50 police personnel who reached the spot and took charge of the situation. An ATS team was also immediately called during the exercise.
The report also quoted Patna ASP (Law and Order) Krishna Murari Prasad, who clarified that the exercise was organised to strengthen the temple’s security arrangements.
A Navbharat Times report published on July 29 also stated that, as part of the planned mock drill, three Bihar Police personnel carrying advanced weapons and hand grenades were sent inside the ISKCON Temple premises. Security agencies responded quickly, cordoned off the area, and the ATS team took control of the personnel and mock explosives, successfully completing the exercise.
During our research , we also found a post dated July 29, 2026, on the official Facebook page of the Home Department, Government of Bihar, regarding the mock drill.
The post stated that the Bihar ATS successfully conducted a security mock drill at the ISKCON Temple premises in Patna. The objective of the exercise was to test coordination between security agencies and stakeholders, quick response capabilities, and the effective implementation of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) during a possible terrorist attack or emergency situation. The post further mentioned that the drill included a rapid response to suspicious activity, area sanitisation, safe evacuation of devotees, search for suspects, and other necessary security measures.
https://www.facebook.com/HomeDeptBihar/posts/1492697179568423?ref=embed_post
Conclusion
The evidence gathered during the research confirms that the viral claim is false. The video being shared with the claim of a terrorist attack on Patna’s ISKCON Temple actually shows a security mock drill conducted by the authorities to assess emergency preparedness.
Related Blogs
Executive Summary
A video showing a flyover collapse is going viral on social media. The clip shows a flyover and a road passing beneath it, with vehicles moving normally. Suddenly, a portion of the flyover appears to collapse and fall onto the road below, with some vehicles seemingly coming under its impact. The video has been widely shared by users online. However, research by the CyberPeace found the viral claim to be false. The probe revealed that the video is not real but has been created using artificial intelligence.
Claim:
On X (formerly Twitter), a user shared the viral video on February 13, 2026, claiming it showed the reality of India’s infrastructure development and criticizing ongoing projects. The post quickly gained traction, with several users sharing it as a real incident. Similarly, another user shared the same video on Facebook on February 13, 2026, making a similar claim.
Fact Check:
To verify the claim, key frames from the viral video were extracted and searched using Google Lens. During the search, the video was traced to an account named “sphereofai” on Instagram, where it had been posted on February 9. The post included hashtags such as “AI Creator” and “AI Generated,” clearly indicating that the video was created using AI. Further examination of the account showed that the user identifies themselves as an AI content creator.
To confirm the findings, the viral video was also analysed using Hive Moderation. The tool’s analysis suggested a 99 percent probability that the video was AI-generated.
Conclusion:
The research established that the viral flyover collapse video is not authentic. It is an AI-generated clip being circulated online with misleading claims.
Introduction:
The Ministry of Civil Aviation, GOI, established the initiative ‘DigiYatra’ to ensure hassle-free and health-risk-free journeys for travellers/passengers. The initiative uses a single token of face biometrics to digitally validate identity, travel, and health along with any other data needed to enable air travel.
Cybersecurity is a top priority for the DigiYatra platform administrators, with measures implemented to mitigate risks of data loss, theft, or leakage. With over 6.5 million users, DigiYatra is an important step forward for India, in the direction of secure digital travel with seamless integration of proactive cybersecurity protocols. This blog focuses on examining the development, challenges and implications that stand in the way of securing digital travel.
What is DigiYatra? A Quick Overview
DigiYatra is a flagship initiative by the Government of India to enable paperless travel, reducing identity checks for a seamless airport experience. This technology allows the entry of passengers to be automatically processed based on a facial recognition system at all the checkpoints at the airports, including main entry, security check areas, aircraft boarding, and more.
This technology makes the boarding process quick and seamless as each passenger needs less than three seconds to pass through every touchpoint. Passengers’ faces essentially serve as their documents (ID proof and if required, Vaccine Proof) and their boarding passes.
DigiYatra has also enhanced airport security as passenger data is validated by the Airlines Departure Control System. It allows only the designated passengers to enter the terminal. Additionally, the entire DigiYatra Process is non-intrusive and automatic. In improving long-standing security and operational airport protocols, the platform has also significantly improved efficiency and output for all airport professionals, from CISF personnel to airline staff members.
Policy Origins and Framework
Rooted in the Government of India's Digital India campaign and enabled by the National Civil Aviation Policy (NCAP) 2016, DigiYatra aims to modernise air travel by integrating Aadhaar-based passenger identification. While Aadhaar is currently the primary ID, efforts are underway to include other identification methods. The platform, supported by stakeholders like the Airports Authority of India (26%) and private airports (14.8% each), must navigate stringent cybersecurity demands. Compliance with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, ensures the secure use of sensitive facial recognition data, while the Aircraft (Security) Rules, 2023, mandate robust interoperability and data protection mechanisms across stakeholders. DigiYatra also aspires to democratise digital travel, extending its reach to underserved airports and non-tech-savvy travellers. As India refines its cybersecurity and privacy frameworks, learning from global best practices is essential to safeguarding data and ensuring seamless, secure air travel operations.
International Practices
Global practices offer crucial lessons to strengthen DigiYatra's cybersecurity and streamline the seamless travel experience. Initiatives such as CLEAR in the USA and Seamless Traveller initiatives in Singapore offer actionable insights into further expanding the system to its full potential. CLEAR is operational in 58 airports and has more than 17 million users. Singapore has made Seamless Traveller active since the beginning of 2024 and aims to have a 95% shift to automated lanes by 2026.
Some additional measures that India can adopt from international initiatives are regular audits and updates to the cybersecurity policies. Further, India can aim for a cross-border policy for international travel. By implementing these recommendations, DigiYatra can not only improve data security and operational efficiency but also establish India as a leader in global aviation security standards, ensuring trust and reliability for millions of travellers
CyberPeace Recommendations
Some recommendations for further improving upon our efforts for seamless and secure digital travel are:
- Strengthen the legislation on biometric data usage and storage.
- Collaborate with global aviation bodies to develop standardised operations.
- Cybersecurity technologies, such as blockchain for immutable data records, should be adopted alongside encryption standards, data minimisation practices, and anonymisation techniques.
- A cybersecurity-first culture across aviation stakeholders.
Conclusion
DigiYatra represents a transformative step in modernising India’s aviation sector by combining seamless travel with robust cybersecurity. Leveraging facial recognition and secure data validation enhances efficiency while complying with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and Aircraft (Security) Rules, 2023.
DigiYatra must address challenges like secure biometric data storage, adopt advanced technologies like blockchain, and foster a cybersecurity-first culture to reach its full potential. Expanding to underserved regions and aligning with global best practices will further solidify its impact. With continuous innovation and vigilance, DigiYatra can position India as a global leader in secure, digital travel.
References
- https://government.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/governance/digi-yatra-operates-on-principle-of-privacy-by-design-brings-convenience-security-ceo-digi-yatra-foundation/114926799
- https://www.livemint.com/news/india/explained-what-is-digiyatra-how-it-will-work-and-other-questions-answered-11660701094885.html
- https://www.civilaviation.gov.in/sites/default/files/2023-09/ASR%20Notification_published%20in%20Gazette.pdf
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.
