#Factcheck-Allu Arjun visits Shiva temple after success of Pushpa 2? No, image is from 2017
Executive Summary:
Recently, a viral post on social media claiming that actor Allu Arjun visited a Shiva temple to pray in celebration after the success of his film, PUSHPA 2. The post features an image of him visiting the temple. However, an investigation has determined that this photo is from 2017 and does not relate to the film's release.

Claims:
The claim states that Allu Arjun recently visited a Shiva temple to express his thanks for the success of Pushpa 2, featuring a photograph that allegedly captures this moment.

Fact Check:
The image circulating on social media, that Allu Arjun visited a Shiva temple to celebrate the success of Pushpa 2, is misleading.
After conducting a reverse image search, we confirmed that this photograph is from 2017, taken during the actor's visit to the Tirumala Temple for a personal event, well before Pushpa 2 was ever announced. The context has been altered to falsely connect it to the film's success. Additionally, there is no credible evidence or recent reports to support the claim that Allu Arjun visited a temple for this specific reason, making the assertion entirely baseless.

Before sharing viral posts, take a brief moment to verify the facts. Misinformation spreads quickly and it’s far better to rely on trusted fact-checking sources.
Conclusion:
The claim that Allu Arjun visited a Shiva temple to celebrate the success of Pushpa 2 is false. The image circulating is actually from an earlier time. This situation illustrates how misinformation can spread when an old photo is used to construct a misleading story. Before sharing viral posts, take a moment to verify the facts. Misinformation spreads quickly, and it is far better to rely on trusted fact-checking sources.
- Claim: The image claims Allu Arjun visited Shiva temple after Pushpa 2’s success.
- Claimed On: Facebook
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs

Introduction
In the evolving landscape of cybercrime, attackers are not only becoming more sophisticated in their approach but also more adept in their infrastructure. The Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C) has issued a warning about the use of ‘disposable domains’ by cybercriminals. These are short-lived websites designed tomimic legitimate platforms, deceive users, and then disappear quickly to avoid detection and legal repercussions.
Although they may appear harmless at first glance, disposable domains form the backbone of countless online scams, phishing campaigns, malware distributionschemes, and disinformation networks. Cybercriminals use them to host fake websites, distribute malicious files, send deceptive emails, and mislead unsuspecting users, all while evading detection and takedown efforts.
As India’s digital economy grows and more citizens, businesses, and public services move online, it is crucial to understand this hidden layer of cybercrime infrastructure.Greater awareness among individuals, enterprises, and policymakers is essential to strengthen defences against fraud, protect users from harm, and build trust in thedigital ecosystem
What Are Disposable Domains?
A disposable domain is a website domain that is registered to be used temporarily, usually for hours or days, typically to evade detection or accountability.
These domains are inexpensive, easy to obtain, and can be set up with minimal information. They are often bought in bulk through domain registrars that do not strictly verify ownership information, sometimes using stolen credit cards or cryptocurrencies to remain anonymous. They differ from legitimate temporary domains used for testing or development in one significant aspect, which is ‘purpose’. Cybercriminals use disposable domains to carry out malicious activities such as phishing, sextortion, malware distribution, fake e-commerce sites, spam email campaigns, and disinformation operations.
How Cybercriminals Utilise Disposable Domains
1. Phishing & Credential Stealing: Attackers tend to register lookalike domains that are similar to legitimate websites (e.g., go0gle-login[.]com or sbi-verification[.]online) and trick victims into entering their login credentials. These domains will be active only long enough to deceive, and then they will disappear.
2. Malware Distribution: Disposable domains are widely used for ransomware and spyware operations for hosting malicious files. Because the domains are temporary, threat intelligence systems tend to notice them too late.
3. Fake E-Commerce & Investment Scams: Cyber crooks clone legitimate e-commerce or investment sites, place ad campaigns, and trick victims into "purchasing" goods or investing in scams. The domain vanishes when the scam runs out.
4. Spam and Botnets: Disposable domains assist in botnet command-and-control activities. They make it more difficult for defenders to block static IPs or trace the attacker's infrastructure.
5. Disinformation and Influence Campaigns: State-sponsored actors and coordinated troll networks use disposable domains to host fabricated news articles, fake government documents, and manipulated videos. When these sites are detected and taken down, they are quickly replaced with new domains, allowing the disinformation cycle to continue uninterrupted.
Why Are They Hard to Stop?
Registering a domain is inexpensive and quick, often requiring no more than an email address and payment. The difficulty is the easy domain registrations and the absence of worldwide enforcement. Domain registrars differ in enforcing Know-Your-Customer (KYC) standards stringently. ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) has certain regulations in place but enforcement is inconsistent. ICANN does require registrars to maintain accurate Who is information (the “Registrant Data Accuracy Policy”) and to act on abuse complaints. However, ICANN is not an enforcement agency. It oversees contracts with registrars but cannot directly police every registration. Cybercriminals exploit services such as:
- Privacy protection shields that conceal actual WHOIS information.
- Bulletproof hosting that evades takedown notices.
- Fast-flux DNS methods to rapidly alter IP addresses
Additionally, utilisation of IDNs ( Internationalised Domain Names) and homoglyph attacks enables the attackers to register visually similar domains to legitimate ones (e.g., using Cyrillic characters to represent Latin ones).
Real-World Example: India and the Rise of Fake Investment Sites
India has witnessed a wave of monetary scams that are connected with disposable domains. Over hundreds of false websites impersonating government loan schemes, banks or investment websites, and crypto-exchanges were found on disposable domains such as gov-loans-apply[.]xyz, indiabonds-secure[.]top, or rbi-invest[.]store. Most of them placed paid advertisements on sites such as Facebook or Google and harvested user information and payments, only to vanish in 48–72 hours. Victims had no avenue of proper recourse, and the authorities were left with a digital ghost trail.
How Disposable Domains Undermine Cybersecurity
- Bypass Blacklists: Dynamic domains constantly shifting evade static blacklists.
- Delay Attribution: Time is wasted pursuing non-existent owners or takedowns.
- Mass Targeting: One actor can register thousands of domains and attack at scale.
- Undermine Trust: Frequent users become targets when genuine sites are duplicated and it looks realistic.
Recommendations Addressing Legal and Policy Gaps in India
1. There is a need to establish a formal coordination mechanism between domain registrars and national CERTs such as CERT-In to enable effective communication and timely response to domain-based threats.
2. There is a need to strengthen the investigative and enforcement capabilities of law enforcement agencies through dedicated resources, training, and technical support to effectively tackle domain-based scams.
3. There is a need to leverage the provisions of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 to take action against phishing websites and malicious domains that collect personal data without consent.
4. There is a need to draft and implement specific regulations or guidelines to address the misuse of digital infrastructure, particularly disposable and fraudulent domains, and close existing regulatory gaps.
What Can Be Done: CyberPeace View
1. Stronger KYC for Domain Registrations: Registrars selling domains to Indian users or based in India should conduct verified KYC processes, with legal repercussions for carelessness.
2. Real-Time Domain Blacklists: CERT-In, along with ISPs and hosting companies, should operate and enforce a real-time blacklist of scam domains known.
3. Public Reporting Tools: Observers or victims should be capable of reporting suspicious domains through an easy interface (tied to cybercrime.gov.in).
4. Collaboration with Tech Platforms: Social media services and online ad platforms should filter out ads associated with disposable or spurious domains and report abuse data to CERT-In.
5. User Awareness: Netizens should be educated to check URLs thoroughly, not click on unsolicited links and they must verify the authenticity of websites.
Conclusion
Disposable domains have silently become the foundation of contemporary cybercrime. They are inexpensive, highly anonymous, and short-lived, which makes them a darling weapon for cybercriminals ranging from solo spammers to nation-state operators. In an increasingly connected Indian society where the penetration rate of internet users is high, this poses an expanding threat to economic security, public confidence, and national resilience. Combating this problem will need a combination of technical defences, policy changes, public-private alliances, and end-user sensitisation. As India develops a Cyber Secure Bharat, monitoring and addressing disposable domain abuse must be the utmost concern.
References
- https://www.bitcot.com/disposable-domains
- https://atdata.com/blog/evolution-of-email-fraud-rise-of-hyper-disposable-domains/
- https://www.cyfirma.com/research/scamonomics-the-dark-side-of-stock-crypto-investments-in-india/
- https://knowledgebase.constantcontact.com/lead-gen-crm/articles/KnowledgeBase/50330-Understanding-Blocked-Forbidden-and-Disposable-Domains?lang=en_US
- https://www.meity.gov.in/
- https://intel471.com/blog/bulletproof-hosting-fast-flux-dns-double-flux-vps

Introduction
Whatsapp is one of the leading OTT messaging platforms, which has been owned by the tech giant Meta since 2013. WhatsApp enjoys a user base of nearly 2.24 billion people globally, with almost 487 million users in India. Since the advent of Whatsapp, it has been the most commonly used messaging app, and it has made an impact to such an extent that it is used for professional as well as personal purposes. Meta powers the platform and follows similar guidelines and policies as its parent company.
The New Feature
Users of WhatsApp on the web and desktop can now access one account from various devices. One WhatsApp account may now be used on up to four handsets thanks to a new update from Meta. Be aware that the multi-device capability has been planned for some time and is finally being made available to stable WhatsApp users. Each linked device (up to four devices can be linked) will function independently, and the independent devices will continue to receive messages even if the central device’s network connection is lost. Remember that WhatsApp will automatically log out of all the companion devices if the primary smartphone is dormant for an extended period. Four more gadgets may be a mix of four PCs and smartphones or four smartphones. This feature is now available for updates and downloads on Android as well as iOS platforms.
Potential issues
As we go deeper into the digital age, it is the responsibility of the tech giants to pilot innovation with features of security by design. Thus such new features should be accompanied by coherent safety and security policies or advisories to ensure the users understand the implications of the new features. Convenience over conditions is an essential part of cyberspace. It points to the civic duty of netizens to go through the conditions of any app rather than only focus on the convenience it creates. The following potential issues may arise from the new features on Whatsapp –
- Increased cybercrime- The bad actors now do not need to access SIM cards to commit frauds over the platforms as now on a single number 4 devices can be used hence the cybercriminal activity can increase over the platform. It is also pertinent for the platform to create SoPs for fake accounts which use multiple devices, as they pose a direct threat to the users and their interests.
- Difficulty in identifying and tracing- The LEAs will face a significant issue in identifying the bad actors and tracing them as the individual’s involvement through a linked device needs to be given legal validity and scope for investigation. This may also cause issues in evidence handling and analysis.
- Surge in Misinformation and Disinformation- With access to multiple devices, the screen time of an individual is also bound to increase. This leads to more time spent online, thus causing a rise in instances of misinformation and disinformation by bad actors. Thus the aspect of fack checking is of prime importance.
- Potential Oversharing of Personal Data- With the increased accessibility on different devices, it is very easy for the app to seek data from all devices on which the app is running, thus leading to a bigger reservoir of personal data for the platforms and data fiduciaries.
- Higher risk of Phishing, Ransomware and Malware Attacks- As the devices under the same login credentials and mobile number will increase, the message can be viewed on all the devices, thus increasing the risk of widespread embedded ransomware and malware in multiple devices is and ever-present threat.
- One number, more criminals- This feature will allow cybercriminals to operate using one device only, earlier they used to forge Adhaar cards to get new sims, but this feature will enable the bad actors to commit crimes and attacks from one single SIM using 4 different devices.
- Rise in Digital Footprint- As the number of devices increases, the users will generate more digital footprints. As a tech giant, Meta will have access to a bigger database, which increases the risk of data breaches by third-party actors.
Conclusion
In the fast-paced digital world, it is important to remain updated about new software, technologies and policies for our applications or forms of tech. This was a long-awaited feature from WhatsApp, and its value of it doesn’t lie in technological advancement only but also in the formulation of policies to govern this technology towards the trust and safety aspect of users. The platforms, in synergy with the policy makers, need to create a robust framework to accommodate the new features and add-ons on apps vehicle, staying in compliance with the laws of the land. Awareness about new features and vulnerabilities is a must for all netizens, and it is a shared responsibility for all netizens to spread the word about safety and security mechanisms.

Introduction
The increasing online interaction and popularity of social media platforms for netizens have made a breeding ground for misinformation generation and spread. Misinformation propagation has become easier and faster on online social media platforms, unlike traditional news media sources like newspapers or TV. The big data analytics and Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems have made it possible to gather, combine, analyse and indefinitely store massive volumes of data. The constant surveillance of digital platforms can help detect and promptly respond to false and misinformation content.
During the recent Israel-Hamas conflict, there was a lot of misinformation spread on big platforms like X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram. Images and videos were falsely shared attributing to the ongoing conflict, and had spread widespread confusion and tension. While advanced technologies such as AI and big data analytics can help flag harmful content quickly, they must be carefully balanced against privacy concerns to ensure that surveillance practices do not infringe upon individual privacy rights. Ultimately, the challenge lies in creating a system that upholds both public security and personal privacy, fostering trust without compromising on either front.
The Need for Real-Time Misinformation Surveillance
According to a recent survey from the Pew Research Center, 54% of U.S. adults at least sometimes get news on social media. The top spots are taken by Facebook and YouTube respectively with Instagram trailing in as third and TikTok and X as fourth and fifth. Social media platforms provide users with instant connectivity allowing them to share information quickly with other users without requiring the permission of a gatekeeper such as an editor as in the case of traditional media channels.
Keeping in mind the data dumps that generated misinformation due to the elections that took place in 2024 (more than 100 countries), the public health crisis of COVID-19, the conflicts in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and the sheer volume of information, both true and false, has been immense. Identifying accurate information amid real-time misinformation is challenging. The dilemma emerges as the traditional content moderation techniques may not be sufficient in curbing it. Traditional content moderation alone may be insufficient, hence the call for a dedicated, real-time misinformation surveillance system backed by AI and with certain human sight and also balancing the privacy of user's data, can be proven to be a good mechanism to counter misinformation on much larger platforms. The concerns regarding data privacy need to be prioritized before deploying such technologies on platforms with larger user bases.
Ethical Concerns Surrounding Surveillance in Misinformation Control
Real-time misinformation surveillance could pose significant ethical risks and privacy risks. Monitoring communication patterns and metadata, or even inspecting private messages, can infringe upon user privacy and restrict their freedom of expression. Furthermore, defining misinformation remains a challenge; overly restrictive surveillance can unintentionally stifle legitimate dissent and alternate perspectives. Beyond these concerns, real-time surveillance mechanisms could be exploited for political, economic, or social objectives unrelated to misinformation control. Establishing clear ethical standards and limitations is essential to ensure that surveillance supports public safety without compromising individual rights.
In light of these ethical challenges, developing a responsible framework for real-time surveillance is essential.
Balancing Ethics and Efficacy in Real-Time Surveillance: Key Policy Implications
Despite these ethical challenges, a reliable misinformation surveillance system is essential. Key considerations for creating ethical, real-time surveillance may include:
- Misinformation-detection algorithms should be designed with transparency and accountability in mind. Third-party audits and explainable AI can help ensure fairness, avoid biases, and foster trust in monitoring systems.
- Establishing clear, consistent definitions of misinformation is crucial for fair enforcement. These guidelines should carefully differentiate harmful misinformation from protected free speech to respect users’ rights.
- Only collecting necessary data and adopting a consent-based approach which protects user privacy and enhances transparency and trust. It further protects them from stifling dissent and profiling for targeted ads.
- An independent oversight body that can monitor surveillance activities while ensuring accountability and preventing misuse or overreach can be created. These measures, such as the ability to appeal to wrongful content flagging, can increase user confidence in the system.
Conclusion: Striking a Balance
Real-time misinformation surveillance has shown its usefulness in counteracting the rapid spread of false information online. But, it brings complex ethical challenges that cannot be overlooked such as balancing the need for public safety with the preservation of privacy and free expression is essential to maintaining a democratic digital landscape. The references from the EU’s Digital Services Act and Singapore’s POFMA underscore that, while regulation can enhance accountability and transparency, it also risks overreach if not carefully structured. Moving forward, a framework for misinformation monitoring must prioritise transparency, accountability, and user rights, ensuring that algorithms are fair, oversight is independent, and user data is protected. By embedding these safeguards, we can create a system that addresses the threat of misinformation and upholds the foundational values of an open, responsible, and ethical online ecosystem. Balancing ethics and privacy and policy-driven AI Solutions for Real-Time Misinformation Monitoring are the need of the hour.
References
- https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/
- https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:C:2018:233:FULL