#FactCheck: Debunking the Edited Image Claim of PM Modi with Hafiz Saeed
Executive Summary:
A photoshopped image circulating online suggests Prime Minister Narendra Modi met with militant leader Hafiz Saeed. The actual photograph features PM Modi greeting former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif during a surprise diplomatic stopover in Lahore on December 25, 2015.
The Claim:
A widely shared image on social media purportedly shows PM Modi meeting Hafiz Saeed, a declared terrorist. The claim implies Modi is hostile towards India or aligned with terrorists.

Fact Check:
On our research and reverse image search we found that the Press Information Bureau (PIB) had tweeted about the visit on 25 December 2015, noting that PM Narendra Modi was warmly welcomed by then-Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif in Lahore. The tweet included several images from various angles of the original meeting between Modi and Sharif. On the same day, PM Modi also posted a tweet stating he had spoken with Nawaz Sharif and extended birthday wishes. Additionally, no credible reports of any meeting between Modi and Hafiz Saeed, further validating that the viral image is digitally altered.


In our further research we found an identical photo, with former Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in place of Hafiz Saeed. This post was shared by Hindustan Times on X on 26 December 2015, pointing to the possibility that the viral image has been manipulated.
Conclusion:
The viral image claiming to show PM Modi with Hafiz Saeed is digitally manipulated. A reverse image search and official posts from the PIB and PM Modi confirm the original photo was taken during Modi’s visit to Lahore in December 2015, where he met Nawaz Sharif. No credible source supports any meeting between Modi and Hafiz Saeed, clearly proving the image is fake.
- Claim: Debunking the Edited Image Claim of PM Modi with Hafiz Saeed
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs

Introduction
Since users are now constantly retrieving critical data on their mobile devices, fraudsters are now focusing on these devices. App-based, network-based, and device-based vulnerabilities are the three main ways of attacking that Mobile Endpoint Security names as mobile threats. Composed of the following features: program monitoring and risk, connection privacy and safety, psychological anomaly and reconfiguration recognition, and evaluation of vulnerabilities and management, this is how Gartner describes Mobile Threat Defense (MTD).
The widespread adoption and prevalence of cell phones among consumers worldwide have significantly increased in recent years. Users of these operating system-specific devices can install a wide range of software, or "apps," from online marketplaces like Google Play and the Apple App Store. The applications described above are the lifeblood of cell phones; they improve users' daily lives and augment the devices' performance. The app marketplaces let users quickly search for and install new programs, but certain malicious apps/links/websites can also be the origin of malware hidden among legitimate apps. These days, there are many different security issues and malevolent attacks that might affect mobile devices.
Unveiling Malware Landscape
The word "malware" refers to a comprehensive category of spyware intended to infiltrate networks, steal confidential data, cause disruptions, or grant illegal access. Malware can take many forms, such as Trojan horses, worms, ransomware, infections, spyware, and adware. Because each type has distinct goals and features, security specialists face a complex problem. Malware is a serious risk to both people and businesses. Security incidents, monetary losses, harm to one's credibility, and legal repercussions are possible outcomes. Understanding malware's inner workings is essential to defend against it effectively. Malware analysis is helpful in this situation. The practice of deconstructing and analysing dangerous software to comprehend its behaviour, operation, and consequences is known as malware analysis.Major threats targeting mobile phones
Viruses: Viruses are self-renewing programs that can steal data, launch denial of service assaults, or enact ransomware strikes. They spread by altering other software applications, adding malicious code, and running it on the target's device. Computer systems all over the world are still infected with viruses, which attack different operating systems like Mac and Microsoft Windows, even though there is a wealth of antiviral programs obtainable to mitigate their impacts.
Worms: Infections are independent apps that propagate quickly and carry out payloads—such as file deletion or the creation of botnets—to harm computers. Worms, in contrast to viruses, usually harm a computer system, even if it's just through bandwidth use. By taking advantage of holes in security or other vulnerabilities on the target computer, they spread throughout computer networks.
Ransomware: It causes serious commercial and organisational harm to people and businesses by encrypting data and demanding payment to unlock it. The daily operations of the victim organisation are somewhat disrupted, and they need to pay a ransom to get them back. It is not certain, though, that the financial transaction will be successful or that they will receive a working translation key.
Adware: It can be controlled via notification restrictions or ad-blockers, tracks user activities and delivers unsolicited advertisements. Adware poses concerns to users' privacy even though it's not always malevolent since the information it collects is frequently combined with information gathered from other places and used to build user profiles without their permission or knowledge.
Spyware: It can proliferate via malicious software or authentic software downloads, taking advantage of confidential data. This kind of spyware gathers data on users' actions without their authorisation or agreement, including:Internet activityBanking login credentialsPasswordsPersonally Identifiable Information (PII)
Navigating the Mobile Security Landscape
App-Centric Development: Regarding mobile security, app-centric protections are a crucial area of focus. Application authorisations should be regularly reviewed and adjusted to guarantee that applications only access the knowledge that is essential and to lower the probability of data misuse. Users can limit hazards and have greater oversight over their confidentiality by closely monitoring these settings. Installing trustworthy mobile security apps also adds another line of protection. With capabilities like app analysis, real-time protection, and antivirus scanning, these speciality apps strengthen your gadget's protection against malware and other harmful activity.
Network Security: Setting priorities for secure communication procedures is crucial for safeguarding confidential data and thwarting conceivable dangers in mobile security. Avoiding unprotected public Wi-Fi networks is essential since they may be vulnerable to cyberattacks. To lessen the chance of unwelcome entry and data surveillance, promote the usage of reliable, password-protected networks instead. Furthermore, by encrypting data transfer, Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) provide additional protection and make it more difficult for malevolent actors to corrupt information. To further improve security, avoid using public Wi-Fi for essential transactions and hold off until a secure network is available. Users can strengthen their handheld gadgets against possible privacy breaches by implementing these practices, which can dramatically lower the risk of data eavesdropping and illegal access.
Constant development: Maintaining a robust mobile security approach requires a dedication to constant development. Adopt a proactive stance by continuously improving and modifying your security protocols. By following up on recurring outreach and awareness campaigns, you can stay updated about new hazards. Because cybersecurity is a dynamic field, maintaining one step ahead and utilising emerging technologies is essential. Stay updated with security changes, implement the newest safeguards, and incorporate new industry standard procedures into your plan. This dedication to ongoing development creates a flexible barrier, strengthening your resistance to constantly evolving mobile security threats.
Threat emergency preparedness: To start, familiarise yourself with the ever-changing terrain associated with mobile dangers to security. Keep updated on new threats including malware, phishing, and illegal access.
Sturdy Device Management: Put in place a thorough approach to device management. This includes frequent upgrades, safe locking systems, and additional safeguarding capabilities like remote surveillance and erasing.
Customer Alertness: Emphasise proper online conduct and acquaint yourself and your team with potential hazards, such as phishing efforts.
Dynamic Measures for a Robust Wireless Safety Plan
In the dynamic field of mobile assurances, taking a proactive strategy is critical. To strengthen safeguards, thoroughly research common risks like malware, phishing, and illegal access. Establish a strong device management strategy that includes frequent upgrades, safe locking mechanisms, and remote monitoring and deletion capabilities for added security.
Promoting user awareness by educating people so they can identify and block any hazards, especially regarding phishing attempts. Reduce the dangers of data eavesdropping and illegal access by emphasising safe communication practices, using Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), and avoiding public Wi-Fi for essential transactions.
Pay close attention to app-centric integrity by periodically checking and modifying entitlements. Downloading trustworthy mobile security apps skilled at thwarting malware and other unwanted activity will enhance your smartphone's defenses. Lastly, create an atmosphere of continuous development by keeping up with new threats and utilising developing technology to make your handheld security plan more resilient overall.
Conclusion
Mobile privacy threats grow as portable electronics become increasingly integrated into daily activities. Effective defense requires knowledge of the various types of malware, such as worms, ransomware, adware, and spyware. Tools for Mobile Threat Defense, which prioritise vulnerability assessment, management, anomaly detection, connection privacy, and program monitoring, are essential. App-centric development, secure networking procedures, ongoing enhancement, threat readiness, strong device control, and user comprehension are all components of a complete mobile security strategy. People, as well as organisations, can strengthen their defenses against changing mobile security threats by implementing dynamic measures and maintaining vigilance, thereby guaranteeing safe and resilient mobile surrounding.
References
https://www.titanfile.com/blog/types-of-computer-malware/
https://www.simplilearn.com/what-is-a-trojan-malware-article
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/latest-anti-analysis-tactics-guloader-malware-revealed-ukhxc/?trk=article-ssr-frontend-pulse_more-articles_related-content-card

Introduction
The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) recently issued the “Email Policy of Government of India, 2024.” It is an updated email policy for central government employees, requiring the exclusive use of official government emails managed by the National Informatics Centre (NIC) for public duties. The policy replaces 2015 guidelines and prohibits government employees, contractors, and consultants from using their official email addresses on social media or other websites unless authorised for official functions. The policy aims to reinforce cybersecurity measures and protocols, maintain secure communications, and ensure compliance across departments. It is not legally binding, but its gazette notification ensures compliance and maintains cyber resilience in communications. The updated policy is also aligned with the newly enacted Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
Brief Highlights of Email Policy of Government of India, 2024
- The Email Policy of the Government of India, 2024 is divided into three parts namely, Part I: Introduction, Part II: Terms of Use, Part III: Functions, duties and Responsibilities, and with an annexe attached to it defining the meaning of certain organisation types in relation to this policy.
- The policy direct to not use NICeMail address for registering on any social media or other websites or mobile applications, save for the performance of official duties or with due authorisation from the authority competent.
- Under this new policy, “core use organisations” (central government departments and other government-controlled entities that do not provide goods or services on commercial terms) and its users shall use only NICeMail for official purposes.
- However, where the Core Use Organisation has an office or establishment outside India, to ensure availability of local communication channels under exigent circumstances may use alternative email services hosted outside India with all due approval.
- Core Use Organisations, including those dealing with national security, have their own independent email servers and can continue operating their independent email servers provided the servers are hosted in India. They should also consider migrating their email services to NICeMail Services for security and uniform policy enforcement.
- The policy also requires departments that currently use @gov.in or @nic.in to instead migrate to @departmentname.gov.in mail domains so that information sanctity and integrity can be maintained when officials are transferred from one department/ministry to another, and so that the ministry/department doesn’t lose access to the official communication. For this, the department or ministry in question must register the domain name with NIC. For instance, MeitY has registered the mail domain @meity.gov.in. The policy gives government departments six months time period complete this migration.
- The policy also makes distinction between (1) Organisation-linked email addresses and (2) Service-linked email addresses. The policy in respect of “organisation-linked email addresses” is laid down in paragraphs 5.3.2(a) and 5.4 to 5.6.3. And the policy in respect of “service-linked email addresses” is laid down in paragraphs 5.3.2(b) and 5.7 to 5.7.2 under the official document of said policy.
- Further, the new policy includes specific directives on separating the email addresses of regular government employees from those of contractors or consultants to improve operational clarity.
CyberPeace Policy Outlook
The revised Email Policy of the Government of India reflects the government’s proactive response to countering the evolving cybersecurity challenges and aims to maintain cyber resilience across the government department’s email communications. The policy represents a significant step towards securing inter government and intra-government communications. We as a cybersecurity expert organisation emphasise the importance of protecting sensitive data against cyber threats, particularly in a world increasingly targeted by sophisticated phishing and malware attacks, and we advocate for safe and secure online communication and information exchange. Email communications hold sensitive information and therefore require robust policies and mechanisms in place to safeguard the communications and ensure that sensitive data is shielded through regulated and secure email usage with technical capabilities for safe use. The proactive step taken by MeitY is commendable and aligned with securing governmental communication channels.
References:
- https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Email-policy-30-10-2024.pdf-(Official document for Email Policy of Government of India, 2024.
- https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/dont-use-govt-email-ids-for-social-media-central-govt-policy-for-employees-101730312997936.html#:~:text=Government%20employees%20must%20not%20use,email%20policy%20issued%20on%20Wednesday
- https://bwpeople.in/article/new-email-policy-issued-for-central-govt-employees-to-strengthen-cybersecurity-measures-537805
- https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/centre-notifies-email-policy-for-ministries-central-departments/article68815537.ece

Introduction
Earlier this month, lawmakers in Colorado, a U.S. state, were summoned to a special legislative session to rewrite their newly passed Artificial Intelligence (AI) law before it even takes effect. Although the discussion taking place in Denver may seem distant, evolving regulations like this one directly address issues that India will soon encounter as we forge our own course for AI governance.
The Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act
Colorado became the first U.S. state to pass a comprehensive AI accountability law, set to come into force in 2026. It aims to protect people from bias, discrimination, and harm caused by predictive algorithms since AI tools have been known to reproduce societal biases by sidelining women from hiring processes, penalising loan applicants from poor neighbourhoods, or through welfare systems that wrongly deny citizens their benefits. But the law met resistance from tech companies who threatened to pull out form the state, claiming it is too broad in scope in its current form and would stifle innovation. This brings critical questions about AI regulation to the forefront:
- Who should be responsible when AI causes harm? Developers, deployers, or both?
- How should citizens seek justice?
- How can tech companies be incentivised to develop safe technologies?
Colorado’s governor has called a special session to update the law before it kicks in.
What This Means for India
India is on its path towards framing a dedicated AI-specific law or directions, and discussions are underway through the IndiaAI Mission, the proposed Digital India Act, committee set by the Delhi High Court on deepfake and other measures. But the dilemmas Colorado is wrestling with are also relevant here.
- AI uptake is growing in public service delivery in India. Facial recognition systems are expanding in policing, despite accuracy and privacy concerns. Fintech apps using AI-driven credit scoring raise questions of fairness and transparency.
- Accountability is unclear. If an Indian AI-powered health app gives faulty advice, who should be liable- the global developer, the Indian startup deploying it, or the regulator who failed to set safeguards?
- India has more than 1,500 AI startups (NASSCOM), which, like Colorado’s firms, fear that onerous compliance could choke growth. But weak guardrails could undermine public trust in AI altogether.
Lessons for India
India’s Ministry of Electronics and IT ( MEITy) favours a light-touch approach to AI regulation, and exploring and advancing ways for a future-proof guideline. Further, lessons from other global frameworks can guide its way.
- Colorado’s case shows us the necessity of incorporating feedback loops in the policy-making process. India should utilise regulatory sandboxes and open, transparent consultation processes before locking in rigid rules.
- It will also need to explore proportionate obligations, lighter for low-risk applications and stricter for high-risk use cases such as policing, healthcare, or welfare delivery.
- Europe’s AI Act is heavy on compliance, the U.S. federal government leans toward deregulation, and Colorado is somewhere in between. India has the chance to create a middle path, grounded in our democratic and developmental context.
Conclusion
As AI becomes increasingly embedded in hiring, banking, education, and welfare, opportunities for ordinary Indians are being redefined. To shape how this pans out, states like Tamil Nadu and Telangana have taken early steps to frame AI policies. Lessons will emerge from their initiative in addressing AI governance. Policy and regulation will always be contested, but contestations are a part of the process.
The Colorado debate shows us how participative law-making, with room for debate, revision, and iteration, is not a weakness but a necessity. For India’s emerging AI governance landscape, the challenge will be to embrace this process while ensuring that citizen rights and inclusion are balanced well with industry concerns. CyberPeace advocates for responsible AI regulation that balances innovation and accountability.
References
- https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/colorado-lawmakers-look-repeal-replace-controversial-artificial-intelligence-law/
- https://www.naag.org/attorney-general-journal/a-deep-dive-into-colorados-artificial-intelligence-act/
- https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/11/indias-advance-on-ai-regulation?lang=en
- https://the-captable.com/2024/12/india-ai-regulation-light-touch/
- https://indiaai.gov.in/article/tamilnadu-s-ai-policy-six-step-tamdef-guidance-framework-and-deepmax-scorecard