#FactCheck: Fake video falsely claims FM Sitharaman endorsed investment scheme

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:

• https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-67544504

Introduction

In the labyrinthine corridors of the digital age, where information zips across the globe with the ferocity of a tempest, the truth often finds itself ensnared in a web of deception. It is within this intricate tapestry of reality and falsehood that we find ourselves examining two distinct yet equally compelling cases of misinformation, each a testament to the pervasive challenges that beset our interconnected world.

Case 1: The Deceptive Video: Originating in Malaysia, Misattributed to Indian Railway Development

A misleading video claiming to showcase Indian railway construction has been debunked as footage from Malaysia's East Coast Rail Link (ECRL). Fact-checking efforts by India TV traced the video's origin to Malaysia, revealing deceptive captions in Tamil and Hindi. The video was initially posted on Twitter on January 9, 2024, announcing the commencement of track-laying for Malaysia's East Coast Railway. Further investigation reveals the ECRL as a joint venture between Malaysia and China, involving the laying of tracks along the east coast, challenging assertions of Indian railway development. The ECRL's track-laying initiative, initiated in December 2023, is part of China's Belt and Road initiative, covering 665 kilometers across states like Kelantan, Terengganu, Pahang, and Selangor, with a completion target set for 2025.

The video in question, a digital chameleon, had its origins not in the bustling landscapes of India but within the verdant bounds of Malaysia. Specifically, it was a scene captured from the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL) project, a monumental joint venture between Malaysia and China, unfurling across 665 kilometers of Malaysian terrain. This ambitious endeavor, part of the grand Belt and Road initiative, is a testament to the collaborative spirit that defines our era, with tracks stretching from Kelantan to Selangor, and a completion horizon set for the year 2025.

The unveiling of this grand project was graced by none other than Malaysia’s King Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah, in Pahang, underscoring the strategic alliance with China and the infrastructural significance of the ECRL. Yet, despite the clarity of its origins, the video found itself cloaked in a narrative of Indian development, a falsehood that spread like wildfire across the digital savannah.

Through the meticulous application of keyframe analysis and reverse image searches, the truth was laid bare. Reports from reputable sources such as the Associated Press and the Global Times, featuring the very same machinery, corroborated the video's true lineage. This revelation not only highlighted the ECRL's geopolitical import but also served as a clarion call for the critical role of fact-checking in an era where misinformation proliferates with reckless abandon.

Case 2: Kerala's Incident: Investigating Fake Narratives

Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has registered 53 cases related to spreading fake narratives on social media to incite communal sentiments following the blasts at a Christian religious gathering in October 2023. Vijayan said cases have been registered against online news portals, editors, and Malayalam television channels. The state police chief has issued directions to monitor social media to stop fake news spread and take appropriate actions.

In a different corner of the world, the serene backdrop of Kerala was shattered by an event that would ripple through the fabric of its society. The Kalamassery blast, a tragic occurrence at a Christian religious gathering, claimed the lives of eight individuals and left over fifty wounded. In the wake of this calamity, a man named Dominic Martin surrendered, claiming responsibility for the heinous act.

Yet, as the investigation unfolded, a different kind of violence emerged—one that was waged not with explosives but with words. A barrage of fake narratives began to circulate through social media, igniting communal tensions and distorting the narrative of the incident. The Kerala Chief Minister, Pinarayi Vijayan, informed the Assembly that 53 cases had been registered across the state, targeting individuals and entities that had fanned the flames of discord through their digital utterances.

The Kerala police, vigilant guardians of truth, embarked on a digital crusade to quell the spread of these communally instigative messages. With a particular concentration of cases in Malappuram district, the authorities worked tirelessly to dismantle the network of fake profiles that propagated religious hatred. Social media platforms were directed to assist in this endeavor, revealing the IP addresses of the culprits and enabling the cyber cell divisions to take decisive action.

In the aftermath of the blasts, the Chief Minister and the state police chief ordered special instructions to monitor social media platforms for content that could spark communal uproar. Cyber patrolling became the order of the day, as a 20-member probe team was constituted to  deeply investigate the incident. 

Conclusion

These two cases, disparate in their nature and geography, converge on a singular point: the fragility of truth in the digital age. They highlight the imperative for vigilance and the pursuit of accuracy in a world where misinformation can spread like wildfire. As we navigate this intricate cyberscape, it is imperative to be mindful of the power of fact-checking and the importance of media literacy, for they are the light that guides us through the fog of falsehoods to the shores of veracity. 

These narratives are not merely stories of deception thwarted; they are a call to action, a reminder of our collective responsibility to safeguard the integrity of our shared reality. Let us, therefore, remain steadfast in our quest for the truth, for it is only through such diligence that we can hope to preserve the sanctity of our discourse and the cohesion of our societies.

References:

1. https://www.indiatvnews.com/fact-check/fact-check-misleading-video-claims-malaysian-rail-project-indian-truth-ecrl-india-railway-development-pm-modi-2024-01-29-914282
2. https://sahilonline.org/kalamasserry-blast-53-cases-registered-across-kerala-for-spreading-fake-news

‍

Introduction

In an era when misinformation spreads like wildfire across the digital landscape, the need for effective strategies to counteract these challenges has grown exponentially in a very short period. Prebunking and Debunking are two approaches for countering the growing spread of misinformation online. Prebunking empowers individuals by teaching them to discern between true and false information and acts as a protective layer that comes into play even before people encounter malicious content. Debunking is the correction of false or misleading claims after exposure, aiming to undo or reverse the effects of a particular piece of misinformation. Debunking includes methods such as fact-checking, algorithmic correction on a platform, social correction by an individual or group of online peers, or fact-checking reports by expert organisations or journalists. An integrated approach which involves both strategies can be effective in countering the rapid spread of misinformation online.

Brief Analysis of Prebunking 

Prebunking is a proactive practice that seeks to rebut erroneous information before it spreads. The goal is to train people to critically analyse information and develop ‘cognitive immunity’ so that they are less likely to be misled when they do encounter misinformation. 

The Prebunking approach, grounded in Inoculation theory, teaches people to recognise, analyse and avoid manipulation and misleading content so that they build resilience against the same. Inoculation theory, a social psychology framework, suggests that pre-emptively conferring psychological resistance against malicious persuasion attempts can reduce susceptibility to misinformation across cultures. As the term suggests, the MO is to help the mind in the present develop resistance to influence that it may encounter in the future. Just as medical vaccines or inoculations help the body build resistance to future infections by administering weakened doses of the harm agent, inoculation theory seeks to teach people fact from fiction through exposure to examples of weak, dichotomous arguments, manipulation tactics like emotionally charged language, case studies that draw parallels between truths and distortions, and so on. In showing people the difference, inoculation theory teaches them to be on the lookout for misinformation and manipulation even, or especially, when they least expect it. 

The core difference between Prebunking and Debunking is that while the former is preventative and seeks to provide a broad-spectrum cover against misinformation, the latter is reactive and focuses on specific instances of misinformation. While Debunking is closely tied to fact-checking, Prebunking is tied to a wider range of specific interventions, some of which increase motivation to be vigilant against misinformation and others increase the ability to engage in vigilance with success.

There is much to be said in favour of the Prebunking approach because these interventions build the capacity to identify misinformation and recognise red flags However, their success in practice may vary. It might be difficult to scale up Prebunking efforts and ensure their reach to a larger audience. Sustainability is critical in ensuring that Prebunking measures maintain their impact over time. Continuous reinforcement and reminders may be required to ensure that individuals retain the skills and information they gained from the Prebunking training activities. Misinformation tactics and strategies are always evolving, so it is critical that Prebunking interventions are also flexible and agile and respond promptly to developing challenges. This may be easier said than done, but with new misinformation and cyber threats developing frequently, it is a challenge that has to be addressed for Prebunking to be a successful long-term solution. 

Encouraging people to be actively cautious while interacting with information, acquire critical thinking abilities, and reject the effect of misinformation requires a significant behavioural change over a relatively short period of time. Overcoming ingrained habits and prejudices, and countering a natural reluctance to change is no mean feat. Developing a widespread culture of information literacy requires years of social conditioning and unlearning and may pose a significant challenge to the effectiveness of Prebunking interventions. 

Brief Analysis of Debunking 

Debunking is a technique for identifying and informing people that certain news items or information are incorrect or misleading. It seeks to lessen the impact of misinformation that has already spread. The most popular kind of Debunking occurs through collaboration between fact-checking organisations and social media businesses. Journalists or other fact-checkers discover inaccurate or misleading material, and social media platforms flag or label it. Debunking is an important strategy for curtailing the spread of misinformation and promoting accuracy in the digital information ecosystem. 

Debunking interventions are crucial in combating misinformation. However, there are certain challenges associated with the same. Debunking misinformation entails critically verifying facts and promoting corrected information. However, this is difficult owing to the rising complexity of modern tools used to generate narratives that combine truth and untruth, views and facts. These advanced approaches, which include emotional spectrum elements, deepfakes, audiovisual material, and pervasive trolling, necessitate a sophisticated reaction at all levels: technological, organisational, and cultural.

Furthermore, It is impossible to debunk all misinformation at any given time, which effectively means that it is impossible to protect everyone at all times, which means that at least some innocent netizens will fall victim to manipulation despite our best efforts.  Debunking is inherently reactive in nature, addressing misinformation after it has grown extensively. This reactionary method may be less successful than proactive strategies such as Prebunking from the perspective of total harm done. Misinformation producers operate swiftly and unexpectedly, making it difficult for fact-checkers to keep up with the rapid dissemination of erroneous or misleading information. Debunking may need continuous exposure to fact-check to prevent erroneous beliefs from forming, implying that a single Debunking may not be enough to rectify misinformation.  Debunking requires time and resources, and it is not possible to disprove every piece of misinformation that circulates at any particular moment. This constraint may cause certain misinformation to go unchecked, perhaps leading to unexpected effects. The misinformation on social media can be quickly spread and may become viral faster than Debunking pieces or articles. This leads to a situation in which misinformation spreads like a virus, while the antidote to debunked facts struggles to catch up.

Prebunking vs Debunking: Comparative Analysis

Prebunking interventions seek to educate people to recognise and reject misinformation before they are exposed to actual manipulation. Prebunking offers tactics for critical examination, lessening the individuals' susceptibility to misinformation in a variety of contexts. On the other hand, Debunking interventions involve correcting specific false claims after they have been circulated. While Debunking can address individual instances of misinformation, its impact on reducing overall reliance on misinformation may be limited by the reactive nature of the approach.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations for Tech/Social Media Platforms

With the rising threat of online misinformation, tech/social media platforms can adopt an integrated strategy that includes both Prebunking and Debunking initiatives to be deployed and supported on all platforms to empower users to recognise the manipulative messaging through Prebunking and be aware of the accuracy of misinformation through Debunking interventions. 

1. Gamified Inoculation: Tech/social media companies can encourage gamified inoculation campaigns, which is a competence-oriented approach to Prebunking misinformation. This can be effective in helping people immunise the receiver against subsequent exposures. It can empower people to build competencies to detect misinformation through gamified interventions. 
2. Promotion of Prebunking and Debunking Campaigns through Algorithm Mechanisms: Tech/social media platforms may promote and guarantee that algorithms prioritise the distribution of Prebunking materials to users, boosting educational content that strengthens resistance to misinformation. Platform operators should incorporate algorithms that prioritise the visibility of Debunking content in order to combat the spread of erroneous information and deliver proper corrections; this can eventually address and aid in Prebunking and Debunking methods to reach a bigger or targeted audience.
3. User Empowerment to Counter Misinformation: Tech/social media platforms can design user-friendly interfaces that allow people to access Prebunking materials, quizzes, and instructional information to help them improve their critical thinking abilities. Furthermore, they can incorporate simple reporting tools for flagging misinformation, as well as links to fact-checking resources and corrections.
4. Partnership with Fact-Checking/Expert Organizations: Tech/social media platforms can facilitate Prebunking and Debunking initiatives/campaigns by collaborating with fact-checking/expert organisations and promoting such initiatives at a larger scale and ultimately fighting misinformation with joint hands initiatives.

Conclusion

The threat of online misinformation is only growing with every passing day and so, deploying effective countermeasures is essential.  Prebunking and Debunking are the two such interventions. To sum up: Prebunking interventions try to increase resilience to misinformation, proactively lowering susceptibility to erroneous or misleading information and addressing broader patterns of misinformation consumption, while Debunking is effective in correcting a particular piece of misinformation and having a targeted impact on belief in individual false claims. An integrated approach involving both the methods and joint initiatives by tech/social media platforms and expert organizations can ultimately help in fighting the rising tide of online misinformation and establishing a resilient online information landscape. 

References

1. https://mark-hurlstone.github.io/THKE.22.BJP.pdf
2. https://futurefreespeech.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Empowering-Audiences-Through-%E2%80%98Prebunking-Michael-Bang-Petersen-Background-Report_formatted.pdf
3. https://newsreel.pte.hu/news/unprecedented_challenges_Debunking_disinformation
4. https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/global-vaccination-badnews/

‍