“Your Parcel Contains Drugs" Inside the Fake FedEx Scam Terrorising Indian Cities

Executive Summary:

A video is being shared on social media showing an aircraft engulfed in massive flames on an airport runway. The video is being linked to the UAE. It is being claimed that a UAE airport was completely destroyed due to recent drone and missile attacks by Iran. Research by the CyberPeace found the viral claim to be false. Our research revealed that the viral video is not real, but AI-generated.

‍

Claim:

‍

On social media platform Facebook, a user shared the viral video on March 3, 2026, and wrote, “Amid the Iran-US-Israel conflict in the Middle East, operations at several major airports, including Dubai International Airport, have been temporarily suspended, causing thousands of flight cancellations and delays. Due to multiple missile and drone attacks from Iran, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had shut its airspace, and limited structural damage at Dubai Airport was also confirmed, with reports of four staff members being injured. Later, considering the security situation, a limited number of flights were resumed, but full operations are still delayed due to ongoing safety concerns. This tension has significantly impacted regional aviation, travel, and global flight routes.”
‍

• https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1552072409208851 
• https://ghostarchive.org/archive/FBvdN 

‍

‍

‍

Fact Check:

‍

To verify the viral video, we searched relevant keywords on Google. However, we did not find any credible media report confirming the claim.However, we found a video report on the YouTube channel of CNN-News18 mentioning explosions near Dubai Airport after a suspected Iranian drone strike. But the visuals shown in that report are completely different from the viral video.
‍

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoNLQLGcDYo 

‍

‍

Upon closely examining the viral video, we noticed several inconsistencies, raising suspicion that it might be AI-generated. We then analyzed the video using the AI detection tool Sightengine. The results indicated that the video is 71 percent likely to be AI-generated.

‍

‍

Conclusion:

‍

Our research found that the viral video is not real, but AI-generated.

‍

Introduction

Taj Hotels Group is well known for its luxurious ambience and old-world grace and charm, blended with contemporary comforts and amenities for its guests or customers. But what can make all the netizens perplexed is the recent data breach incident which took place in Tata-owned Taj hotels. The hotel suffer from a data breach that compromises nearly 1.5 million customers' data which includes addresses, membership IDs, mobile numbers and other personally identifiable information, according to sources. This news was brought to light which raised concerns about the privacy and data protection of personal data of individuals. We are living in a space influenced by advanced technology and digital communication which throws a concern or challenge to secure the personal information of individuals. 

Unveiling the incident 

Tata-owned Taj Hotels group has suffered a data breach that compromise information of over 1.5 million customers, according to a news report. A bad actor or entity going by the name “Dnacookies” claimed data set contains data from the 2014-2020 period and has not been disclosed anywhere till now. Such personal data includes name, address, customer ID, mobile number and other personally identifiable information. This shows the risks or challenges of data protection and security. The incidents raise an alarm about the risks and vulnerabilities that might be faced even by the big corporate giants. The bad actor with the handle “Dnacookies” also demanded a ransom of a sum of about Rs 4.16 lakh from the Taj hotel group. In response to the incident, a spokesperson from the concerned hotel group said that we have been made aware of someone claiming possession of a limited data customer data set, which is non-sensitive in nature. Investigation is underway and relevant authorities have been notified about the incident.

‍A demand for ransom

The report from CNBC-TV18 clears that the bad actor not only purloined the data but also demanded around 4.16 lakh as a ransom for the database.  Along with this, the bad actor kept three conditions ahead. Firstly there has to be a middleman for a negotiable deal secondly the data cannot be split either the entire data has to be taken with the ransom demand or no data at all. Thirdly additional samples of data will not be provided. Further, the spokesperson of Indian Hotel Company Limited mentioned that they have been escalated with the fact that someone is claiming authority in a limited data set. The bad actor claimed that the database contains information from 2014- 2020 which has been kept confidential till now. The audacity of the bad actor went to such an extent that the sample containing one thousand rows of unique entries from the bad actor dataset was also provided by the bad actor as proof of the deed. This incident underlines the growing threat in cyberspace and the urgency for individuals, organizations or entities to priorities data security measures and maintain cyber resilience.

Personal Data on Stake

Such data is the personal information of the individuals and also constitutes the personal tastes and preferences of individuals which can be exploited. The biggest gush of winds the hotel and individuals face by such a data breach is not only the volume of data compromised but also the potential ways it can get misused and exploited against the hotel or its customers by cyber crooks. This paves the way for cybercriminals to put forward any demand knowing the sensitivity of the data. Followed by creating a dilemmatic situation for the affected entities to either accept the ransom demands or to stand against ransom. Since the risks are high, going ahead with any of these situations can have an adverse impact on the security of personal data. The organisation or entities holding the personal data need to make sure that data under their realm is well protected and secured.

While the organisation has to sail through the aftermath of this breach, such incidents also pose a challenge for the organisation to maintain the trust and reputation of the organization since these incidents question the cyber security posture of the organisation. It is suggested to be transparent with its stakeholders, and open about the vulnerabilities and steps taken against this. They should also discuss the amplified step added for safeguarding their customer's personal data. Since Taj is well known for its out-of-the-box luxury and for providing comfort to its customers it should take a step ahead to reinforce its digital infrastructure to ensure the security of data.

Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023

The newly enacted Digital Personal Data Act, 2023 put certain obligations on data fiduciaries to take reasonable measures to maintain the security of personal data. The Act also requires to inform about the data breach to the data protection board constituted under the Act. The Act aims to protect the individual's digital personal data. The Act casts certain obligations on data principals and data fiduciaries. The Act provides penalty upto 250 crores in case of a data breach. The Act aims to provide consent-based data collection techniques. The Act also establishes the Data Protection Board to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Act and address grievances. 

Conclusion

Data breach in such a big giant in the market serves as an alarming concern to be more cautious and proactively take precautionary measures to protect the security of data and compliance with data protection laws and regulations. We are living in an era where digital security is as important as the basic fundamental rights of an individual. Taj Hotels Group has actively taken steps to handle the aftermath of the data breach by informing the incident to law enforcement agencies and taking necessary steps.  It is also on our part to be more aware, and vigilant about our personal data. Entities need to ensure compliance and measures to protect personal data and overall ensure a true cyber-safe & digital environment.

References

https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/technology/taj-hotels-suffers-data-breach-exposes-information-of-1-5-million-customers-11801161.html

‍

Introduction

Recently the attackers employed the CVE-2017-0199 vulnerability in Microsoft Office to deliver a fileless form of the Remcos RAT. The Remcos RAT makes the attacker have full control of the systems that have been infected by this malware. This research will give a detailed technical description of the identified vulnerability, attack vector, and tactics together with the practical steps to counter the identified risks.

The Targeted Malware: Remcos RAT

Remcos RAT (Remote Control & Surveillance) is a commercially available remote access tool designed for legitimate administrative use. However, it has been widely adopted by cybercriminals for its stealth and extensive control capabilities, enabling:

• System control and monitoring
• Keylogging
• Data exfiltration
• Execution of arbitrary commands

The fileless variant utilised in this campaign makes detection even more challenging by running entirely in system memory, leaving minimal forensic traces.

Attack Vector: Phishing with Malicious Excel Attachments

The phishing email will be sent which appears as legitimate business communication, such as a purchase order or invoice. This email contains an Excel attachment that is weaponized to exploit the CVE-2017-0199 vulnerability.

Technical Analysis: CVE-2017-0199 Exploitation

Vulnerability Assessment

• CVE-2017-0199 is a Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability in Microsoft Office which uses Object Linking and Embedding (OLE) objects.
• Affected Components:some text
  • Microsoft Word
  • Microsoft Excel
  • WordPad
• CVSS Score: 7.8 (High Severity)

Mechanism of Exploitation

The vulnerability enables attackers to craft a malicious document when opened, it fetches and executes an external payload via an HTML Application (HTA) file. The execution process occurs without requiring user interaction beyond opening the document.

Detailed Exploitation Steps

1. Phishing Email and Malicious Document some text
   • The email contains an Excel file designed to make use of CVE-2017-0199.
   • When the email gets opened, the document automatically connects to a remote server (e.g., 192.3.220[.]22) to download an HTA file (cookienetbookinetcache.hta).
2. Execution via mshta.exe some text
   • The downloaded HTA file is executed using mshta.exe, a legitimate Windows process for running HTML Applications.
   • This execution is seamless and does not prompt the user, making the attack stealthy.
3. Multi-Layer Obfuscation some text
   • The HTA file is wrapped in several layers of scripting, including: some text
     • JavaScript
     • VBScript
     • PowerShell
   • This obfuscation helps evade static analysis by traditional antivirus solutions.
4. Fileless Payload Deployment some text
   • The downloaded executable leverages process hollowing to inject malicious code into legitimate system processes.
   • The Remcos RAT payload is loaded directly into memory, avoiding the creation of files on disk.

Fileless Malware Techniques

1. Process Hollowing
The attack replaces the memory of a legitimate process (e.g., explorer.exe) with the malicious Remcos RAT payload. This allows the malware to:

• Evade detection by blending into normal system activity.
• Run with the privileges of the hijacked process.

2. Anti-Analysis Techniques

• Anti-Debugging: Detects the presence of debugging tools and terminates malicious processes if found.
• Anti-VM and Sandbox Evasion: Ensures execution only on real systems to avoid detection during security analysis.

3. In-Memory Execution

• By running entirely in system memory, the malware avoids leaving artifacts on the disk, making forensic analysis and detection more challenging.

Capabilities of Remcos RAT

Once deployed, Remcos RAT provides attackers with a comprehensive suite of functionalities, including:

• Data Exfiltration: some text
  • Stealing system information, files, and credentials.
• Remote Execution: some text
  • Running arbitrary commands, scripts, and additional payloads.
• Surveillance: some text
  • Enabling the camera and microphone.
  • Capturing screen activity and clipboard contents.
• System Manipulation: some text
  • Modifying Windows Registry entries.
  • Controlling system services and processes.
  • Disabling user input devices (keyboard and mouse).

Advanced Phishing Techniques in Parallel Campaigns

1. DocuSign Abuse
Attackers exploit legitimate DocuSign APIs to create authentic-looking phishing invoices. These invoices can trick users into authorising payments or signing malicious documents, bypassing traditional email security systems.

2. ZIP File Concatenation
By appending multiple ZIP archives into a single file, attackers exploit inconsistencies in how different tools handle these files. This allows them to embed malware that evades detection by certain archive managers.

Broader Implications of Fileless Malware

Fileless malware like Remcos RAT poses significant challenges:

• Detection Difficulties: Traditional signature-based antivirus systems struggle to detect fileless malware, as there are no static files to scan.
• Forensic Limitations: The lack of disk artifacts complicates post-incident analysis, making it harder to trace the attack's origin and scope.
• Increased Sophistication: These campaigns demonstrate the growing technical prowess of cybercriminals, leveraging legitimate tools and services for malicious purposes.

Mitigation Strategies

1. Patch Management some text
   • It is important to regularly update software to address known vulnerabilities like CVE-2017-0199. Microsoft released a patch for this vulnerability in April 2017.
2. Advanced Email Security some text
   • It is important to implement email filtering solutions that can detect phishing attempts, even those using legitimate services like DocuSign.
3. Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)some text
   • Always use EDR solutions to monitor for suspicious behavior, such as unauthorized use of mshta.exe or process hollowing.
4. User Awareness and Training some text
   • Educate users about phishing techniques and the risks of opening unexpected attachments.
5. Behavioral Analysis some text
   • Deploy security solutions capable of detecting anomalous activity, even if no malicious files are present.

Conclusion

The attack via CVE-2017-0199 further led to the injection of a new fileless variant of Remcos RAT, proving how threats are getting more and more sophisticated. Thanks to the improved obfuscation and the lack of files, the attackers eliminate all traditional antiviral protection and gain full control over the infected computers. It is real and organisations have to make sure that they apply patches on time, that they build better technologies for detection and that the users themselves are more wary of the threats.

References

• Fortinet FortiGuard Labs: Analysis by Xiaopeng Zhang
• Perception Point: Research on ZIP File Concatenation
• Wallarm: DocuSign Phishing Analysis
• Microsoft Security Advisory: CVE-2017-0199

‍