Naavi.org

Twitter has set the Indian legislators thinking. It has defied the demand of the Indian Government for removal of some tweets and accounts. Out of the 1178 requests (Or should we call it as directions?) made by the Indian Government, it is understood that a few hundreds have been acted upon and the rest not. Twitter has actually stated that it has its own rules and after considering the request from the Government, it has taken a considered view.

This raises a pertinent question whether Twitter is a law unto itself and beyond the Indian law?

The secondary question raised is whether Twitter is a “Commercial Business Entity” just like the East India Company which came to India to do business with us and is now following the footsteps of the East India Company in dictating terms to the Indian rulers.

Mr Tejasvi Surya, our honorable MP has rightly pointed out that Twitter is arbitrary in its approach since it finds “torming of Capitol Hill in the United States problematic but not when it happens at Red Fort”. It applies one logic to Greta Thunberg and Rihaana and another logic to Kangana Ranaut.

This is a great insult to India as a country and has to be strongly opposed. Naavi.org did give a call for Twitter Silence and moving over to Koo/Tooter and there has been a significant movement of users away from Twitter.

In the meantime there are Privacy Activists who are advocating that Twitter is actually trying to protect the fundamental right of Indian citizens better than the Indian Government.

The convoluted argument is that “Creating Chaos” through Twitter is a fundamental right of people.  The above article in Indian Express eulogizes Twitter as follows

“the platform feeds a larger ecology of digital media. This is because Twitter is the default social network for political leaders and foreign governments to make statements, as a large number of journalists are present on it. This often makes Twitter the homepage where news breaks first and loudly. Its speed, velocity, and quality of recipients is unparalleled as it integrates with television and press publications. Hence, Twitter is a significant forum for the ongoing adversarial contest for narrative control on the farm laws.”

There is a fundamental flaw in arguing that Twitter deserves to be respected as a “Media”. It is a commercial organization which makes money by  wash their dirty linen in public. It thrives by trolls and controversial discussions. It has no concern on the impact it has on the society as long as money flows into the coffers of Twitter.

Naturally there is more discussion on Politics on twitter rather than other educative aspects on science or culture.

Twitter is not a “Media” which is understood as “purveyor of news.” Twitter is a “Creator of arguments” and wants us to consider it as news.

There have been occasional good use of Twitter where news directly emanates from a citizen reporter and in such cases, Twitter like Facebook provides a ready platform in replacement of a own blog which many may not have.

There have also been a partially good use of Twitter when it is used to communicate the news already published by other media such as the Print publications or TV media. It is this aspect which the above article in Indian Express refers to when saying that “Twitter is often the home page” for news seekers.

There are many “News Aggregators” which provide a good aggregation of news from the traditional media and Twitter may also contribute to this use.

However, the principle content of Twitter which is also the subject of all the controversy is the “Views” expressed by different persons. Some of these are by the so called “Celebrities” may be from the film field, sports field or music field. Out of such “Celebrities” the political class is a significant contributor as they generate controversial views. Each such celebrities are measured for popularity from the number of followers and a lot of them use fake supporters who are operated by software. In Internet advertising we have what is called “Click Frauds” where software creates ad views and ad clicks to generate advertising revenues. The Twitter followers and their re-tweets which are used as a measure of popularity are nothing different from such “Click Frauds”.

It is also found that many accounts that support these fraudulent re-tweeting business are fake and even some of the leaders of these groups are fake. Twitter introduced a system of “Verified Handles” to separate fake users from genuine users. This verification system was fine since even a controversial view is fine as long as it comes from some body who owns the responsibility for the view.

However Twitter did not implement the “Verification” system fairly. It rejected many genuine requests (Naavi has been repeatedly refused the Blue tick) and approved many fake accounts as “Verified”. However the system of “Verification” was a good move and after some discontinuance, it has been re-started. There is an allegation that Verifications are easy to get if you are “Anti Modi”  which is subject to further verification.

If “Verification” system is fair and unbiased then it is a good system to ensure that only responsible persons express their opinion. However the “Responsibility” flows only when “Irresponsible posts” are properly punished.

All criticisms even against Modi are not “Irresponsible”. But when a pop singer who does not know where India is posts a tweet about India carrying on a “Genocide” and a 18 year old kid posts a “Tool kit” on how to spread anarchy in India, then the media owner has to answer whether his platform is purveying news or instigating violence.

This is precisely what is happening in India today. The Government of India has a provision called Section 69A in the ITA 2000 and has issued an order. If Twitter thinks the order is illegal, it has to approach a Court for staying the order. It cannot assume the role of the Judge and agree to block some and disagree to block others.

Twitter today is like a news paper which is full of “Letters to Editor” with the news and advertisements are spread in between. It is more like the “Ad Magazine” where only ads are there. The difference is that Twitter is an aggregation of “Views” with some ads and some news thrown in between. It does not deserve the respect as a “Media”.

In the case of Farm Laws, it would be appreciated if there is a clause by clause discussion of the farm laws on twitter in which case it would constitute useful content. But like the old Doordarshan, audience may not like such information and would rather fight on “Genocide”.

What is deplorable is that Twitter is supporting people who without understanding the farm laws are posing “Views” and provoking people to oppose the laws.

In such a scenario if the Government keeps quiet, then it would be a show of weakness.

We therefore fully endorse Mr Tejasvi Surya’s views that we need to crack the Whip. One way is to make Twitter redundant by moving over to alternate platforms. Second is to invoke the law to take appropriate criminal action against the Twitter executives so that they see reason. If it is necessary to amend Section 79 of ITA 2000, it can be done. But probably we donot need to amend the laws. The current laws are good enough to hold Twitter liable not only under several sections of IPC but also under Section 66F of ITA 2000.

Section 79 only refers to the exemptions available to an intermediary and is not the primary offence section. Twitter loses protection under Section 79 because it is not considering itself as an Intermediary but a content owner.

Let’s hope that Government does crack the whip…

Naavi

It was clear from the beginning that Bhima Koregaon was a high level international conspiracy much like the present Twitter campaign. It was not surprising that the activists who faced criminal charges would have the resources to invoke international support. One such support has now come from a Forensic report given out by a US firm and promptly propagated by “Washington Post” which was also in the fore front of the Information War unleashed by Twitter on India.

According to a report being widely discussed in the media, key evidence against the  activists were planted using a malware, as per a report put out by a firm called “Arsenal Forensics”

Rona Wilson, one of the accused has claimed that the incriminating documents found in his laptop could have been inserted by the investigating agencies  and his laptop remained compromised for over 22 months without his knowledge.

The accused claims that 10 incriminating word documents were inserted in his laptop through a malware named “Netwire”. The virus itself could have been inserted by a phishing mail from another compromised computer of his contact Mr Varavara Rao’s email account. It is important to note that Varavara Rao is also a co-accused in this case and hence the defense is producing an evidence from another co-accused source.

It is indicated that the Forensic agency has found the presence of “Netwire” in the forensic image of the laptop storage device and has also claimed that the version of the word was dated later than the date of creation of the document.

At this time we are not aware if the original hard disk was cloned using the standard process and the observation of the forensics firm was based on a properly cloned hard disc.

It is also not clear if the original hard disc can be checked once again by an independent forensic investigator to confirm if Netwire was present in the laptop prior to the date on which the incriminating documents were first created on the subject laptop.

Also it is possible that the incriminating documents might have been found in Rona Wilson computer and may also be there on Varavara Rao’s computer or it could have been wiped out of Varavara Rao’s computer. Forensic investigation of Varavara Rao’s computer that there was no such document there and that there was a phishing attempt from his computer (some evidence of this needs to be traced in the Varavara Rao’s computer) also needs to be presented by Rona Wilson.

It must be understood that the party challenging the evidence needs to produce irrefutable proof that the evidence has been tampered with. Otherwise the accused in partnership with other co-accused can make any charge on the investigating agencies to create confusion.

Indian Courts have not always been clear about understanding digital evidence and appreciating the possibility that there is always a set of  Anti-Forensics groups which consist of all criminal elements who are the backbone of the Deep Web and make money out of their crimes. They are technically well informed and have access to all sort of tools. For a team of Urban Naxalites like the Bhima Koregaon accused to take the assistance of such elements comes natural.

The Court should therefore be careful in providing any credibility to such evidence. Even if Washington Post or Rihaana or Greta Thunberg supports such counter views, there is a need to view it with suspicion. The onus of proving it is entirely on the accused and a mere prima facie evidence which itself could be a planted evidence cannot be considered good enough to acquit the accused.

The questions which the Arsenal team has to make public is

a) What is the verification they have done to ensure that the evidence disc with the Court and the analyzed disc are exact bit replicas?

b) What is the justification for the malware to be present for 22 months from 2016 to 2018 and was not detected?

c) What were the anti virus software used by Mr Rona Wilson and is there an evidence that the virus “Netwire” is undetectable?

d) Is Rona Wilson negligent deliberately or otherwise in not cleaning his laptop with an appropriate anti virus installation?

e) Was Varavara Rao’s computer was also simultaneously examined to see if there was any virus which was used to plant Netwire into Rona Wilson’s computer?

f) Is it possible for Rona Wilson to have implanted a newer version of the documents to vitiate the evidence?

g) What are the relevant dates … Creation of the incriminating documents, Original device in which it was created, original author, Original software, date of its entry into Rona Wilson computer, date of detection of “Netwire” etc.

It is possible that this is a new “Information War” that the Bhima Koregaon team has unleashed. The Court has to now act responsibly to ensure that this is not used as an excuse by the accused to avoid being punished for an anti-national activity.

One option available to the Court is to call a “Digital Evidence Examiner” to examine the forensic report submitted by Arsenal, allow for cross examination of Arsenal and if there is insufficient evidence to accept the counter evidence of Arsenal, reject it as “Unreliable”. All this will inevitably delay the trial and perhaps it is the price we have to pay for having a fair trial even for the enemies of the nation.

Naavi

For the generall information of all Net4India victims.

Wish ICANN also institute some efforts to ease the problems of the domain name registrants of their erstwhile accredited registrar and legal agent for domain registrations. I am reasonably sure that ICANN would be legally liable for the action or inaction of Net4India as well as the mishandling of the issue by NCLT.

Naavi

When Naavi called for quitting Twitter and opting for Tooter or Koo through his articles

February 3, 2021:  Twitter high on Technology Intoxication

February 4, 2021: Quit Twitter

February 5: Let Indians go for a “Twitter Silence” and move over to “Tooter” and “Koo”

February 6: Rihana and Greta Thunberg are Information Gladiators

and also followed up with some print articles, I did not realize that this would catch up as a movement so quickly.

I had in my article of  5th February pointed out that Arnab Goswami of Republic had contributed to the popularity of Twitter by linking Twitter hashtags to his debates on TV and encouraging the cross platform promotion of his news/views.

It was therefore an atonement for Mr Arnab that he has now taken up the campaign against Twitter and is actively promoting Koo.

I had also called for the Ministries and some prominent political people including the PMO and Modi to switch to Koo. It appears that  the switch  is happening.

Once the prominent members of the Nationalist social media participants switch to Koo or Tooter then Twitter will realize that any of the propaganda they are indulging in will not reach their intended audience in India.

If Rihanaa or Greta tweets and their followers who have no stake in India view them, it will not have the effect that the propogandists will have. The Washington Post may join them but it has no credibility of its own.

It is ironic that #kooapp is trending on Twitter. For some time this would be necessary so that the message reaches out to more of Indian Twitter users who can shift to Koo which at present seems to have won the lead over Tooter.

It will take some time for the real impact of this campaign on Twitter to be known. But the increased downloads of Koo (Also see here) indicate that the popularity of Koo is surging. It has now crossed 4 million downloads. In August Koo download was only around 5 lakhs and it has grown at the rate of more than one lakh since the last few days to reach nearly 5 million now.

It appears that Koo has now crossed the critical level of popularity which will sustain a momentum for it to grow further.

Let’s all welcome Koo and wish it to be a success.

We can also take this opportunity to recognize how WhatsApp and Twitter have endangered their business with an inadequate handling of their Compliance responsibility. It is in this context that the the Personal Data Protection Standard of India (PDPSI) promoted by Naavi and FDPPI places “Communication” as one of the standards for data protection.

Naavi

Other articles on Twitter at Naavi.org:

Twitter hack highlights the need for Indian Provision on Social Media Intermediary

The brighter side of hacking of Congress Twitter accounts

2.5 lakh Twitter passwords compromised

@PMOIndia twitter handle under dispute

Search for Twitter on Naavi.org

This is the picture of Robyn Rihanna Fenty is a Barbadian singer, actress, and businesswoman. According to reports in the Internet, this girl was paid Rs 18 crores to tweet to prompt discussion on what is called “Farmer’s Protest” in India.

This growling girl is Greta Thunbeg who has been allegedly paid Rs 7.5 crores to post a plan on how to conduct an information war on India using the so called “Farmer’s agitation.

Both Rihana and Greta can be called Information Gladiators who are willing to enter into a combat for a consideration.

Here is a larger list of the price of some information gladiators as published on Twitter

Read here for more details  about  the Information war economy which appears to be developing as a branch of the “Darkweb”.

Rihana is supposed to have 100 million followers and therefore the amount of Rs 2.5 million is a payment for endorsing the statement to these followers. In other words the payment is 0.025 US dollars or around Rs 1.75 per exposure in advertising terms.

In fact Gita Thumberg’s “Tool kit” is more valuable in terms of the content and it was interesting to observe her Twitter follower chart.

The followership of Greta is reported differently in different websites and mixed up with Twitter and Instagram. Taking the followership as about 4.9 million followers and her payment of Rs 7.5 crores amounts to Rs 15.40 for the tweet with the toolkit. Some estimates place the following of Greta at around 10 million in which case her support to the Khalistani movement might have been valued at around Rs 7.5 per exposure.

On the other hand Narendra Modi’s twitter following is placed around 65 million and Rahul Gandhi following is placed around 17 million.

In terms of valuation of advertising potential, it is not only the number of exposures that should be counted but also the quality of the exposure. In this respect, followers of Modi and Rahul Gandhi are the political target audience for the two politicians and are valued much more than the followers of Rihana or Greta.

Hence one tweet of Mr Narendra Modi is valued much more than these tweets of the Information Gladiators.

Rihana followers may be mostly music lovers and they would largely ignore the message. The hype is only created by the media based on the number of followers.

Greta’s exposure is different because it represents part of the conspiracy to promote unrest in India and may be considered directly as an offence under Section 66F of Indian Information Technology Act 2000, namely promotion of  “Cyber Terrorism” . I wish Delhi Police register a case naming Greta Thunberg under Section 66F of ITA 2000/8 and ask for Interpol to arrest her and extradite her to India.

At the same time we should also inform her followers that the Punjabi farmer’s agitation is directly promoting their environmental vandalism through stubble burning which adversely affects the air quality in Delhi and needs to be regulated. Greta’s support to the agitation is therefore against the cause of “Environment” which is her published goal.

It is necessary for Mr Modi to counter Greta’s influence (whatever it is) with his own tweets and it will reach more relevant audience than Greta can influence.

Naavi

PS: Some of my professional friends would be unhappy about Naavi.org taking up this cause against misuse of Twitter to discredit India. My view on this is as follows.

Many of the Indian intellectuals who consider themselves as “Professionals” try to keep themselves away from the controversy by remaining silent when such Information war is in progress are doing a disservice to the country. Most of us cannot join a war on the borders. But we can join the war in the Information warfare. Let us therefore be true to our conscience and fight for a cause to stop the disinformation engaged in by these Rihanas and Gretas..

Naavi