ISIS’s Cyber Nightmare: How Misinformation and Hacktivists are Fueling Paranoia Among Jihadis

ISIS Urges Followers to Use Only Official Channels Amid Cyber Warfare and Misinformation Campaigns

The terrorist organization ISIS has issued a directive to its supporters, instructing them to rely solely on its “official” communication channels. This announcement comes in response to a series of spoof propaganda efforts and cyberattacks launched by international intelligence agencies.

In a message disseminated through the group’s Nashir News Agency on the encrypted messaging app Telegram, ISIS expressed alarm over the proliferation of fake news attributed to the organization. The announcement emphasized that the Nashir News Agency does not have accounts on platforms such as Twitter, Instagram, or WhatsApp. It further stated that no legitimate accounts provide links apart from those officially associated with Nashir.

“We also caution against any account claiming to be affiliated with the publisher of Nashir News… the specialized agency to publish all that is officially issued by the Islamic State,” the message added.

The Nashir News Agency has been a key outlet for disseminating ISIS propaganda, including text, video, and photo reports from militants in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Egypt, and other regions. It also publishes material aimed at inspiring and instructing followers to commit acts of global terrorism. Each post on Telegram typically garners thousands of views and is often translated and further spread across mainstream websites and social media platforms by ISIS supporters worldwide.

Rise of Misinformation and Internal Strife

Recently, there has been a noticeable increase in fake ISIS propaganda, leading to paranoia and infighting among jihadis. Daeshgram, a group of Iraqi activists, played a significant role in this development by creating a spoof version of ISIS’s weekly newsletter, Al Naba. This fake newsletter, distributed via an official-looking Telegram account, featured a doctored image of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi surrounded by female dancers and an article on a fictional ISIS team participating in the World Cup.

Daeshgram claimed to have infiltrated over 120 ISIS-affiliated Telegram groups to spread confusion and mistrust using the counterfeit Al Naba issue. “Many members who used to trust one another are fighting in their groups and blaming one another,” an activist told The Independent. Upon realizing they were being targeted, some members became fearful, suspecting that their devices might have been infected with malware. “Our operation is continuing, but we have already achieved our goal to confuse and scare ISIS members and make them doubt each other in a place on the internet where they thought they were untouchable,” the activist added.

ISIS’s propaganda materials, including videos and documents, have been linked to terrorists who carried out deadly attacks in the UK, as well as “self-radicalized” extremists who have been jailed for planning attacks. The group’s focus on creating a “virtual caliphate” is seen as an attempt to maintain influence despite significant territorial losses in Iraq and Syria. The sophistication of their propaganda campaigns has been cited as a key factor in attracting an unprecedented number of foreign recruits.

Target of Global Cyber Efforts

Given its effective use of propaganda, ISIS has become a focal point for both international intelligence agencies and activists working to disrupt its messaging. Earlier this year, GCHQ, the UK’s intelligence and security organization, disclosed that it had initiated a “major offensive cyber campaign” against ISIS, which likely included the creation of fake propaganda.

Jeremy Fleming, the Director of GCHQ, noted that ISIS had harnessed the power of online communications to “radicalize and scare” in a way no previous terrorist group had. “They know potential sympathizers react well to slickly produced, unfiltered videos and magazines that can be downloaded and watched on smartphones, and they know which platforms to use to reach them,” Fleming explained. He further mentioned that the impact of ISIS’s approach has been felt across Europe, including attacks in London and Manchester.

Fleming elaborated that agents at GCHQ and the Ministry of Defence had successfully suppressed ISIS propaganda, impeded the group’s ability to coordinate attacks, and safeguarded coalition forces on the battlefield. “In 2017, there were times when Daesh found it almost impossible to spread their hate online, to use their normal channels to spread their rhetoric, or trust their publications,” he added.

In April, British intelligence, alongside US and European allies, launched a new wave of attacks targeting ISIS’s online platforms, including Amaq, al-Bayan radio, Halummu, and Nashir news websites. Europol stated that ISIS’s capacity to distribute and publicize terrorist content had been “compromised” through a combination of cooperation with internet service providers and cyberattacks. Security services are also working to identify ISIS administrators and radicalized individuals across Europe and beyond using the data retrieved from these operations.

Recent court cases have brought to light that British intelligence agents have been posing as ISIS fighters and propagandists on Telegram and other platforms to gather intelligence on terrorists who believe them to be like-minded extremists.

Evolution of ISIS’s Propaganda Network

When ISIS declared its “caliphate” in early 2014, it was openly publishing propaganda on mainstream social networks and websites, while many foreign fighters became known for documenting their activities on Twitter and blogs. The scale and complexity of the group’s propaganda network were unprecedented, with content available in nearly a dozen languages through websites, social media, automated emails, dedicated apps, and internet browser extensions.

However, intensified efforts to detect and remove such content have forced ISIS into increasingly obscure corners of the internet. Despite this, experts warn that ISIS’s propaganda network, although under significant pressure and facing territorial losses in Syria and Iraq, has already gained a dangerous level of ideological notoriety worldwide.

Raffaello Pantucci, Director of International Security Studies at the Royal United Services Institute in London, noted that the group continues to migrate across various platforms.

“Clearly there’s a real question of integrity around their material, and they’re stuck in a situation where no one necessarily trusts it anymore,” he told The Independent.

While acknowledging the importance of disrupting ISIS’s propaganda, Pantucci cautioned against underestimating the group’s resilience. “You can’t kid yourself that this will go away… the real threat comes from the fact there are angry people who are unhappy with governance in parts of the world,” he said.

Pantucci also pointed out that ISIS, which often publishes idealized depictions of life under its rule alongside gruesome footage of executions and battles, is attempting to “project an image of normality” despite its territorial setbacks. He questioned the extent to which the group could compensate for its battlefield losses through its online presence alone, asking, “If they continue to fail on the battlefield, how much can they make up for it with a Telegram account?”

Conclusion

The ongoing battle against ISIS’s propaganda machine involves a multi-faceted approach combining cyberattacks, misinformation campaigns, and intelligence gathering. While these efforts have led to disruptions in ISIS’s ability to operate online, the group’s ideological reach remains a significant concern. Continued vigilance and innovative strategies will be required to counteract the evolving threat posed by ISIS’s propaganda and recruitment tactics.

A Timeline of the New Assets

The Ongoing Relationship Between American Right-Wing Influencers and Russian Propaganda Farms

In recent years, the intricate web of Russian interference in Western democracies has continued to unravel, revealing a broad spectrum of financial and political influences. The Tenet Media Russian money scandal stands out as one of the more complex and covert operations in this ongoing saga. Tenet Media, a prominent media conglomerate, was thrust into the spotlight when a series of investigations revealed it had unknowingly accepted substantial financial investments linked to Russian oligarchs and entities under the influence of the Kremlin. These revelations ignited widespread concern about foreign influence on Western media and exposed how financial networks can be manipulated for strategic geopolitical gains.

The scandal began to surface in early 2023 when investigative journalists discovered unusual financial patterns involving Tenet Media. Tracing these funds back to their origins, they uncovered a network of offshore companies and financial transactions that pointed to Russian interests. Initial reports hinted that Tenet Media had been receiving indirect funding from entities connected to sanctioned Russian oligarchs, raising questions about the motivations behind these investments and whether they were intended to sway public opinion through media channels. This revelation triggered a chain of events that led to a full-scale investigation, involving multiple governments, financial institutions, and media watchdogs, all aiming to uncover the extent of Russian influence on Tenet Media’s operations.

As the investigations deepened, more startling details emerged. Key figures within Tenet Media were found to have had meetings and established relationships with individuals tied to Russian intelligence and financial networks. Leaked documents revealed that these relationships were not coincidental but were part of a coordinated effort to build soft power influence in Western media. One of the major turning points came when emails from a high-ranking Tenet executive were leaked, suggesting awareness of the questionable origins of some of their funding sources. This leak not only fueled public outcry but also led to intensified scrutiny from regulatory bodies.

The implications of the scandal were vast. For Tenet Media, it meant a substantial loss of credibility, the resignation of several top executives, and the implementation of new, stricter compliance measures to prevent such a breach of trust from recurring. For the wider media landscape, it underscored the vulnerability of even well-established media organizations to covert foreign influence operations. Governments and financial institutions responded by tightening regulations around foreign investments in media companies, ensuring greater transparency and accountability.

The timeline that follows chronicles the key events of the Tenet Media Russian money scandal, detailing the investigation’s progression, the critical moments that shaped public understanding, and the broader implications for media integrity and geopolitical dynamics. From the first whispers of suspicious financial activity to the fallout that ensued, the timeline provides a comprehensive look at how a single media company became entangled in the complex web of international politics and espionage.

The Simplified Timeline (So Far):

February 2022:

  • Russia invades Ukraine.
  • This invasion prompts a global response, including extensive sanctions targeting Russian state-controlled entities such as RT (Russia Today). These sanctions are intended to isolate Russia economically and politically on the international stage.

October 2023:

  • RT begins covertly funneling money to a U.S. media company.
  • RT, seeking to circumvent the sanctions and influence American public opinion, secretly transfers nearly $10 million to a Tennessee-based media company identified as U.S. Company-1. This company’s operations are designed to subtly promote pro-Russian narratives and undermine U.S. credibility.

November 2023:

  • Launch of Tenet Media.
  • U.S. Company-1 rebrands itself as Tenet Media. The company starts an aggressive social media campaign, posting content on platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, X (formerly Twitter), and YouTube. The content often features anti-Ukrainian and anti-American themes, aligning with RT’s covert objectives.

March 2024:

  • Moscow music venue terrorist attack.
  • A terrorist attack occurs at a music venue in Moscow, causing significant casualties. The indictment alleges that RT operatives directed Tenet Media to propagate false narratives blaming Ukraine and the U.S. for the attack. This disinformation aims to create division and alter public perception in both Russia and the U.S.

May 22, 2023:

  • Tenet Media’s rebranding.
  • The company formally adopts a new name and identity to better align with its covert mission. This rebranding effort is a part of a broader strategy to disguise the company’s origins and operations.

August 2024:

  • Financial details of the scandal are revealed.
  • It is disclosed that RT’s financial support to U.S. Company-1 totals approximately $9.7 million, which constitutes nearly 90% of the company’s bank deposits. This financial dependence highlights the extent of RT’s control over the media operations and its significant influence on the company’s content.

Early September 2024:

  • Indictment unsealed.
  • The indictment against RT employees Konstantin Kalashnikov and Elena Afanasyeva is made public by the Southern District of New York. The charges include conspiracy to violate the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) and conspiracy to commit money laundering. The indictment reveals the use of fake identities and shell companies to obscure the source of the funds and the manipulation of public opinion.

Mid-September 2024:

  • RT operatives remain at large.
  • The indictment details that Konstantin Kalashnikov and Elena Afanasyeva are fugitives. The authorities are actively seeking their apprehension. The case is a significant example of how foreign actors attempt to infiltrate and influence U.S. media and public discourse.
  • Influencers and media figures associated with Tenet Media, including Tim Pool, Benny Johnson, Dave Rubin, and Lauren Southern, publicly react to the scandal. They claim ignorance of the true origins of their funding and express shock at the revelations. This public reaction highlights the complexity and far-reaching impact of the scandal on individuals and media platforms involved.

Tim Pool’s official response after days of mocking the allegations with sarcastic comments about flipping his allegiance to Ukraine

The Tenet Media Russian money scandal serves as a stark reminder of the pervasive and sophisticated nature of modern geopolitical influence operations. What began as a seemingly innocuous flow of investment into a media company turned out to be part of a broader strategy by Russian interests to subtly shape narratives and influence public opinion in the West. The scandal highlights how vulnerable even established media companies can be to covert financial manipulations, especially in an era where information is a powerful tool in the geopolitical arena.

Throughout the unfolding of the scandal, several lessons have become evident. First and foremost is the critical importance of transparency and due diligence in media financing. The Tenet Media case has demonstrated that without rigorous scrutiny of funding sources, media organizations risk becoming unwitting vehicles for foreign influence. This realization has led to a much-needed reassessment of regulatory frameworks governing foreign investments in media, pushing for more stringent checks and balances to safeguard media independence and integrity.

Another key takeaway is the evolving nature of state influence campaigns. The use of offshore accounts, shell companies, and intermediaries to mask the true origins of funds reflects a shift from more overt forms of propaganda to subtler, more insidious methods of shaping the information environment. This approach not only makes it harder to detect and counter such operations but also complicates the legal and ethical landscape for media organizations that must navigate these murky waters.

For Tenet Media, the fallout has been both swift and severe. The loss of public trust, the resignation of high-level executives, and the imposition of new compliance protocols are just the beginning of a long road to rebuilding credibility. While the company has taken steps to rectify its mistakes, the scandal will likely cast a long shadow over its operations for years to come.

At a broader level, the scandal has underscored the need for a coordinated global response to counter foreign influence in media. Governments, regulatory bodies, and the media industry itself must work together to ensure that such breaches of trust are prevented in the future. The Tenet Media case has set a precedent that will inform future policies and strategies, reminding us that in the information age, the battle for hearts and minds is fought not just with facts and narratives but also with the financial flows that underpin them.

In the end, the Tenet Media Russian money scandal is not just a story of one company’s failure to guard against covert influence; it is a cautionary tale for the entire media landscape. It reveals the complexities of navigating a world where economic and informational warfare are increasingly intertwined, demanding vigilance, integrity, and collaboration to preserve the principles of free and independent media.

US and UK Intelligence Chiefs Embrace Generative AI for Enhanced Operations

CIA Director Bill Burns and MI6 Chief Richard Moore Discuss How AI is Revolutionizing Intelligence Gathering and Global Security

In a joint declaration on collaboration between their agencies, CIA Director Bill Burns and MI6 Chief Richard Moore have outlined the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in addressing contemporary security threats.

In an op-ed for the Financial Times, Burns and Moore revealed that both agencies are actively employing generative AI to bolster intelligence operations, particularly in managing vast amounts of data. “We are now using AI, including generative AI, to enable and improve intelligence activities—from summarization to ideation to helping identify key information in a sea of data,” they wrote.

The intelligence chiefs also emphasized the use of AI to protect their agencies’ operations. They noted that they are training AI systems to conduct “red teaming” exercises to rigorously test their activities and ensure operational security.

Burns and Moore underscored the transformative impact of technology on the geopolitical landscape, citing the war in Ukraine as a prominent example where satellite imagery, drone technology, cyber warfare, and information operations are converging on an unprecedented scale. “This conflict has demonstrated that technology, deployed alongside extraordinary bravery and traditional weaponry, can alter the course of war,” they stated.

Beyond Ukraine, the CIA and MI6 are actively cooperating to counter Russian disinformation campaigns and what they describe as a “reckless campaign of sabotage across Europe.”

Russia’s utilization of generative AI is also evolving rapidly. Last week, the U.S. Department of Justice seized more than 30 websites operated by Russian actors as part of a misinformation campaign using AI to target American citizens ahead of the 2024 elections.

Additionally, the South China Morning Post recently reported that Russia is coordinating with China on the military applications of AI, including discussions about lethal autonomous weapons systems and other advanced military technologies.

China’s approach to generative AI presents a distinct set of challenges. According to a February 2024 testimony by the RAND Corporation to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, China is expected to integrate generative AI into its cyber-enabled influence operations. RAND alleges that the Chinese military, particularly the People’s Liberation Army, plans to employ AI for social media manipulation and election interference.

Both MI6 and the CIA have identified China as “the principal intelligence and geopolitical challenge of the 21st century.” The intelligence leaders emphasized that their agencies are not navigating this technological landscape alone; they are partnering with innovative companies across the United States, the United Kingdom, and globally to maintain a competitive technological advantage.

While this joint disclosure from Burns and Moore provides important insights into the evolving use of AI in intelligence, it is important to recognize that the exploration of AI applications within intelligence agencies is not new. In July, Lakshmi Raman, the CIA’s Director of Artificial Intelligence Innovation, spoke at an Amazon Web Services Summit about the agency’s use of generative AI for content triage and analytical support. “We were captured by the generative AI zeitgeist just like the entire world was a couple of years back,” Raman said, according to NextGov.

“We’ve also had a lot of success with generative AI, and we have leveraged generative AI to help us classify and triage open-source events to help us search and discover and do levels of natural language query on that data.”

AI companies like OpenAI and Palantir have also been forging agreements with various government agencies to provide AI services that enhance their capabilities. This marks a significant trend; according to a report by the Brookings Institution, federal agencies have increased their potential awards to private tech contracts by almost 1,200%, from $355 million to $4.6 billion during the period studied.