You know it’s bad when we are relying on tech companies to protect our freedom of speech
The UK tries for a backdoor into Apple iCloud, Russia, China, and Iran perpetrate information operations, and a former Google employee gets charged with economic espionage
The internet flourished under the idea of anonymity to enable freedom of speech. If you choose so, no one (without technical ability and in some cases a little guesswork) will know it’s you posting that comment or reacting to that post online. If you send a message to someone on end-to-end encrypted sites, that message is private: no one else can view it or change it. This has allowed countless revolutions to flourish, most notably the Arab Spring. Revolutionaries, protestors, dissidents, journalists, refugees, and others involved in conflict rely on anonymity and private messages to communicate, to organize, to plan, to rally. Companies ensuring encryption and privacy of data enable the anonymity and freedom of speech we all rely on.
Countries like China require control of any and all data in the country under the guise of national security. However, it’s also one way they can manage dissent and control the information entering or leaving the country. For example, there have been reports for many years that locals in China using apps like WeChat have messages the government does not approve of disappearing from their text threads. This violates their freedom of speech and is only possible because of China’s tight grip on Chinese companies.
While it may not seem like a big deal to those of us living outside of China and other censorship-heavy countries, the reality is that we must protect our fundamental rights of free speech from every government, not just those that are overt in their surveillance efforts.
Why? We’ve already seen the US, U.K., and others use whatever they can to surveil citizens illegally. Our phones are a treasure trove of data; we do everything with them. If the government gets access to the data our phones collect, they can use it as evidence of a crime — say you're talking about using an illicit drug, or you’re texting while driving, or you're listening to pirated music… or you’re speaking ill of the government. The more government overreach and access we allow, the easier it is for any government to curtail, censor, and prosecute its citizens.
What happened: The U.K. wants access to the cloud backups of all Apple users, which will give them access to the data of any Apple iCloud user at any time. In the United Kingdom, rules like the Investigatory Powers Act of 2016 limited invasive data access unless there was a warrant. However, the U.K. recently adopted the Investigatory Powers Act of 2024, an amendment to the 2016 act, which gives the U.K. far more surveillance powers than before and does it covertly.
Take note: Apple has had a long and challenging relationship with various countries over access to its users’ data, most notably the United States. The U.K. amendment ensures that the rules apply not just to companies in the U.K. but to those in other countries as well. If Apple or other companies give in to this order, it will establish a precedent and other countries will also demand access.
Russia, China, Iran, and others target the US with information operations, but for very different purposes
What happened: A new report details a series of foreign information operations where different nation-states targeted the United States, especially in down-ballot elections.
Take note: This report details how Russia, China, Iran, and other countries targeted the US. Russia followed its same old playbook of attempting to divide the public, while China focused on gaining support for state interests.
Former Google employee indicted on economic espionage because of work by the Disruptive Technology Strike Force
What happened: A former Google employee was indicted for economic espionage and theft of trade secrets in the US. He allegedly stole data for China on the hardware and software infrastructure Google was building to compete with other AI model providers.
Take note: The Disruptive Technology Strike Force identified and investigated this activity. The DTSF was created by the Biden administration and is led by the Justice Department’s National Security Division and the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS). It enforces US laws protecting advanced US technologies from illegal acquisition by nation-state entities. It operates across domains, not just limited to the digital realm.
I want to hear your perspective. Share a comment with me below.