Australia has joined different international locations in saying a ban on the usage of TikTok on authorities units, with some states and territories following go well with. The rationale was based mostly on safety fears and, particularly, the chance the platform will probably be used for overseas interference operations by China.
TikTok is a video-sharing platform operated by ByteDance, an organization headquartered in Beijing, however included within the Cayman Islands. Information is allegedly saved within the US and Singapore.
Like related websites, TikTok’s privateness coverage signifies an expansive method to the gathering and use of non-public info. It could actually acquire info from customers and third events (akin to advertisers), and it may possibly draw inferences about its customers’ pursuits.
All of this info can then be shared with TikTok’s companions and repair suppliers to, amongst different issues, personalise content material and promoting.
The coverage additionally says info will probably be shared when there’s a authorized requirement to take action. China’s nationwide intelligence regulation obliges residents and organisations to assist, help and cooperate with nationwide intelligence efforts, which may embody ByteDance sharing folks’s TikTok knowledge.
Whereas TikTok denies it could hand over knowledge in such circumstances, there are studies that knowledge from American customers has been accessed by China-based staff. TikTok has additionally censored content material that’s politically delicate in China.
TikTok executives have confessed that its employees used the app to spy upon US journalists.
The specter of knowledge harvesting, and the co-opting of person info by way of TikTok isn’t theoretical, writes Martin McKenzie-Murray. https://t.co/Xkxeg7AECG
— The Saturday Paper (@SatPaper) April 10, 2023
The issue with specializing in just one app
Whereas the Australian authorities’s response might be defined by way of this logic, questions stay.
Given the ban solely impacts authorities units, couldn’t the identical folks be prone to overseas interference by way of their use of TikTok on private units?
What about different apps, akin to Fb, that acquire vital quantities of person knowledge – are these safer than TikTok? Even when different digital platforms don’t have connections with China, couldn’t they share or promote knowledge to different entities, akin to advertisers, knowledge brokers or enterprise companions? And mightn’t these third events have connections with China? Or different international locations with related legal guidelines?
A ultimate level: overseas interference can happen on a variety of digital platforms. Russia has run info campaigns designed to affect US elections utilizing platforms akin to YouTube, Tumblr, Google, Instagram, PayPal, Fb and Twitter.
In different phrases, the issue of digital safety and overseas interference is larger than only one app or the usage of authorities units.
Certainly, the Division of Residence Affairs notes that overseas interference actions will not be solely directed in the direction of authorities, but additionally academia, industries, the media and different communities (which is definitely everybody).
Banning TikTok on authorities units does get rid of one danger, however the broader pool of dangers stays each in authorities and past.
A brand new, more practical cybersecurity technique
The federal government is at the moment growing a brand new cyber safety technique to interchange the one put in place by the earlier authorities simply three years in the past.
A dialogue paper on the brand new technique was launched earlier this 12 months, with submissions due this week.
In his tackle to #TheSydneyDialogue, the Hon @TimWattsMP, Assistant Minister for International Affairs famous how Covid-19 had modified the way in which we take into consideration danger. The globe’s interconnectedness was dropped at the fore, revealing our publicity to systemic dangers. It’s the identical with tech. pic.twitter.com/tH69yjgjs7
— ASPI (@ASPI_org) April 5, 2023
This course of will hopefully end in a extra holistic technique on the way to handle the cybersecurity and overseas interference issues that led to the TikTok ban.
Somewhat than the whack-a-mole tactical response of banning one app at a time, the technique may present readability on how the federal government will handle points round weak safety on cellular apps (notably utilized by folks in delicate sectors), in addition to the potential for this to be an entry level for overseas interference.
This might embody things like:
- educating folks on digital safety and overseas interference
- streamlined reporting channels for knowledge breaches, overseas interference makes an attempt, cybercrime, bugs and vulnerabilities
- growing or recommending the usage of acceptable requirements on cybersecurity, which may embody references to worldwide requirements in areas akin to info safety and knowledge governance
- strengthening cooperation between authorities and platforms and civil society
- focused prohibitions, which can embody bans on apps that would share knowledge with international locations that may then use it for overseas interference.
This sort of strategic method, notably on the schooling aspect, would give Australians higher instruments to arm themselves towards overseas interference on-line, which as Residence Affairs emphasises, is the “greatest defence” accessible.
A stronger privateness act may assist, too
One other related coverage growth is the federal government’s assessment of the Privateness Act, which is the first Australian regulation on knowledge safety.
Altering the principles about how knowledge is collected and utilized by platforms may present much less fodder for these working overseas interference operations. This might embody banning unfair makes use of, akin to focused messaging based mostly on a psychological profile. If the platforms don’t facilitate these makes use of, it turns into harder for overseas governments to make use of these instruments for manipulation.
Enhancing funding for the first knowledge regulator, the Workplace of the Australian Info Commissioner, may additionally strengthen enforcement throughout the board.
What is required is a method, not ways
These two reform initiatives exist inside a maze of others, together with inquiries or proposals referring to on-line privateness, digital platform providers, the affect of worldwide digital platforms, digital surveillance, and digital financial system regulation.
Past Australia, on the United Nations degree, some questions on whether or not worldwide regulation might be utilized to our on-line world have been resolved, whereas others stay open. Australia’s place on these points may be clarified.
Finally, what is required is a method, slightly than ways, and higher coordination of related insurance policies throughout authorities. The TikTok instance additionally highlights a truism that we shouldn’t suppose when it comes to privateness or safety, however slightly privateness and safety.
Whereas there may be an occasional want to decide on between these two values (for instance, when authorities companies surveil these suspected of against the law, terrorism or espionage), within the overwhelming majority of conditions safety is enhanced when the privateness of non-public info is protected.
For instance, the extra private info a overseas agent can entry about residents working in delicate areas, the higher it may possibly goal espionage and affect operations. If social media corporations are restricted in how they acquire, use and share Australians’ knowledge, we will take vital steps in the direction of defending everybody from overseas interference and different harms.
We’d like all of the insurance policies and related companies (cyber, privateness, schooling, platform regulation, worldwide relations, nationwide safety and extra) working collectively if we’re to fulfill the present challenges. It might make sense to ban TikTok on authorities units, however we have to tackle this downside a couple of app at a time.