Even Former NSA Lawyers Don’t Think A TikTok Ban Fixes The Actual Problem
from the you're-not-fixing-the-actual-problem-because-you-don't-want-to-fix-the-actual-problem dept
We’ve mentioned more than a few times how the great moral panic over TikTok is a hollow performance by unserious people who have little actual interest in consumer privacy. Folks like the FCC’s Brendan Carr, who’ve spent years opposing funding privacy regulators or passing a meaningful Internet privacy law, yet now suffer repeated, performative embolisms when TikTok exploits a reality they helped create.
Much of the U.S. press coverage of the TikTok issue has been hollow, nationalistic, and painfully lacking this context. That interestingly started to change a little bit last week, with an opinion piece in the New York Times by Glenn S. Gerstell, former general counsel at the NSA (of all people), who reiterates a point I’ve found has been repeatedly lost in most press coverage. Namely:
[a TikTok ban] would sidestep a broader problem — our nation’s overall failure to address concerns over the huge amount of personal data collected in our digital lives, especially when that data could be used by foreign adversaries….if it wanted to collect information on Americans, China could sidestep a ban and legally, though with a little more effort, purchase almost limitless amounts of information from data brokers who stockpile information about our online activities.
The policymakers currently the most vocal about TikTok created this environment they’re pretending to be upset about.
They opposed giving privacy regulators at the FTC the funds, staff, or authority to adequately police companies that play fast and loose with sensitive consumer data. They repeatedly fought against absolutely any privacy law for the Internet era that would in absolutely any way inconvenience U.S. telecoms, app makers, and data brokers.
The end result: a barely regulated data-hoovering market that gobbles up and monetizes everything from your daily movement habits to a granular snapshot of your every online decision down to the millisecond. Foreign intelligence agencies can easily cobble together vast profiles on U.S. consumers for very little money, making a TikTok ban kind of like shooting a single bull in a stampede.
(An aside: the GOP folks hyperventilating about TikTok’s potential for propaganda and influence also couldn’t care less about our own domestic propaganda system built over decades by the GOP across AM radio, local broadcast news, cable TV news, and the Internet. That disinformation bullhorn is directly radicalizing Americans, fomenting violence, chipping away at the cornerstones of democracy, and undermining public health advice in a way that’s far more concrete than TikTok, yet we’ve seen little real media reform.)
The TikTok moral panic is, in reality, a distraction from our profound failures on consumer protection and privacy legislation. The real path forward is meaningful privacy legislation and actual, meaningful penalties for companies that routinely play fast and loose with consumer data, both foreign and domestic:
The optimal way forward would be for Congress to pass a law governing the collection and misuse of online personal and commercial data that would apply not only to current apps such as TikTok but also to future digital apps (foreign owned or not) posing security or privacy concerns.
U.S. corporations very much don’t want a reality where consumers are empowered and there are meaningful, well-considered penalties for corporations (and executives) that repeatedly violate consumer privacy, because it will cost them billions. Corruption has, quite effectively, prevented this reality from materializing despite several decades of efforts, and advice from activists and experts alike.
If we’re going to have an adult conversation about TikTok, we need to discuss how corruption first stifled meaningful privacy reform and consumer protection, as well as how that corruption is easily exploitable by both foreign governments and our own. Simply hyperventilating about TikTok, and pretending that banning a single popular app fixes any of this, is grade school bullshit dressed up as adult conversation.
Filed Under: china, ftc, moral panic, privacy, security, social media, spy, surveillance, tiktok ban
Companies: tiktok


Comments on “Even Former NSA Lawyers Don’t Think A TikTok Ban Fixes The Actual Problem”
minor typo
There’s what I believe’s a minor typo.
“…or authority to adequately
policypolice companies…”or not.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Privacy nuts are desperately trying to convince people that there’s a problem, and since they can’t, they want to convince the government instead. The fact that it will “cost companies billions” to comply with idiotic policies that no one wants or needs is all the reason we need to not have those policies.
Re:
What kind of horse-$#it is this^? We all have a natural / inherent right to privacy. If any of us wants to voluntary surrender some of that privacy, that should be an option. But complete personal privacy should be the default. There should also be laws / policies against systems like some grocery stores and other merchants have where you can maintain your privacy while paying exorbitant / prohibitive prices, or “all your data is belong to us” systems in exchange for paying normal market prices.
Privacy is a basic human right. The 4th Amendment to our Constitution, while not actually using the word “privacy,” makes this very clear. The SCOTUS travesty of the “third party doctrine” is just as clear in it’s effect of being an end run around the 4th Amendment guarantees of individual privacy.
Our current status, with a largely surveillance-based government and a largely complicit surveillance-based economy, is also very clear as prima facie evidence of our increasingly fast decent into a completely authoritarian / totalitarian / fascist surveillance-based regime.
Re: Re: That's like saying "Flying by flapping your arms is a human right"
Essentially all electronic devices are compromised, so digital privacy is impossible. If you are in a room with a window, a laser beam bounced off that window from the outside makes everything audible, so analog privacy is equally impossible. There can be no “human right” to do the impossible.
To communicate secrets, use 15C tradecraft: go to a large open field before dawn, where you can see people coming from a long way off (and can see drones in the sky overhead, because they can’t hide in the sun).
Re:
As the joke goes, Who’s this “we”, white man?
The ‘billions’ are industry-wide, and the industry is “selling other people’s data”. What you’re saying is “don’t destroy the market we data-brokers depend upon”.
Good luck with that.
Re:
“The fact that it will “cost companies billions””
As opposed to the untold amounts being wasted upon
“desperately trying to convince people that there’s a problem” with people having a bit of privacy.
Idiotic policy – like not having to produce a RealId when purchasing groceries? Remember The Donald confusion about this? lol
“policies that no one wants or needs”
No one huh .. did you do a poll?
Re:
What a great framing for the executives of the companies worth billions. How about considering that they shouldn’t have earned some of those billions in the first place?
Imagine living back in the 19th century US and arguing that abolishing slavery would cost wealthy slaveowners their fortunes. “all the reason” my foot.
Re:
“Nobody really wants privacy” is quite a hot from anyone not making money from the lack of effective privacy regs.
I wonder how Congress would react to know that a government that is hostile to US citizens is collecting way more information than TikTok could ever hope to get about citizens and uses that information to look for targets they can sway into doing things they might not normally do.
How can they claim doing anything about tiktok would protect us when they ignore this massive wholesale collection of citizens data being used for unclear purposes.
Then once they are all worked up, tell them its room 641A, and it is a shining example of the government not actually giving a shit about citizen privacy & has resulted in courts being lied to about how information was obtained which really seems to call into question that whole fair trial thing…
But china video app bad, undermining the rights of all us citizens NBD.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
There is an immediate need for newndigital infrastructure to accomodate the growth and innovation.
With all of the recent hacks and ransomware on healthcare companies (for example), new domestic infrastructure does away with that darkweb model and increases security in that industry exponentially.
Not having connectivity to a global network starts the next chapter of the infirmation superhighway as well.
Many of the educated people are laughing at “oh! Thats what wqs in the closet”. Plastic emotion trash and digital slums just confirm why the 3rd world is 3rd world.
Internet 2.0 is already a done deal. Those that have already divested from Internet 1.0 are already enjoying the innovation.
You also have to remember that many of the 20th century facdes have underfunded retirement math to deal with. Scapegoating poor design is not new.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
That explains the old people in politics. They just have to admit failure and that chasing cheap labor in China and India made their math even worse.
They still have underfunded retirement accounts and underfunded pensions.
Old politicians do not have a clue about how good the innovation is in the 21st century. Compute and big data work even better with accurate math :p
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
Securing remote work/WFH infrastructure is another positive benefit of new infrastructure.
All of the businesses that offshored private data are in for a big fine as well for not taking privacy concerns into account. Basic digital hygiene is not sending financial, health and private data to insecure locations.
That $2 an hour offshore assistant just sold the data to the highest bidder. Business model and all.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:
Lol. Artificial morbid obesity from eating all of the crap on the Internet facilitates the immediate need for new digital infrastructure in 2023. They are eqting their own babies.
Securing the remote curriculum era and the remote work era from foreign intrusion should be paramount. Its easy to reverse engineer network infrastructure.
I agree that most leisure and business can be conducted just as well on domestic infrastructure without foreign influence. There is no reason to be connected to a global network for many businesses.
Commerce changes overnight without the 3rd world security burden and moderation woes.
Re: Re: Old People and Western Stockholders
The ‘Old People’ thing hits from multiple directions. The western world has a huge drive to focus on returns for the current quarter and not much beyond that. As a result, thoughts of what could make a company healthy for the long term just don’t materialize. This goes for younger investers as well as pension fund managers.
Re: RE:
This looks like some kind of really bad AI word salad.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
Having usa://, uk://, aus://, jap://, skor://, etc makes sense in the 1st world with domestic digital infrastructure.
All of it adheres to local laws without 3rd world strawmen.
Its the future already. The 3rd world timesuck is counterproductive and inferior vocabulary.
Can you see online voting being commonplace on domestic digital infrastructure? Of course you can. It can be private and secured. The global infrastructure is digital slums already. I guess they bred like cockroaches and thought somebody would care.
New infrastructure leaves all of that behind.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
1st world problems are best resolved with 1st world solutions.
I agree that new infrastructure is a sound investment in the modern world.
The ingenuity to achieve that is already available.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
Here is a somwhat recent podcast that confirms that.
https://opensourcesecurity.io/2022/08/21/episode-337-security-patches-are-getting-worse-dustin-childs-from-zdi-tells-us-why/
Updating processes for new infrastructure is why the being nimble is still important.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:
Agreed. Removing the weakest link in security requires not connecting to bad neighborhoods and building something better suited for modern life.
Re: Re: Re:2
Heres a link from a fave site that shows 80%+ of email is SPAM, pretty much confirming the direction of Internet 1.0 as a useful tool goes.
https://donotpay.com/learn/spam-accounts-for-approximately-percent-of-all-email/
Twitter is also dropping its API today, so we will probably hear stats about how much SPAM was removed from their system.
Now that Internet 2.0 is becoming more popular with the techies, new PUSH messaging systems and indexing services to replace the outdated relics (google/bing ad bias) shifts gears on innovation back to being for the pleasure of it. And its relevant to growth again.
The information superhighway was all satisfaction with no upsells, marketing or bloat.
Re: Re: Re:3
My goodness, John Smith really has gone completely off the fucking rails…
Governing theater
Tik Tok, one hole in the Swiss cheese data dam.
Re:
Worrying about TikTok alone in this environment is an awful lot like shooting down balloons while satellites fly overhead.
Re: Re:
What’s a little treason between Republicans?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Take The Shot
But you DO have to start somewhere. If you never open fire, you get trampled. Tiktok looks like an excellent first target. Bonus: sometimes a stampede can get spooked into changing direction. Pull the trigger and give the other data violators a good reason to worry.
Re:
That might be plausible, if it weren’t so clear they’re picking on TikTok because it’s owned by a Chinese company and the folks motivating this nonsense would prefer to expropriate it for themselves.
I hardly think Zuck will quake in his shoes, much less change behavior as a result.
Re:
Why not start with those companies that track people whether they actually use their service or not? Google and Facebook being the worst offenders.
Re: Re:
ISPs*
Re:
Once again, you don’t start by targeting a company. You start with a law.
This is the most pathetic nonsense argument ever.
It’s like working up to a trespassing law by arguing for years that Ted shouldn’t be allowed on the grass in one place. Idiotic.
Re: You can't be this naive, Koby
In context, there’s a simple implication of Karl’s bull stampede analogy. You missed it or ignored it. The problem is not that politicians like Brendan Carr are shooting one bull out of the entire stampede. The problem is that Brendan Carr and other corrupt politicians go out of their way to stop anyone from shooting any of the other bulls.
Re: Re: Forgot to mention one thing
To be safe, I should’ve been more explicit. Karl’s bull analogy is as follows:
Corrupt politicians like Brendan Carr banning TikTok is to shooting one bull while protecting the rest of the stampede
as
passing a strong federal privacy law which applies to all companies operating in the US (domestic and foreign, ISPs and internet tech, TikTok and Google, etc.) is to shooting every bull in the stampede.
Re: Re:
Nah, Koby knows EXACTLY what he’s trying to say.
He wants TikTok (and by extension, Bytedance) firmly under Republican ownership.
Or, he wants America subservient to China.
thanks for sharing it is very helpful for me and also informative for all those users who will come to read…
this is one of the best book marking site in the World.
thanks you.
https://www.alawncare.net/
Thanks for social bookmarking websites list. Really it goanna help many freshers to bookmark their websites/posts, etc. it has various advantages as mentioned above but most importantly it has the main advantage to bloggers, free social bookmarking websites will help them fetch traffic to their websites. When anyone submits any link to any famous bookmarking website, it gets tones of free attention and traffic.
https://www.johnniescarwashonoak.com/