Vietnam Expands Decades Long Effort To Crack Down On Any Dissent Online By Demanding Data Be Kept In The Country

from the wider-impact dept

It’s no secret that the Vietnamese government is no fan of the open internet. All the way back in 2002 we wrote about the government requiring people to register just to create a website. That same year we were writing about people being arrested for posting criticism of the government. In 2008, we wrote about the Vietnamese government banning “subversive” blogs as well. With the rise of social media, Vietnam has shifted its focus there. In 2013, it banned news reporting on social media, saying it should be for personal use only. In 2014, we wrote about how the government was abusing Facebook’s own reporting tools to shut down dissenters from using the site. And at the beginning of this year, we wrote about how the government now employed around 10,000 people whose only job was to monitor the internet for dissent.

And now it’s going to get even worse — to a degree that might even lead some of the big internet companies to leave Vietnam entirely. And we have the NSA (partially) to blame. Ever since the revelation of the Snowden documents, describing how the NSA was getting access to all sorts of data and metadata on foreigners by compelling various private companies to cough up their data, there’s been a big push among some for data localization. Some of that push has come from privacy activists themselves, arguing in other countries that their data shouldn’t be allowed to go to the US where the NSA has so much access — but much of it has simply been using the NSA revelations as a stalking horse to get what they want: which is the ability to snoop locally on all of that data. That’s why countries like Russia has been a huge proponent of data localization.

And now we can add Vietnam to the list. Despite strong condemnation from the US (and US internet companies) it appears that Vietnam wants to require any internet company with Vietnamese users to host that data locally where the government and its thousands of content monitors can snoop on it:

The new draft decree requires companies providing a range of services, including email, social media, video, messaging, banking and e-commerce, to set up offices in Vietnam if they collect, analyze or process personal user data.

The companies would also be required to store a wide range of user data, ranging from financial records and biometric data to information on peoples? ethnicity and political views, or strengths and interests inside Vietnam?s border.

Not surprisingly, the same law gives law enforcement much greater ability to demand data from these platforms, because of course it does. The Vietnamese officials pushing this plan say its necessary for “cybersecurity” which is utter nonsense.

This could be a real test for companies like Facebook and Google and there’s a strong argument they (and others) should seriously consider simply shutting off access in that country, even as both sites are quite popular there. Giving in here will undoubtedly mean having to give in elsewhere, and literally supporting the suppression of political dissent.

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Vietnam Expands Decades Long Effort To Crack Down On Any Dissent Online By Demanding Data Be Kept In The Country”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
15 Comments
btr1701 (profile) says:

Ignore It

> The new draft decree requires companies providing a range of services, including email, social media, video, messaging, banking and e-commerce, to set up offices in Vietnam if they collect, analyze or process personal user data.

Considering that this requires companies to set up offices, it apparently purports to apply to companies that *don’t* have a physical presence in Vietnam?

If that’s the case, any US company that meets that criteria can just ignore this. Vietnam laws don’t control them if they don’t have a physical presence in the country. Vietnam’s only recourse is to block companies that don’t comply from access within Vietnam.

Vietnam isn’t the super-legislature for the entire world, binding all 7 billion people on the planet with its decrees.

Bergman (profile) says:

Re: Ignore It

Unfortunately, that’s not necessarily true. It is against federal law in the US to violate the laws of any country in certain ways. The Lacey Act, for example, sent a US resident to prison for violating a Honduran law (that it had been repealed before he ‘broke’ it was deemed irrelevant by the court), despite the fact he had never been to Honduras.

Anonymous Coward says:

> Giving in here will undoubtedly mean having to give in elsewhere, and literally supporting the suppression of political dissent.

Are you intentionally ignoring the fact that Google has already had hundreds of employees working full time to build something to assist the Chinese government in suppressing political dissent?

TheResidentSkeptic (profile) says:

The strategy of the game

1) all our users data must be kept in our country on a server in our country
2) since our users data is on a server in our country, you have a nexus of business in our country
3) since you now have a nexus of service in our country, we will tax you 3% of your global revenue (H/T to the EU)

So.. how many countries get to play the tax game before each company goes out of business?

Gets rid of all them foreign companies who won’t comply with the instructions of what information the people are allowed to know, and back to local-only, well-controlled media.

And that’s the real game.

Tanner Andrews (profile) says:

no worries there

seriously consider simply shutting off access in that country

Much simpler solution: have no office in that country. With no office, and presumably a corresponding lack of assets, they are free to ignore any decrees from Vietnam.

Think of it as a message: “I fart in your general direction, which I am allowed to do from here in the States because we have a First Amendment and you all have an unappetizing little dictator.”

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
15:42 Supreme Court Shrugs Off Opportunity To Overturn Fifth Circuit's Batshit Support Of Texas Drag Show Ban (62)
15:31 Hong Kong's Zero-Opposition Legislature Aims To Up Oppression With New 'National Security' Law (33)
09:30 5th Circuit Is Gonna 5th Circus: Declares Age Verification Perfectly Fine Under The First Amendment (95)
13:35 Missouri’s New Speech Police (67)
15:40 Florida Legislator Files Bill That Would Keep Killer Cops From Being Named And Shamed (38)
10:49 Fifth Circuit: Upon Further Review, Fuck The First Amendment (39)
13:35 City Of Los Angeles Files Another Lawsuit Against Recipient Of Cop Photos The LAPD Accidentally Released (5)
09:30 Sorry Appin, We’re Not Taking Down Our Article About Your Attempts To Silence Reporters (41)
10:47 After Inexplicably Allowing Unconstitutional Book Ban To Stay Alive For Six Months, The Fifth Circuit Finally Shuts It Down (23)
15:39 Judge Reminds Deputies They Can't Arrest Someone Just Because They Don't Like What Is Being Said (33)
13:24 Trump Has To Pay $392k For His NY Times SLAPP Suit (16)
10:43 Oklahoma Senator Thinks Journalists Need Licenses, Should Be Trained By PragerU (88)
11:05 Appeals Court: Ban On Religious Ads Is Unconstitutional Because It's Pretty Much Impossible To Define 'Religion' (35)
10:49 Colorado Journalist Says Fuck Prior Restraint, Dares Court To Keep Violating The 1st Amendment (35)
09:33 Free Speech Experts Realizing Just How Big A Free Speech Hypocrite Elon Is (55)
15:33 No Love For The Haters: Illinois Bans Book Bans (But Not Really) (38)
10:44 Because The Fifth Circuit Again Did Something Ridiculous, The Copia Institute Filed Yet Another Amicus Brief At SCOTUS (11)
12:59 Millions Of People Are Blocked By Pornhub Because Of Age Verification Laws (78)
10:59 Federal Court Says First Amendment Protects Engineers Who Offer Expert Testimony Without A License (17)
12:58 Sending Cops To Search Classrooms For Controversial Books Is Just Something We Do Now, I Guess (221)
09:31 Utah Finally Sued Over Its Obviously Unconstitutional Social Media ‘But Think Of The Kids!’ Law (47)
12:09 The EU’s Investigation Of ExTwitter Is Ridiculous & Censorial (37)
09:25 Media Matters Sues Texas AG Ken Paxton To Stop His Bogus, Censorial ‘Investigation’ (44)
09:25 Missouri AG Announces Bullshit Censorial Investigation Into Media Matters Over Its Speech (108)
09:27 Supporting Free Speech Means Supporting Victims Of SLAPP Suits, Even If You Disagree With The Speakers (74)
15:19 State Of Iowa Sued By Pretty Much Everyone After Codifying Hatred With A LGBTQ-Targeting Book Ban (157)
13:54 Retiree Arrested For Criticizing Local Officials Will Have Her Case Heard By The Supreme Court (9)
12:04 Judge Says Montana’s TikTok Ban Is Obviously Unconstitutional (4)
09:27 Congrats To Elon Musk: I Didn’t Think You Had It In You To File A Lawsuit This Stupid. But, You Crazy Bastard, You Did It! (151)
12:18 If You Kill Two People In A Car Crash, You Shouldn’t Then Sue Their Relatives For Emailing Your University About What You Did (47)
More arrow