TikTok Owner Had 'Backdoor' for CCP Access to US Data, Lawsuit Alleges(businessinsider.com)
businessinsider.com
TikTok Owner Had 'Backdoor' for CCP Access to US Data, Lawsuit Alleges
https://www.businessinsider.com/new-lawsuit-alleges-tiktok-owner-let-ccp-access-user-data-2023-5
397 comments
Social media access to user data (whether foreign or domestic) is bad, but it is a distraction from the real evil: behavioral management at scale. When you can target specific demographics and control what they see 8-10 hours of the day, you can change what they think, say, do, and most importantly, how they vote. People are literally being programmed (euphemistically, "conditioned") by the specific triggers and stimuli with almost surgical precision, and completely unbeknownst to them. This is uncomfortable to recognize and discuss, so the conversation is sadly reduced to "China/AI is bad/evil" to further foment hate and division.
Half of the comments in this thread sound like they were written by CCP propaganda chatbots. A dead giveaway is the failure to address the topic at hand and immediately deflect to "but the USA does XYZ too!" No one is disputing such a claim, but that's also not what we're talking about here.
> Yu is a former engineering lead for ByteDance in the US who worked at the company between 2017 and 2018.
This seems like an outrage bait lawsuit. The facts in the case are five years out of date, ByteDance has been through the wringer in the ensuing years and there’s no evidence that this backdoor exists in the current app.
This seems like an outrage bait lawsuit. The facts in the case are five years out of date, ByteDance has been through the wringer in the ensuing years and there’s no evidence that this backdoor exists in the current app.
Im more curious what tiktok data amouts to and how it could be used by CCP. I’ve heard of bans of Tiktok use by politicians and army bases and such. Without sensitive location data to some specific users but solely the young sharing memes, I wounder how CCP could use that data… Not a Tiktok user myself, if anyone could illuminate me on this it’s be great. For example does tiktok have direct messages from users to users that could be spied on? My naive assumption is that Tiktok is a meme sharing platform and timesink
This seems sloppy. If I were to build an app that was popular in say Cuba or something I wouldn't leave myself technical gateways to access the data and manipulate things directly. That would leave a clear paper trail and open me up to some innocent engineer stumbling across what's happening.
Rather I would embed trusted people into the company at low to mid-level positions of power, like software engineers, content moderators, etc. where they could quietly use their influence on shape things in ways that are favorable to my goals. I would do this with every company I could get them hired at not just the one making my app.
If I really had a need to exert undue influence I would use a side-channel to communicate instructions to people at the company (potentially even the leadership) and rely on them to carry out the orders. Remoting in and changing things myself seems silly.
Rather I would embed trusted people into the company at low to mid-level positions of power, like software engineers, content moderators, etc. where they could quietly use their influence on shape things in ways that are favorable to my goals. I would do this with every company I could get them hired at not just the one making my app.
If I really had a need to exert undue influence I would use a side-channel to communicate instructions to people at the company (potentially even the leadership) and rely on them to carry out the orders. Remoting in and changing things myself seems silly.
I would be extremely surprised if a state-actor like China couldn’t access most US company data at will. If you can invest several billions and have thousands of people working to create a breach, no company is safe, not even AWS or Microsoft.
In this case, that’s even way easier, the company is Chinese, the CCP can have this access lawfully, is this something unexpected?
I’m much more concerned by the laziness of most western governments in understanding if this was a threat or not.
In this case, that’s even way easier, the company is Chinese, the CCP can have this access lawfully, is this something unexpected?
I’m much more concerned by the laziness of most western governments in understanding if this was a threat or not.
TikTok is allegedly staffed with dozens of ex-FBI, CIA, and US State Department officials who moderate content[1].
Somehow PRISM and the closed-doors FISA court hearings, Lavabit, etc seem to be collectively memory-holed by USians. Nowadays their anxiety about state surveillance is reserved for the "CCP".
1. https://www.mintpressnews.com/tiktok-chinese-trojan-horse-ru...
Somehow PRISM and the closed-doors FISA court hearings, Lavabit, etc seem to be collectively memory-holed by USians. Nowadays their anxiety about state surveillance is reserved for the "CCP".
1. https://www.mintpressnews.com/tiktok-chinese-trojan-horse-ru...
When it comes to the CCP is it even a "backdoor"? They assert full LEGAL right to all data from companies in their jurisdiction. Everyone who operates in China, domestic or foreign, knows the costs of doing business.
Meanwhile, the CCP can just open their huge wallets and pay US-based data-brokers for all the private information of US citizens that they ever dreamed of ...
This is the original reporting that Business Insider rewrote:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/12/technology/tiktok-bytedan...
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/12/technology/tiktok-bytedan...
Oh dear. I won't be surprised to see this being true since TikTok is just a worse version of Facebook/Instagram who has already admitted and shown evidence of them violating the privacy of its users [0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5], and its defenders are just running out of excuses faster than a running tap at this point.
Before anyone says 'All social media companies do this', If large social networks like Facebook have been fined in the billions of dollars for such repeated privacy violations, then given the size of TikTok, you might as well agree that for TikTok to continue to operate in the US, it must to pay a multi-billion dollar fine for such repeat offenses and abuses of its user's privacy simply on the grounds of the size of the many users on the platform.
[0] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emilybakerwhite/tiktok-...
[1] https://www.scmagazine.com/news/privacy/uk-tiktok-16m-fine-c...
[2] https://fortune.com/2022/12/22/tiktok-data-privacy-blunder-c...
[3] https://futurism.com/tiktok-spy-locations-specific-americans
[4] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65126056
[5] https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/05/08/tiktok-lgbtq/
Before anyone says 'All social media companies do this', If large social networks like Facebook have been fined in the billions of dollars for such repeated privacy violations, then given the size of TikTok, you might as well agree that for TikTok to continue to operate in the US, it must to pay a multi-billion dollar fine for such repeat offenses and abuses of its user's privacy simply on the grounds of the size of the many users on the platform.
[0] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emilybakerwhite/tiktok-...
[1] https://www.scmagazine.com/news/privacy/uk-tiktok-16m-fine-c...
[2] https://fortune.com/2022/12/22/tiktok-data-privacy-blunder-c...
[3] https://futurism.com/tiktok-spy-locations-specific-americans
[4] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65126056
[5] https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/05/08/tiktok-lgbtq/
I know there's a legitimate, serious discussion to be had here, but anecdotally all of my TikTok stream is cooking and memes.
I'm pretty sure that's based on my viewing habits, because I love cooking and memes, but it does make these serious claims humorous at times.
I'm pretty sure that's based on my viewing habits, because I love cooking and memes, but it does make these serious claims humorous at times.
So, basically just the China version of the US Cloud Act?
I'm starting to become fatigued by all this TikTok news. Either ban the app or don't. Causing anxiety over TikTok without any action is the worst of both worlds.
Even if they didn't have an official backdoor, they would have many backdoors by just placing people on staff (getting them hired in the normal way.) You can't stop state intelligence agencies from getting into any domestic data that they want, even with law (which they can just ignore.) Social media is full of 'ex-'state intelligence operatives, and objections to that situation are made out to be bizarre, or even banned from discussion on these same social networks.
As far as I can tell, what we're supposed to think is that managing a social network, or any communications service, is within the same field as covert intelligence and surveillance, so of course that would be the hiring pool.
Non-Chinese have little to fear from Chinese government monitoring of their activity on TikTok. Chinese people know their government (which openly censors, rather than laundering their censorship through covert means like the Five Eyes), and know how to act to keep safe.
As far as I can tell, what we're supposed to think is that managing a social network, or any communications service, is within the same field as covert intelligence and surveillance, so of course that would be the hiring pool.
Non-Chinese have little to fear from Chinese government monitoring of their activity on TikTok. Chinese people know their government (which openly censors, rather than laundering their censorship through covert means like the Five Eyes), and know how to act to keep safe.
There are two main problems with social media, as it exists today:
First, the company that operates the social media system, has access to data that exposes extremely personal information about the users, sometimes directly, and sometimes through inference based on user behavior. This naturally attracts parties that might benefit from this information, originally advertisers, but increasingly nation states. Personally, I think the solution to this involves both privacy legislation, and legislation that dramatically restricts what foreign entities can do in the United States, but I acknowledge this is very controversial.
Second, the algorithms that the social media site uses to decide what content to presented to users is extremely susceptible to manipulation and to causing undesirable side effects. Even if the site operator is benign, the algorithm might magnify, extreme or emotional content in order to maximize engagement. We have seen this for several years now. And, of course, the site operators may choose to amplify messaging that they like or suppress messaging that they don’t. This may seem great if your values align with the site operator, but remember that operators change, e.g., Twitter. And of course, the site operator might be hostile to your values, e.g., TikTok. I think that the solution to this problem is actually much easier than the solution to the first problem. The solution to algorithmic problems is to make the algorithm opt-in. For example, when you join a social media site, you initially might be presented with the option to use company, curated prioritization, or to use time and subscription-based prioritization. However, social media sites should be encouraged or perhaps forced to allow community curated, prioritization, and allow community members to opt into, a community feed versus the company curated feed. I think we would see a small number of users and communities who would quickly come up with their own curated feeds, that would be popular with like-minded individuals.
First, the company that operates the social media system, has access to data that exposes extremely personal information about the users, sometimes directly, and sometimes through inference based on user behavior. This naturally attracts parties that might benefit from this information, originally advertisers, but increasingly nation states. Personally, I think the solution to this involves both privacy legislation, and legislation that dramatically restricts what foreign entities can do in the United States, but I acknowledge this is very controversial.
Second, the algorithms that the social media site uses to decide what content to presented to users is extremely susceptible to manipulation and to causing undesirable side effects. Even if the site operator is benign, the algorithm might magnify, extreme or emotional content in order to maximize engagement. We have seen this for several years now. And, of course, the site operators may choose to amplify messaging that they like or suppress messaging that they don’t. This may seem great if your values align with the site operator, but remember that operators change, e.g., Twitter. And of course, the site operator might be hostile to your values, e.g., TikTok. I think that the solution to this problem is actually much easier than the solution to the first problem. The solution to algorithmic problems is to make the algorithm opt-in. For example, when you join a social media site, you initially might be presented with the option to use company, curated prioritization, or to use time and subscription-based prioritization. However, social media sites should be encouraged or perhaps forced to allow community curated, prioritization, and allow community members to opt into, a community feed versus the company curated feed. I think we would see a small number of users and communities who would quickly come up with their own curated feeds, that would be popular with like-minded individuals.
It’s widely known likely 99.9% chance they have access, but just the us law system needs good proof.
Of course the party committee can access data. That's how China works under Xi.[1][2] Party committees had less presence in private companies post-Mao and pre-2003, but now they're back. Most larger non-state owned companies now have one, so the party can keep an eye on the private sector from the inside. They have roughly board-level authority.
Nominally, the party committee represents the party members who work for the company. But they're not chosen by the employees; they're appointed by higher levels of the party.
[1] https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/politics-in-the-boardroom-th...
[2] https://www.seafarerfunds.com/prevailing-winds/party-committ...
Nominally, the party committee represents the party members who work for the company. But they're not chosen by the employees; they're appointed by higher levels of the party.
[1] https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/politics-in-the-boardroom-th...
[2] https://www.seafarerfunds.com/prevailing-winds/party-committ...
The levels of naivety around this stuff in the aftermath of Assange and Snowden continue to astound me.
The conversation here dances around the topic, but nobody really talks about it. The same applies to almost every media outlet. Everyone is talking about something, but that is mostly irrelevant and doesn't give any insight. Interesting pattern.
In the old days, parents had an unwritten responsibility to steer their kids away from neighborhood kids who are a bad influence. Their kids aren’t running around in the neighborhood any more; the bad influences are social media algorithms.
1) My primary concern will always be tied to governments with the ability to arrest me.
2) Because our personal data is trivial for govs/corp/LEO to purchase, it isn't obvious how this risk budges the needle.
2) Because our personal data is trivial for govs/corp/LEO to purchase, it isn't obvious how this risk budges the needle.
Will you install a secuirty camera in your daughters room, specifically when the the camera comes from country with most leaked cam footage!(where various reports argue that State is involved in such leaks)
Tiktok doesn’t need a back door for CCP to have access. It’s Chinese law that requires bytedance to hand over any information requested without question.
No one can dispute this. It’s literally the law in China.
No one can dispute this. It’s literally the law in China.
Anyone has working link? BI 404's if you don't live in USA.
I don't have a Business Insider subscription and don't plan on getting one.
Any important, linkable sources that I can read instead?
> TikTok Owner Had 'Backdoor' for CCP Access to US Data, Lawsuit Alleges
I feel like "Had" should have been the word in quotes here.
I feel like "Had" should have been the word in quotes here.
It'd be extremely naive to assume that they didn't have a back door, didn't have the ability to 'direct' TikTok to do as they required for pretty much anything, and didn't use it to further whatever their agenda is.
The inverse problem is to think of TT as directly an agent of the CCP, which it is not. TT is a company that wants to make money, that exists in a regime where there is no effective rule of law, meaning the regime can do pretty much as it pleases, when it please, and they do do that, particularly for censorship, content control etc.. But otherwise, the company is left to it's own devices.
Much like if you use Google or FB, you can be assured that the US Gov. will leverage that within the normal constraints of the US, which is to say for local policing warrants and judges, and for narrow issues of national security, well, probably 'anything goes' with respect to non-US citizens, 'almost anything goes' with respect to US citizens, but that ultimately the scope of the more acute stuff will be narrow, and ultimately there will be leakers.
Aka Snowden and Assange sadly get a different form of justice, but at least it's a kind of justice and it's in the public domain. You can speak out against Biden all day long but if you leak sensitive docs, that's probably a line that will get you in trouble.
Finally, we need to start to account for corporate surveillance.
The inverse problem is to think of TT as directly an agent of the CCP, which it is not. TT is a company that wants to make money, that exists in a regime where there is no effective rule of law, meaning the regime can do pretty much as it pleases, when it please, and they do do that, particularly for censorship, content control etc.. But otherwise, the company is left to it's own devices.
Much like if you use Google or FB, you can be assured that the US Gov. will leverage that within the normal constraints of the US, which is to say for local policing warrants and judges, and for narrow issues of national security, well, probably 'anything goes' with respect to non-US citizens, 'almost anything goes' with respect to US citizens, but that ultimately the scope of the more acute stuff will be narrow, and ultimately there will be leakers.
Aka Snowden and Assange sadly get a different form of justice, but at least it's a kind of justice and it's in the public domain. You can speak out against Biden all day long but if you leak sensitive docs, that's probably a line that will get you in trouble.
Finally, we need to start to account for corporate surveillance.
Of course they did!
The CCP requires a back door like this for all businesses operating in China.
The CCP requires a back door like this for all businesses operating in China.