Is Microsoft Fighting Hackers or Setting Up to Censor The Competition?

Are we giving the tech giant too much control over parts of the internet?

Right now, if you were to google “Microsoft stops Russian hackers” you would have media outlets writing articles about how Microsoft is a hero saving the American people (and various think tanks) from fake news and phishing attacks.

Back in July, they sent up a red flag regarding the midterm elections this year. On the outset, it appears like Microsoft has the altruistic goal of keeping our internet a little safer from foreign meddling. This is great, to be sure, but there are some aspects of this story that no one is talking about. For starters, the fact that a corporation has been granted the authority to delete web domains from the DNS system with little to no oversight. Is no one concerned about how this authority is being monitored? Not one article mentions how often they are using this authority or who is monitoring their decisions to take websites down.

The more I read about Microsoft stopping these Russian hackers from creating fake web domains the more my concerns escalate about their ability, granted by a federal judge, to remove website domains that they deem as fake or phishing attacks. I worry a lot of people aren’t grasping the gravity of giving a corporation the authority to delete web domains without anyone checking their actions. How do they determine what’s a fake? The concept of a “phishing scam” is pretty loose in that it’s basically an attempt to obtain sensitive information. The definition of sensitive information probably varies from person to person, I’d imagine.

So far, Microsoft has deleted 84 web domains. They had released a blog post at one point, in an attempt at transparency, but that doesn’t provide a clear answer on all their actions. The first question that comes to mind is, did Microsoft have to go to a federal judge each time before deleting one? As far as I understand, no. Microsoft was given what they call a Special Master, meaning Microsoft “is appointed by a court to carry out some sort of action on its behalf.” In other words, some federal judge in Virginia gave Microsoft the permission to delete ANY website it felt was a threat on behalf of the federal government.

Let me reiterate something, no one is monitoring Microsoft and what web domains they are deleting. The federal government is putting total faith in Microsoft that they are telling the truth and have done their due diligence. That is a lot of trust that one centralized entity will act impartially and solely in the interests of democracy and the fight against foreign meddling.

Let’s forget for a second that it’s Microsoft doing this and let’s just call it Corporation X. Corporation X has been granted permission, blanket authority, to delete any web domain it feels threatens the American people. How confident are you that Corporation X has your best interest in mind? Or that Corporation X wouldn’t view a small company who may be developing a competing product as a threat? Corporations have been under the magnifying glass countless times for doing shady things to promote their business, yet the federal government has given one corporation the authority to delete web domains without oversight.

It’s not just Russia these companies are focused on, either. Iran is involved as well. Google deleted accounts tied to the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting across their three platforms. They also recently purged Russian-backed actors from their services as well. Google frames their work largely as a mission to clean up our email. Which, great, if they’re really filtering out phishing scams, I’m all for it. But keep in mind Google includes Blogger and YouTube as well. Where does Google draw the line between free speech and hate speech, and how do we, as consumers, engage in this conversation as well? This is where it gets complicated, and it’s important to stay vigilant with these corporations.

I don’t think many would argue that sites pushing fake news should stay up and running, especially sites who might pair that fake news with a side of bigotry. But what’s frightening about these privileges granted to Microsoft, and where this conversation enters the open internet conversation, is how do we monitor Microsoft? Fake news isn’t always easy to spot, but where this gets even murkier is when you let Microsoft (and other corporations) decide what is considered a “phishing scam” as well.

With Facebook, you sign a user agreement which allows you to utilize their services. Part of that agreement includes certain restrictions on the content you post to their platform. Break the agreement, get booted from the platform, as we’ve seen recently with Alex Jones and others. However, give power like that to companies like Google and Microsoft, who own not just platforms but the servers that host those platforms (and many other websites) and you open up a new can of worms. This gets into territory regarding equal access and the continued open dissemination of information. This is the same ballpark as ISPs trying to throttle access to various services and segments of the internet. Being asked to leave Facebook is one thing. Being asked to leave the internet is another matter entirely. It’s a complicated issue, one that is, of course, further complicated by figures such as Alex Jones.

So now that Microsoft and Google have been getting all of this good press about how they are saving the American people one deleted web domain at a time, what is keeping other corporations from seeking the same authority? Now there is precedent. Now other companies and corporations can say, “You gave this authority to them, why not us?” That’s a good question. Why not give authority to other corporations to do this in the name of the Federal government? What harm could come of this? Well let’s jump to the extreme: China.

In China, if you try to go to a domain that is not permitted through the Great Firewall, you won’t be granted access. China monitors their citizens heavily and only allows certain web domains that they deem fit for public consumption to be seen. Is this not what we are experiencing right now? We have given authority to go through and decide what web domains are deemed fit for American citizen consumption. If other corporations jump on board, we may be looking a situation similar to the Great Firewall.

So many worry about their right to bear arms, but what about their right to information?

Contact/Connect with us at:

Twitter || Facebook || Telegram || Website

DISCLAIMER: The content provided on this site is opinion and commentary on topics related to the blockchain universe. IT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE NOR SHOULD IT BE RELIED ON BY YOU FOR ANY REASON AND IS PROVIDED “AS IS” WITH NO WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND. You are responsible for your own decisions and for properly analyzing and verifying any content.