We can collaborate working on the draft using this disroot pad
https://pad.disroot.org/p/fshm-statement-59-apps
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 6:21 PM Kamal Velan <sskamalavelan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
# Comments on order by IT Ministry to block 59 apps
- Titled 'Government Bans 59 mobile apps which are prejudicial to
sovereignty and integrity of India, defence of India, security of
state and public order'
- The Press Release (https://pib.gov.in/PressReleseDetailm.aspx?PRID=1635206)
# What does the press release say?
- No order copy only press release of timeline of events which
resulted in MEITy blocking 59 apps
- IT Ministry has received complaints over that few Android & iOS apps
are transmitting data in an 'unauthorized manner' to servers which
have locations outside India
- Govt is concerned sent an exhaustive recommendation of apps to be
blocked. It has received representations raising concerns regarding
'security of data and risk to privacy'
- CERT-IN has recevied representations regarding 'security of data
and breach of privacy impacting upon public order issues'
- Bipartisan concerns, flagged by public representatives, inside and
outside Parliament of India
- 'There has been a strong chorus in the public space to take strict
action against Apps that harm India’s sovereignty as well as the
privacy of our citizens.'
- 'This decision is a targeted move to ensure safety and sovereignty
of Indian cyberspace.'
# Response by Google, Apple, app developers
Google's spokesperson said, “While we continue to review the interim
orders from the Government of India, we have notified the affected
developers and have temporarily blocked access to the apps that
remained available on the Play Store in India,” a Google spokesperson
said."
No comments so far from Apple but it seen that Apple too complied. App
developers like ByteDance have voluntarily restricted their apps in
India. TikTok applied for repeal.
# On the nature of the move itself, Where is the due process?
The public is informed of the government's move only through the Press
& Information Bureau but there is no actual copy of the order or
related incident reports provided by any of the agencies listed in the
press release. Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for
Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 specifies
the procedure underwhich any access to information by public can be
blocked by government temporarily on the grounds of sovereignty or
friendly relations with foreign powers or public order.
The Rules only permit deparments of government of Centre, State or
Union Territories to request blocking of information. Who are the
public representatives who raised these concerns, which are supposed
to be in writing and what was the review taken by the Designated
Officer in response to the concerns?
It is welcomed that Govt. has acted proactively in the interests of
the citizens, however without due process, this sets a dangerous
precedent to indescriminate blocking of public access to websites,
apps or electronic apps.
RTIs have been filed by Internet Freedom Foundation and other civil
action bodies regarding the details of the process.
# On user data being transmitted outside India
The primary cause for the threat to sovereignty of India seems to be
that these apps are transimititng data outside of India in an
unauthorized manner. There is no law yet stating that transimission of
data outside of India is unauthorized or illegal. Internet by itself
has no bounds, especially in the context of decentralized and peer to
peer technologies or applications like Bittorrent, WebRTC, PeerTube,
Mastodon, BigBlueButton etc. The decentralized nature of the Internet
is a boon to its users in evening out the playing field for
# Why only these 59 apps? Why not Facebook or Google which are a
bigger threat to sovereignty of our nation?
Government's intention to protect sovereignty, integrity of the nation
and privacy of its citizens seem to be applied to only these 59 apps
as this list has been an exhaustive (final) list. Why shouldn't this
be an extended order with due process? Why shouldn't this order be
applied retrospectively? What happened to FB's relationship with
Cambridge Analytica's involvement in Indian General Elections? Why
can't the government summon Mark Zuckerberg to answer for Facebook
undue influence and Cambridge Analytica's direct intervention in the
Indian General Elections?
# What happens if you use banned apps?
The access to these apps are only restricted for access from India,
just like it was with the numerous websites that the government has
blocked. This means that people can still access the resources through
various means including VPN, mirror sites or alternative frontends to
access the blocked apps. What happens to people using it despite the
ban?
# Where is Privacy Bill?
Indians are adapting to various kinds of technology at a rapid rate.
The technology scene is filled with closed source mobile & web
services which are hungry to store data and share it with third party,
this is the fundamental problem facing the Indian cyberspace and it is
beyond just the 59 apps being banned. The government's tabled Data
Protection Bill has quite a few gaping holes as pointed out by various
lawyer groups.
# Final list of statements
- IT Ministry ordered the blocking of 59 apps, there is no proof of
due process being followed, RTIs have been filed
- Many civil action groups and lawyers have questioned the validity of
the order as per Sec 69 of the IT Act
- This is cited to be an exhaustive order, why only these 59 apps, why
not all apps that are harmful for the privacy of the users
- There are many ways to access the blocked apps, some apps come
preinstall on phones, what happens if people use them?
- Implement a strong, clear privacy bill which protects the user.
Implement heavy penalties against violators. GDPR is a good starting
point.
