Posted on

Government review of denied datacentre builds sees Iver project get green light

A government review of a local council’s decision to block a US-based company from building a hyperscale datacentre in Iver, Buckinghamshire, has concluded the project should proceed.

Buckinghamshire Council refused permission in November 2022 for US investment company Affinius Capital to proceed with its plans to redevelop an industrial estate in Court Lane, Iver, Buckinghamshire and build a 65,000m2 datacentre on the site instead.

The reason given by the council for the refusal is that the project would be an inappropriate use of Green Belt Land, which are protected pieces of land that are intended to prevent the onset of urban sprawl.

Shortly after coming to power in July 2024, the Labour government pledged to review the council’s decision to block the project in support of its strategy to stimulate the UK’s economic growth by accelerating the delivery of large-scale infrastructure projects.

The developer had raised an appeal against the council’s decision, and a month before the government’s intervention a public local inquiry was held over four days in June 2024.

Following a review of the council’s decision and the local inquiry, the government has now granted Affinius Capital permission to proceed with the project, with a letter dated 6 December 2024, outlining the reasons why.

The letter states that the decision to overturn Buckinghamshire Council’s decision to block the build was made by the minister of state for Housing and Planning Matthew Pennycook, on behalf of the secretary of state Angela Rayner.

“Weighing in favour of the proposal are the need for new datacentres, reduction in HGV movements, heritage benefits, reuse of previously developed land, and investment and job creation, which each carry significant weight,” the letter stated.

“Weighing against the proposal are harm to Green Belt, which carries substantial weight; harm to [a nearby] listed building, which carries great weight; and landscape harm and visual harm, which carries moderate weight.”

The letter also goes on to state that, in Rayner’s view, there are “very special circumstances to justify this development in the Green Belt”, adding: “The secretary of state therefore concludes that the appeal should be allowed and planning permission granted.”

The letter also states that the secretary of state’s decision on this matter can be challenged in the High Court, provided an application to do so is received within six weeks from the date of the letter.

Computer Weekly contacted Affinius Capital for comment on this story, but no response was received by the time of publication.

The Affinius Capital project was one of two datacentre developments the government placed under review in July 2024.  

The other is being overseen by Oxford-based developer Greystoke Land, after its bid to build a £1bn datacentre in Abbots Langley, Hertfordshire, was denied in January 2024. That decision is being appealed.

At the time of writing, Computer Weekly understands a decision at government level on whether that build will go ahead remains pending.

Source

Posted on

Post Office creates CTO role to support ‘extensive and complex’ plans

The Post Office has created a new role to bolster its tech leadership team amid an ongoing project to replace the Horizon system supplied by Fujitsu.

This comes at a time when the organisation faces tough decisions over the move away from the controversial IT system used in all Post Office branches.

Subpostmasters were blamed for unexplained shortfalls caused by errors in the Horizon software, which was introduced in 1999. Hundreds were wrongly convicted of crimes based on flawed evidence from the system, in what is known as the Post Office Horizon scandal.

Paul Anastassi joins the Post Office from gaming and entertainment company Rank Group as interim chief technology officer (CTO). Acting CEO Neil Brocklehurst told staff in an internal message: “…we are keen to transition to our new Executive Operating Model as quickly as possible in order to deliver on the benefits of the Strategic Review for Postmasters and enable broader change as necessary.”

He added: “With this in mind, we have taken the decision to appoint to the CTO role on an interim basis whilst we complete the recruitment process for our permanent CTO, which is now underway internally and externally.”

Andy Nice, chief transformation officer at the Post Office, told Computer Weekly: “The interim CTO role was introduced to allow us to increase our technology leadership capability given our extensive and complex plans for this area, as well as enabling me to focus on the delivery of our strategic transformation plan for the business.”

He said Anastassi has “excellent, relevant experience in creating and executing technology strategies to enable business improvement and growth”.

The Post Office – under its new leadership, including recently appointed Nice – is in the midst of a huge project to replace the controversial Horizon system from Fujitsu, which is at the centre of the Post Office scandal.

Nice and his team were quick to act on arrival at the Post Office earlier this year, pausing the work being done on its planned Horizon replacement, the New Branch IT (NBIT) project.

The NBIT project to build an in-house software platform to replace Horizon was running late and hugely over budget. Costs had increased by £1bn and, as revealed by Computer Weekly in May, a government report described the project as “unachievable”.

There is still an ongoing debate at the Post Office about the way forward for the project, with claims the Post Office is set to buy the Horizon system from Fujitsu and combine it with in-house developed and commercially available software.

The Post Office scandal was first exposed by Computer Weekly in 2009, revealing the stories of seven subpostmasters and the problems they suffered due to the accounting software (see timeline of Computer Weekly articles about the scandal below).

Source

Posted on

AWS on using GenAI to speed up legacy VMware and Microsoft datacentre migrations

Amazon Web Services (AWS) has set out how its investments in artificial intelligence (AI) chips and software are saving customers money and helping them migrate their legacy Windows and VMware workloads off-premise much quicker.

AWS CEO Matt Garman used the opening keynote at the public cloud giant’s Re:Invent customer and partner conference in Las Vegas, which is the first he has delivered since taking over the company reins in June 2024, to talk up the potential for generative AI (GenAI) to digitally transform the way that businesses operate. He also talked at length about the work that goes into ensuring the AWS cloud infrastructure is equipped to cope with the growing demand from its customers for the compute power they need to run AI and GenAI workloads.

As previously reported by Computer Weekly, the demand for GenAI workloads from its customers was recently cited as the reason for a “significant re-acceleration” in AWS’s annual growth rate, with the company reporting a 19.1% year-on-year uptick in revenue during its third-quarter results.  

Garman touched on Amazon’s 14-year-long collaboration with Nvidia, which he said has enabled it to roll out a succession of increasingly more powerful graphics processing unit (GPU) instances based on the latter’s technology so it can keep pace with its customers’ AI demands.

The company has also doubled down on the creation of its own AI silicon – namely its family of Tranium chips – to support a wider range of instances that are designed to improve the cost performance of running compute-intensive workloads. To this point, Garman used the keynote to announce that the second generation of Tranium instances had now become generally available, claiming the latest iteration can deliver “30-40%” better price performance than “current GPU-powered instances”.

This is based on feedback from early adopters of the technology, with Garman naming Adobe as among the customers who have seen some “promising” early wins with the technology.

Another is AI-focused software engineering startup Poolside, who has reportedly committed to training all future versions of their large frontier model on Tranium 2. The company is also anticipating the move will generate savings in the region of 40%. “Databricks is one of the largest data and AI companies in the world,” he said. “[It] plans to use Trainium 2 to deliver better results and [to] lower the total cost of ownership for our joint customers by up to 30%.” 

Opening up about Amazon’s use of GenAI

The conversation later moved on to how GenAI is also changing the way that AWS operates, with particular focus on how its own offerings are helping to speed up the time it takes to refactor legacy, on-premise workloads and ready them for migration to the public cloud.

Central to this bit of the discussion was Amazon Q, which is the company’s generative AI chatbot assistant that is designed for in-house use by software developers, business analysts and contact centre employees to make the work they do more efficient.

The migration of customer workloads out of private datacentres and into the public cloud is a process that fuelled the company’s growth for a decade or more after its inception in 2006.

However, despite the company previously acknowledging that a large proportion of enterprise workloads remain on-premise, it was an area that was markedly less talked about during the keynote, until Garman flagged how Amazon Q can assist with this task.

“Our goal at AWS is to help every builder be able to innovate, [and] we want to free you from the undifferentiated heavy lifting to really focus on those creative things that make your building unique … [and] generative AI is a huge accelerator of this capability,” he said.

As an example, he talked about how Amazon Q Developer, an iteration of the chatbot specifically designed to help developers speed up their CodeDeploy processes, is helping customers deploy faster, more secure and better-quality software updates.

Garman then went onto announce several new features that were being added to Amazon Q Developer that will generate unit tests, documentation and code reviews on behalf of developers, so they can spend more time each day writing code than dealing with the admin associated with it.

Addressing the legacy

The software is also reducing the amount of time they have to spend managing legacy applications, it is claimed.

“One of [the software’s] most powerful capabilities we already have is [its ability to] automate Java version upgrades,” said Garman. “What it can do is transform a Java application from an old version of Java to a new version in a fraction of the time it would take to do manually. This is work that no developer loves to do, but is critically important.”

According to Garman, integrating this capability into Amazon’s own internal systems saw it “migrate literally tens of thousands of production applications” to Java 17 in a “small fraction of the time” it would typically take. “The estimate from our teams is this saved us 4,500 developer years … [and] this is a mind-blowing amount of time saved, and because we’re now running on modern Java, we can use less hardware, too. So, we saved $260m a year through this process.”

Java upgrades are one thing, but – in Garman’s opinion – a migration that a lot of enterprises want assistance with is moving from Windows to Linux. And this is something AWS can assist with now through the preview release of a new version of Amazon Q Developer.

“Customers love an easy button to get off of Windows,” he said. “They’re tired of constant security issues, the constant packing or patching, all the scalability challenges that they have to deal with, and they definitely hate the onerous licensing costs.

“But we do recognise today that this is hard. Actually, modernising away from Windows is not easy, [but] with Q Developer, modernising windows just got a lot easier … [as it allows you] to transform .Net applications that are running on Windows to Linux in a fraction of the time.”

Signature IT

As an example, Garman flagged digital transactions, signing software company Signature IT, and the work it has done to modernise its legacy .Net applications and migrate them from Windows to Linux. “It was a project they estimated was going to take six to eight months, [and] they actually completed it in just a few days,” he said. “That is a game-changing amount of time.”

But it’s not just Windows workloads that enterprises are having a hard time modernising. “Windows is not the only legacy platform in the datacentre that is slowing down all your modernisation efforts … oftentimes it is VMware workloads that customers would really love to modernise to cloud-native services,” said Garman.

“VMware is deeply entrenched in many datacentres, and has been for a really long time. And what happens is … because it’s been there for a long time, there ends up [being] this kind of spaghetti mess of interconnected applications.”

“[So] really the hardest part about modernising is finding out what are the dependencies of those applications,” he said. “And the migrations are error-prone, because it’s hard to understand if you move something, if it is going to break something else. And again, of course, licensing is expensive.”

To assist with this, Q Developer also has capabilities that will allow VMware-based datacentre workloads to be reconfigured to become cloud-native, with the system able to identify the dependencies and create a migration plan for the user.

“[This] really reduces a ton of the migration time, and significantly it reduces [the organisation’s] risk,” said Garman. “It also launches agents that can convert on-premise VMware network configurations into modern AWS equivalents. This takes what used to be months and months of work into hours to weeks.”

The next complex datacentre migration project the company is looking to simplify for enterprises, with the help of Amazon Q, concerns mainframes, which Garman described as “by far the most difficult to migrate to the cloud”.

“When you talk to customers, just the effort of trying to analyse, document and plan mainframe modernisation is often too much, [and] people give up [because] it’s too hard. Turns out, Q can help with this, too,” he said.

The software has a number of agents in it that are able to do mainframe code analysis, refactor applications and create documentation in real time for legacy COBOL code so enterprises can fill in any knowledge gaps about what it might do.

“Most customers will tell you their mainframe migration will probably take three to five years … but planning a project for three to five years is nearly impossible,” said Garman. “A lot of the time, they just don’t get done.”

And while it’s beyond the capabilities of Amazon Q to make mainframe migrations a “one-click” job right now, he said early testing suggests the software could significantly accelerate the pace of these projects.

“We think Q can actually turn what was going to be a multi-year effort into a multi quarter effort, cutting by more than 50% the time to migrate mainframes,” said Garman. “If you can take a multi-year effort and bring it down to a couple of quarters, that’s something that people can really get their heads around. And customers are incredibly excited about this.”

Source

Posted on

UK medical trial of four-day week finds staff happier and more productive

Learning technology firm Thrive has taken part in the UK’s first medical trial of the four-day work week, which found that shorter hours lead to happier, more productive staff.

Conducted by Thrive in partnership with the University of Sussex, the trial collected data on 115 Thrive employees between July and October 2024, including research tests such as MRI scans, blood tests and sleep tracking, as well as weekly questionnaires covering their workplace experiences and wellbeing.

Regular feedback was also sought from Thrive customers – which the company supplies with an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered learning management system (LMS) to help them train and upskill their employees faster – to determine the impact of the trial on quality of service, while sales and product metrics were also evaluated to assess the effects on business productivity.

According to the results, there were notable improvements in a number of employee wellbeing metrics – particularly those related to stress levels, sleep quality, and detachment from work – indicating a significant improvement in work-life balance.

This includes a 20% reduction in sleep problems, a “considerable” 8.6% reduction in perceived stress, a 14.7% decrease in “emotional exhaustion”, and a “statistically significant” 5% reduction in anxiety symptoms.

“The results speak for themselves. These significant improvements in areas related to physical and mental wellbeing demonstrate the transformative power of a four-day work week,” said Charlotte Rae, research lead at the University of Sussex. “Improved sleep quality and reduced stress and exhaustion are factors that could have a significant impact on our health, with the potential to enhance our lives in and outside of work. This study provides further compelling evidence for the benefits of flexible working models.”

In terms of the impact on work productivity, the trial found that despite working fewer hours, the task execution of employees remained consistent, with many reporting increased goal attainment and self-efficacy. Researchers said this reflected a boost in their confidence and belief in their ability to achieve desired outcomes at work.

Cassie Gasson, co-CEO at Thrive, said that being a tech-focused business brought a range of advantages to the firm when conducting the trial: “Working in the tech space means our teams are naturally aligned with using tools like AI, which allowed us to streamline workflows and prioritise the work that matters most.

“As creators and users of AI-powered solutions, we’ve seen first-hand how impactful it can be in enabling flexibility without compromising on results, which has proven beneficial in the context of the four-day work week.”

She added that while Thrive’s teams are already equipped with the skills and tech to make the most of a four-day week – as the company has used its platform to continually upskill its own workforce – the trial highlighted that success depends on fostering the right culture to make the working changes sustainable.

“Because of this, we recognise that this approach doesn’t suit every business or team dynamic,” she said. “By balancing flexibility with customer needs, we’re exploring how to make the four-day work week a sustainable option for the future, opting for a seasonal approach going forward.”

Widespread cultural change needed for success

Despite the dual benefits on employee wellbeing and productivity, the trail highlighted the difficulty of providing consistent customer service in a business landscape where most other firms are still operating on the traditional five-day working model.

“Our four-day work week trial revealed incredibly encouraging results and we saw a fantastic impact on the people within our business,” said Gasson. “While we would have loved to implement it on a full-time basis, our experiences in the trial highlighted that the success of a four-day work week will rely on widespread cultural change across the UK business landscape.

“As a business serving hundreds of organisations, it highlighted that five-day coverage for our customers is essential when they’re operating more traditional ways of working.”

Gasson added that the UK government should consider implementing policies to help make a four-day work week a reality: “The benefits are evident through its potential to boost business productivity, increase wellbeing, and generally make the country happier and healthier. The UK has the potential to take the lead on this by pioneering the four-day work week and reaping the rewards.”

Until then, she said Thrive would look to implement a four-day work week on a seasonal basis.

In May 2022, more than 3,000 workers at 60 companies took part in a coordinated, six-month trial of a four-day working week in the UK. Organised by 4-Day Week Global in partnership with think tank Autonomy and the 4-Day Week UK Campaign, the trial saw 60 firms – including several technology companies – adopt a reduced working week with no loss of pay from June to December 2022.

Speaking with Computer Weekly at the time, many of the tech firms highlighted positive results in terms of productivity, as well as talent attraction and retention.

While issues were highlighted for business in sectors such as cyber security, where “switching off” for a day is not necessarily an option, researchers at Autonomy said businesses could circumvent this issue through the introduction of a better rota system or by hiring additional staff. Ultimately, most firms involved deciding to continue with shorter weeks on a permanent basis.

Prior to this, the largest four-day week trial to date was run in Iceland by Reykjavík City Council and the national government, which included more than 2,500 workers. It found that productivity either remained the same or improved in the majority of workplaces involved.

In November 2023, Autonomy published a paper on the potential for AI-driven large language models (LLMs) to shorten people’s work weeks, noting while they could lead to significant reductions in working time without a loss of pay or productivity, realising the benefits of such AI-driven productivity gains in this way will require concerted political action.

Autonomy noted that although people have long been predicting and expecting far shorter working weeks due to technological advances, historical increases in productivity over recent decades have not translated into increased wealth or leisure time for most people, largely as a result of economic inequality.

It said that there is often a sense of pessimism around AI-driven productivity gains, with most conversations emphasising the potential for job losses and degraded working conditions, but that such gains could also be used to deliver shorter working weeks for many while maintaining their pay and performance.

A number of IT firms have moved to a four-day week over the past couple of years due to the benefits, including cloud provider Civo, channel player Highgate IT Solutions, and challenger bank Atom.

Source

Posted on

Justifying ECC upgrade: A Computer Weekly Downtime Upload podcast

“We all want to do this,” says Conor Riordan, chair of the UK and Ireland SAP User Group (UKISUG),” describing the transition to cloud-based ERP with SAP Rise. “We all want to get to the end point. We just can’t get there as fast as SAP wants us to go.”

Computer Weekly met up with Riordan during the user group’s annual Connect 2024 event, which took place in Birmingham at the start of December.

Upgrading and moving to the SAP cloud has been a hot topic for UKISUG for a number of years.

Mainstream support for SAP Enterprise Core Components (ECC), officially ends in 2027. Moving to SAP Rise is regarded by many as too big a step to take in one go and instead, as Riordan explains, users need financial support to make the transition from ECC to S4/Hana, which is a stepping stone towards Rise. But for Riordan, many SAP customers will not find this step easy. However, he says: “SAP responded and it has come up with a modernisation programme,  which was well received by customers and our members.” 

He is confident the newly appointed UK and Ireland managing director for SAP, Leila Romane, has recognised this challenge and the move to SAP Rise is more of a marathon than a sprint. “User group members aren’t convinced about SAP’s strategy, but we need to manage risk,” he says, adding: “We probably need to do the migrations in multiple steps rather than one big step.”

Riordan believes that for SAP customers the move to Rise is inevitable. “The majority of customers will go to Rise at some stage, whenever it’s right for them. That might be next year. That could be 20-30 years. Who knows. It’s about doing the upgrade when it’s right for the customers rather than doing it when it’s right for SAP.”

Although upgrading SAP will offer new functionality like a more modern user experience through Fiori, for Riordan the most important consideration is “Going live with no business impact”. For a lot of companies, success is when a project goes live without business disruption.

Discussing what can seem like a push from the IT industry to make sure businesses spend a lot of money upgrading, Riordan notes that there is a constant need to be more efficient in business and drive better earnings per share to get better margins. This, in turn, means the business is rated as a growth company by the financial markets. “People are under more pressure to drive more innovation and in order to deliver more innovation, you need a more modern platform,” he says.

As Riordan points out most companies that are still on ECC tend to be running manufacturing, procurement, sales and finance business processes. “You’re doing these in the same way you have done over the last 20 years,” he says. “But now in this new digital world, you’ve got access to an infinite amount of data that can help drive better decision-making. If you want to innovate and have smarter ways of running your business, you need to be on a better platform.”

An example of this is forecasting, as Riordan explains. “In the past you’d have planners that would try and figure out a forecast and put the forecast into SAP. Now you can get artificial intelligence (AI) to do that and figure out what your demand plans are and it can probably do it better than the planners because an AI forecast can bring in many different sources of information.”

Source

Posted on

Met Police challenged on claim LFR supported by ‘majority of Lewisham residents’

The Metropolitan Police has claimed its live facial-recognition (LFR) deployments in Lewisham are supported by the majority of residents and local councillors, but a community impact assessment (CIA) obtained by Computer Weekly shows there has been minimal direct consultation with residents, while elected officials continue to express concern.

In August 2024, Lewisham councillors complained there had been no engagement with the local community ahead of the controversial technology being deployed in the area, with the Met announcing the tech would be used in Tweet just a month after being urged by councillors to improve its community engagement around LFR.

Responding to Computer Weekly’s questions about the concerns raised by Lewisham councillors, a Met Police spokesperson said at the time that its LFR deployments “have been very much supported by the majority of Lewisham residents, business owners and political representatives – namely Lewisham councillors”.

The spokesperson added that over the previous six months, the force had delivered “more than six briefings at a mixture of public forums, private council and independent advisory group sessions” to explain what its LFR deployments entail and to answer all enquiries posed by committee members.

However, according to the CIA obtained under freedom of information (FoI) rules by Computer Weekly, the only mention of “residents” in the entire document is when detailing the press response given to Computer Weekly.

Despite the Met claiming its LFR deployments are supported by the majority of residents, the CIA also explicitly notes “there is mixed opinion for the operation within the community”, adding that while there is nothing to suggest there would any form of “disorder/criminality in relation” to the deployment, “there is likely to be some opposition”.

In terms of actual engagement conducted by the Met, the CIA notes the force held seven meetings between March and August 2024, including five with various council bodies, and two sets of public discussions: one at the “New Met for London event held at the Albany in Deptford”, and another held in relation to the Met’s “London Race Action Plan”.

The council bodies engaged with included a select committee tasked with scrutinising LFR deployments, the Lewisham Independent Advisory Group (IAG) for LFR, and the Safer Neighbourhoods Board (SNB).

“Members of the Safer Stronger Communities Select Committee urged improved communication with residents concerning LFR deployments, as well as a need to increase stakeholder engagement,” the committee told Computer Weekly in response to the CIA document.

Many councillors are on record (as evidenced in meeting minutes) calling for improved communication with residents and stakeholders, noting there has been minimal stakeholder engagement regarding LFR deployments thus far.

Expressing her own views on the matter, independent councillor and Safer Stronger select committee member Hau-Yu Tam – who previously stressed the need to give local people the ability to scrutinise the Met’s approach – told Computer Weekly she is personally only aware of one instance of consultation between the Met and Lewisham’s SNB, the boroughs independent forum for community engagement with the police.

The CIA document confirms there has been one formal meeting with the SNB recorded, which took place on 26 March 2024.

“Policing is touted as being legitimised by community consent, so they tick the box of community consultation, but it doesn’t take much digging to find that the consultation is extremely poor,” she said, adding that the effectiveness of the consultation is limited by the fact that “not a lot of people get consulted”, and the use of leading questions by the Met when they talk to people about the technology, which are designed to sell LFR to the public, rather than understand and act on the areas of concern.

People who would be hurt or harmed by LFR don’t have the means to access the consultation, nor are their views really allowed to be registered Hau-Yu Tam, Lewisham Council

“It’s similar to a lot of large public institutions, including Lewisham Council, in that consultation is undertaken poorly because communities are not engaged. Above all, budget cuts – including to communities – are being passed down, with the political and executive leadership failing to formulate alternatives or even to believe alternatives can be possible.

An example of the leading nature of the Met’s engagement process is shown by an email to an SNB member (not recorded in the CIA), which has been shared with Computer Weekly. In it, a Met police officer explains that local policing teams are proposing to run an LFR operation in the area, highlighting only the benefits of the technology.

“This is used to identify individuals who are sought by police in relation to ongoing investigations – with a focus on violence against women and girls. Previously, this has been extremely successful in other local boroughs – e.g. identifying an individual who was sought for a serious domestic violence incident and had been evading police by changing appearance,” they said.

“Facial-recognition technology is a very valuable tool to help to catch perpetrators of crime that impact individuals and communities. Is this something that you think is a good idea, and would support? We appreciate your comments.”

Tam said the email shows the Met framing LFR solely around the prevention of violence against women and girls in a way that would appeal to the recipient, because “obviously” they would express support in that context.

She added that the biggest issue is the lack of mechanisms in place for dealing with critical comments about LFR: “What people support is safer streets and improved equity and community cohesion. They don’t necessarily support live facial recognition, which they’re not given the full rundown of, or they’re given very misleading information about.”

She further added that while the Met does seek input from legitimate voices, the same sorts of voices are over-represented: “People who would be hurt or harmed by LFR don’t have the means to access the consultation, nor are their views really allowed to be registered.”

Tam said that while the Met may have formally engaged with the SNB on LFR issues, many members of that body have raised concerns around the use of LFR by police, adding: “There’s a lot of trepidation about this.”

Met responds

Computer Weekly contacted the Met about the CIA process and every aspect of the story.

“The Met is committed to making London safer, using data and technology to help identify offenders that pose a risk to our communities,” said Lindsey Chiswick, the force’s director of performance. “We continue to engage with and listen to views from a range of voices across Lewisham on our use of LFR technology, including local residents, councillors, local businesses and retailers.”

A spokesperson for the force added that the Met is committed to transparency and community engagement in its use of LFR technology, which they described as a key tool for enhancing public safety that also enables police to identify individuals wanted for serious offences while minimising disruption to the wider public.

“Officers have conducted extensive engagement with the Lewisham community, including local residents, councillors, businesses, and advisory groups,” they said. “These sessions provide an open platform for discussion, allowing us to explain how LFR works, the intelligence-led process behind deployments, and the safeguards in place to protect privacy and human rights. We also share data, such as the number of arrests, other outcomes and false-positive alerts, to ensure accountability and transparency.

“We understand the concerns raised by some community members and are committed to listening to all voices, including those critical of LFR. Engagement is intended to be inclusive, and we work with independent advisory groups [IAGs] and community leaders to reach those who may not always have access to formal consultation processes.

“Our focus is on ensuring the safety of London’s streets while maintaining open, honest dialogue about the use of LFR technology.”

Civil society reacts

Responding to the contents of the CIA, Charlie Whelton, policy and campaigns officer at human rights group Liberty, said: “Facial-recognition technology effectively enables the police to identify and track anyone they choose. But instead of reaching out to the residents of Lewisham on the impacts of this dangerous surveillance tech, the Met has redefined ‘community engagement’ as speaking to high-level officials. 

“The real community impact of facial recognition is that our privacy is undermined, our movement restricted, and our risk of being subjected to a false stop from a dodgy algorithm is increased as we just go about our lives. None of these were addressed within the assessment as the Met Police continue to push forward this unknown and unchecked technology.”

He added that the huge power LFR grants police is particularly concerning after years of high-profile scandals involving violent, racist and sexist police forces in the UK: “The government must urgently introduce safeguards to restrict the use of this invasive technology and for the police to recognise the true impact on the communities they are spying upon.” 

Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at privacy campaign group Big Brother Watch, added that it is hard to evaluate the efficacy of the Met’s community engagement in Lewisham because the CIA is so light on detail: “It doesn’t demonstrate very good engagement at all.”

Instead of reaching out to the residents of Lewisham … the Met has redefined ‘community engagement’ as speaking to high-level officials Charlie Whelton, Liberty

Echoing sentiments from Tam that the CIA is a box-ticking exercise, he further added that because there is so little genuine community engagement over LFR with people who live in Lewisham, the engagement process becomes a “rubber stamp” for the Met’s continued deployments.

“To be honest, do it properly or don’t bother,” he said, adding that the way the Met has characterised its engagement with councillors is also an issue. “We’re in conversation with councillors and a lot of them aren’t happy.”

According to a spokesperson for Lewisham Council, the local authority “will continue to carefully monitor its implementation in our borough and will continue to engage with the police and other local authorities where it’s being used”.

Hurfurt concluded that for there to be meaningful community engagement, the process needs to be done without “the Met’s thumb on the scale” by limiting its consultation to mostly high-level council meetings and officials.

“You have to properly consult people, giving them a chance to object, to raise concerns and listen to them, rather than tick a box… there’s a chance this undermines trust in the police if it’s not done properly,” he said, adding that while a number of local authorities have passed motions that express their opposition to the police deployment of LFR in their boroughs, “it’s been deployed anyway.”

In January 2023, for example, Newham Council unanimously passed a motion to suspend the use of LFR throughout the borough until biometric and anti-discrimination safeguards are in place.

While the motion highlighted the potential of LFR to “exacerbate racist outcomes in policing” – particularly in Newham, the most ethnically diverse of all local authorities in England and Wales – both the Met and the Home Office said that they would press forward with the deployments anyway.

“As part of the authorisation process and before any deployment, a specific community impact assessment is completed by the local BCU [Basic Command Unit],” said a Met police spokesperson at the time. “This assessment involves speaking to a wide number of local groups so that policing is informed of those views and can take those into consideration before any decision to deploy is made.”

The Met’s own LFR policy document states it “may be appropriate to pursue engagement opportunities with a number of stakeholders” prior to any deployments taking place.

Chiswick, speaking as the Met’s then-director of intelligence, has also previously told Lords that LFR is “a precision-based, community crime-fighting tool”, adding in a later session that because of a lack of support for police among specific community groups, there would need to be engagement with them prior to any LFR deployments to quell any fears people might have.

“You get told there’s all this engagement by the Met, but they’re just cracking on,” said Hurfurt.

On 13 November 2024, MPs held their first-ever debate on the police use of LFR technology, eight years after the Met first deployed the technology at Notting Hill Carnival in August 2016.

MPs – including members of both front benches – discussed a range of issues associated with the technology, including the impacts of LFR surveillance on privacy; problems around bias, accuracy and racial discrimination; the lack of a clear legal framework governing its use by police; and how its wider roll-out could further reduce people’s dwindling trust in police.

While there were differences of opinion about the efficacy of LFR as a crime-fighting tool, MPs largely agreed there are legitimate concerns around its use by police, with a consensus emerging on the need for proper regulation of the technology.

The majority of MPs involved in the debate openly lamented why there had been no debate about the use of the technology by police up until now.

Source

Posted on

Government agencies urged to use encrypted messaging after Chinese Salt Typhoon hack

US government agencies have been urged to use end-to-end encrypted messaging services, including WhatsApp, Signal and FaceTime, following disclosures that China has breached US telephone networks in a hacking operation that undermines US national security.

In a letter to the US Department of Defence (DOD), two prominent senators warned the DOD is placing security at risk through its continued use of unencrypted landlines, and unencrypted platforms such as Microsoft Teams.

The warning follows confirmation from the FBI and the US Cyber Security and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) that groups linked to the People’s Republic of China have compromised multiple telephone networks and had accessed private communications of a “limited number” of people in government and politics in a hacking operation dubbed Salt Typhoon.

Democratic senator Ron Wyden and republican Eric Schmitt criticised the defence department for failing to use its purchasing power to require wireless telephone service providers to provide cyber defences and accountability, in a letter on 4 December 2024.

“DOD’s failure to secure its unclassified voice, video and text communications with end-to-end encryption has left it vulnerable to foreign espionage,” they warned.

US Navy tests encrypted messaging

The senators disclosed previously classified details of a trial by the US Navy to test end-to-end encryption communications platform Matrix, an open-source, decentralised service widely used by Nato countries. The US Navy is testing Matrix to send encrypted messages from 23 ships and three on-shore sites.

“While we commend the DOD for piloting such secure, interoperable communications technology, its use remains the exception; insecure propriety tools within the DOD and the federal government generally,” the senators said.

“The widespread adoption of insecure, proprietary tools is the direct result of DOD leadership failing to require the use of default end-to-end encryption, a cyber security best practice, as well as a failure to prioritise communications security when evaluating different communications platforms.”

The Salt Typhoon attack, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, has targeted individuals including president-elect Donald Trump, vice-president-elect JD Vance and Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer, according to press reports. 

“This successful espionage campaign should finally serve as a wake-up call to the government’s communications security, despite repeated warnings from experts and Congress,” the senators wrote.

The FBI and CISA have recommended that people use encrypted messaging and voice services such as Signal and WhatsApp to reduce the risk of hackers intercepting text messages.

CISA executive assistant director for cyber security Jeff Greene told broadcaster NBC this week: “Encryption is your friend, whether it’s on text messaging or if you have the capacity to use encrypted voice communication. Even if the adversary is able to intercept the data, if it is encrypted, it will make it impossible.”

According to a blog by cyber security expert Bruce Schneier in October 2024, Chinese hackers appear to have accessed backdoors used by the US government to execute wire-tapping requests, which have been mandated by the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, enacted in 1994.

“For years, the security community has pushed back against these backdoors, pointing out that the technical capability cannot differentiate between good guys and bad guys,” he said. “And here is one more example of a backdoor access mechanism being targeted by the ‘wrong’ eavesdroppers.”

Matthew Hodgson, co-founder of Matrix.org, a non-profit foundation developing standards for end-to-end encryption, told Computer Weekly that the Salt Typhoon hack was an “unfortunate validation” of concerns raised about the impact of the UK’s Online Safety Act, which contains measures that could be used to weaken end-to-end encrypted communications services.

“It is morbidly amusing to see all of the intelligence agencies telling everybody that actually, end-to-end encryption is a good idea, and the backdoors are a bad idea, and everybody should hop on encrypted systems like Matrix or Signal rather than trust the phone network anymore,” he said.

Source

Posted on

What do the Home Secretary’s policing reforms mean for the future of the Police Digital Service?

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) has become a landing zone for Whitehall’s various digital functions since the new government came to power in July 2024.

Responsibility for running the Government Digital Service (GDS) and the Central Digital and Data Office (CDDO) has transferred from the Cabinet Office to DSIT, but it seems the government’s digital reshuffle might not be over yet.

On 19 November 2024, home secretary Yvette Cooper released a statement about the government’s plans to take a more “active leadership role” to restore the public’s waning confidence in UK policing.

“Confidence in policing has fallen in recent years,” she said. “Visible neighbourhood policing has been decimated. At the same time, crime has become more complex, and policing lacks the systems and technology to respond. Police, and the public they serve, need a system that is fit for purpose and fit for the future.”

The policing sector needs to be reformed, she continued, to ensure it can operate effectively and efficiently – and so that local forces can improve the level of service they provide to the public.

The statement outlines the various actions the Home Office will take to achieve its goals, including the creation of a National Centre of Policing (NCoP) that will have IT in its purview.

“We are determined to work with policing to consult on the creation of a new National Centre of Policing to bring together crucial support services, such as IT and forensics, that local police forces can draw upon, to raise standards and improve efficiency,” it said.

The Home Office’s involvement in UK police IT

What is notable about this is that the Home Office already has a hand in directing the UK’s policing sector’s technology use, through its funding of the privately owned Police Digital Service (PDS).

According to the most recent set of accounts, filed with Companies House on 28 November 2024, the Home Office National Police Capabilities Unit provided PDS with a £32m grant during the financial year ending 31 March 2024.

Previous accounts from PDS have neglected to provide details of the exact size of the grants or funding the Home Office has provided the organisation with.

However, Computer Weekly understands the department defines the £32m grant as being a single-year funding stream, issued on the “basis of need”. As such, there are no guarantees PDS will receive a Home Office grant from one financial year to the next.

For context, during the financial period this grant was issued, PDS made a loss of just over £1m in 2024, having posted a profit of £2.4m in 2023. Its staffing costs also increased from £11.9m to £20.4m during the same 12-month period.

The organisation is tasked with the development and delivery of the National Policing Digital Strategy, which is focused on enabling forces through technology to tackle increasingly complex crimes and, in turn, improve public safety.

With the Home Secretary emphasising the need for more efficiency in policing, does it make sense for two organisations with similar-sounding responsibilities to exist when there is a risk that they could be duplicating efforts?

PDS reform

Owen Sayers, an independent security consultant and enterprise architect with over 20 years’ experience in delivering national policing systems, told Computer Weekly back in mid-July 2024 that he expected the new Labour government would seek to reform PDS when they came to power.

Several months on and it appears his prediction could be coming true, with Sayers now of the view that PDS, or at least its responsibilities, will most likely end up getting folded into NCoP. “I do not doubt the Home Office will seek to build on the work that PDS has done thus far, just as the new administration has lifted the entirety of the CDDO and GDS and placed them into DSIT to ‘continue their good work’ and ‘rely on their expertise’,” he said.

That said, PDS does “carry significant baggage”, he continued, which might make it difficult for the government to “base any new central service upon them”.

To this point, two individuals working for PDS were arrested and bailed in July 2024 on suspicion of bribery, fraud and misconduct in public office – and within two weeks of this news being made public, the organisation’s CEO – Ian Bell – resigned.

The organisation has also been heavily and repeatedly criticised in the past for championing the use of US-based hyperscale cloud services by the policing sector, despite there being a persistent misalignment between how these platforms operate and the policing sector’s own data protection laws.

“PDS, in particular, has overseen and promoted adoption of technologies that breach UK data laws, and that’s not a great CV,” said Sayers. “In addition, there remains serious questions as to whether a body packaged as a profit-making limited company, operating in the heart of government, is an acceptable model to build upon.”

Particularly one that is losing money and receiving multimillion-pound grants from the government. “Making a loss for a public body is nearly as bad as making a profit,” he added.

Invoice data

Invoice data from public sector market watcher Tussell shows that – despite reporting a loss of over £1m for the 12 months to 31 March 2024 – PDS brought in £29.6m of business.  

Computer Weekly contacted the Home Office for clarification on what the creation of NCoP means for the future of PDS, but the department did not directly answer the question.

Computer Weekly also contacted PDS to see if it had received any indication from the Home Office about what the creation of the NCoP means for its future, and received a statement in response from its interim CEO, Tony Eastaugh.

There is no detail in the statement about how PDS and the NCoP will be expected to coexist, but Eastaugh said his organisation “hugely welcomes” the prospect of the NCoP’s creation, describing it as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” for the policing sector to “design, build and deliver a new construct” that will make communities safer.

“PDS exists solely to support our policing colleagues in that mission – and so we welcome the prospect of being asked to bring our skills, experience and expertise to the discussions on how digital, data and technology in law enforcement needs to look over the coming years,” he said.

“It’s genuinely an exciting opportunity for all of us to deliver tangible change – and PDS is fully committed to doing everything it can to help build that new body with colleagues from across the sector.”

The need for reform

On the same day Cooper’s statement about the need for policing reform went public, she gave a speech at the National Police Chiefs’ Council and Association of Police and Crime Commissioners annual conference, where she shared a few more details about the NCoP’s remit.

“As a starting point, I see this body [NCoP] taking on responsibility for existing shared services [and] national IT capabilities,” she said, having talked about “outdated technology holding policing back” earlier on in her speech.

As an example of this, she pointed to the 50-year-old Police National Computer (PNC). “It was cutting-edge when I was five,” said Cooper.

The government is already working with the sector to create a “collaboration and efficiencies” programme that will seek to cut the costs of IT contracts, among other things, in the interests of saving “hundreds of millions of pounds over the next few years” that can be reinvested in frontline policing, she continued.

“[We’re also] working with you on tackling the bureaucracy that drags policing down – including reforms on redaction, and use of new technology – to free up more time for officers to get back on the frontline,” said Cooper.

Expanding on this point, she said technology procurement is an area that every force wrestles with repeatedly, “with the same questions about new software, IT changes or records management – wasting time, pushing up costs and creating news systems that aren’t even interoperable”.

“Instead of technology driving great leaps forward in policing, too often it is holding policing back,” said Cooper.

Technological changes

Calum Baird is a digital forensics incident response consultant at managed security services provider Systal Technology Solutions, who previously served as a detective constable specialising in cyber investigations for Police Scotland. Speaking to Computer Weekly, he said there are myriad ways that forces are hampered in their ability to fight crime and protect the public because of IT limitations, but also because of how quickly changes to the technological landscape occur.

“Legislative change can take time, and often technology advances at a faster pace, [and] this means that police and legal professionals have to identify how potentially criminal acts fit into existing legislation,” said Baird.

“[Also] think about recent advancements, such as generative AI, cryptocurrency and cloud computing – many of which lack explicit mentions in existing legislation,” he said.

At the same time, forces are often on the back foot when it comes to tackling online forms of crime, because officers need a mix of both investigative and technical skillsets to do so effectively.

“These can be a challenge to develop individually, and even more challenging to develop continually,” said Baird. “Investigative skills take time to develop in law enforcement, and whilst they can be taught, much is learned through practical experience.”

“Cyber security technical skills [as an example] can be developed, but require considerable dedication and often funding to do so,” he said.

What the future holds

For the time being, it remains to be seen how PDS will fit in with the Home Office’s vision of what the future of policing should look like.

However, Secon Solutions’ Sayers said the Home Office would be wise to “turn back the clock” and seek inspiration from how IT was delivered across the policing and criminal justice sector during the latter stages of the last Labour government. “[Back then] the UK had services that were internationally considered to be at the leading edge – both in terms of their technology adoption and exemplars of good governance,” he said.

Sayers cited the Labour government’s early 2000s “Joined-Up Justice” Criminal Justice IT (CJIT) programme that sought to link up the IT systems used by the police and court system. The National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) was another example called out by Sayers.

The latter was a non-departmental public body created in 2007 that was set up to support police by providing expertise in IT and data-sharing, among other areas. It closed down during the 2012–2013 financial year.

“During NPIA and CJIT’s tenure, they introduced over 30 national systems, and a host of lesser-known, but still critical, public safety systems,” he said.  

“They worked hand-in-hand to deliver on the joined-up justice agenda, reflecting the reality that criminal justice has many participants, but that for the bulk of cases, the data journey begins in policing,” said Sayers. “This means if the integrity of the data or IT is compromised there, it will never regain good provenance, and the justice process suffers accordingly.

“Rebuilding police technology has to be recognised as foundational to rebuilding all justice IT, and requires organisations to be modelled more on NPIA and CJIT models than police-centric structures like PDS,” he added.

More specifically, Sayers said he would like to see the NCoP change the direction of travel for policing IT, which has seen the sector develop a growing reliance on the US-based cloud hyperscalers, despite their services being “wholly unsuitable” for police and justice use.

“Those technologies are familiar, popular and helped the UK to manage Covid, but the pandemic is behind us now, and we need to build technology platforms suitable for a more diverse operating future,” he said. “Tactical decisions hastily made to address times of urgent need are rarely the right fit for strategic use and growth.

“That is, however, exactly where we are today in policing – where systems born out of our need to react to Covid are being increasingly built upon to form, and constrain, our future thinking,” said Sayers. “We need to be brighter than that.”

We also need the policing sector to start adopting technology offerings that are “optimised for UK laws” because they are built by homegrown providers.

“This does not mean we revert to monolithic and non-interoperable systems … nor should we continue to invest in single-provider technology stacks that lock UK criminal justice into generic commercial services requiring us to compromise on the UK’s mandatory security and vetting requirements – or require UK laws to be changed for use,” said Sayers.

“Whatever the NCoP’s form, it should be tasked to include delivery of a future technology landscape that is based on open standards and federated services, and can provide services at a national scale independent of a reliance on a primary supplier,” he said.

“The next five years can see a renaissance of UK-bred justice technology innovation, but only if the government are brave enough to choose to do so.”

Source

Posted on

TfL cyber attack cost over £30m to date

The September 2024 cyber attack that forced Transport for London (TfL) to suspend multiple services across the capital has cost it more than £30m to date, it has emerged.

In a financial update to its board, TfL said that previous forecasts of an operating surplus of £61m had now been slashed to £23m, largely due to the financial impact of the security incident. It currently has an operating deficit of £37m, which is £122m lower than initially budgeted for.

The organisation revealed that it has spent £5m on incident response, investigation and remedial cyber security measures in the past three months.

The incident began on 1 September when defenders detected suspicious activity on TfL’s network. Likely fearing ransomware, the IT security teams limited and shut off several systems to ensure the impact was minimised.

Fortunately, the impact of the incident on London’s bus, Tube and other services was limited, but multiple other services were affected. Most prominently, passengers were left unable to access their account logins for contactless and Oyster payment services, APIs used by third parties including Citymapper went offline, and the Dial-a-Ride service for disabled people had to be briefly suspended.

Although initially TfL said that it did not believe passenger data had been affected,, it later found that data on 5,000 people was accessed, including names, contact details and in some cases bank account data. All of these people have been contacted and the incident has been referred to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Subsequently, the National Crime Agency (NCA) arrested and later bailed a 17-year-old boy on suspicion of offences under the Computer Misuse Act.

In the report, TfL commissioner Andrew Lord thanked the thousands of TfL employees who have “really pulled together” in recent weeks to address the disruption and maintain key services, and passengers for their patience.

Lord added that TfL had received wide praise and recognition for its response, but said that the consequences of the incident will continue for some months to come. He promised a full review of the incident in due course, although stressed that publicly available information will remain limited as it relates to an ongoing criminal case.

More services restored

In recent days, TfL has been able to restart a number of services that were disrupted during the cyber attack, including the contactless.tfl.gov.uk service.

This means passengers who use pay-as-you-go with a contactless credit or debit card, or on their smartphones, are now able to see their full journey history again.

Additionally, it means that TfL can also once again provide photocards for Zip cards for five to 17 year-olds, 60+ London Oyster, and 18+ Student Oyster. It has already dispatched over 30,000 Zip passes, 40,000 new student passes and 13,000 pensioners’ passes since reopening applications.

TfL said that it was encouraging parents and guardians to apply for updated Zip photocards as a matter of urgency – expired 5-10 and 11-15 Zips are being accepted on TfL and surface rail services in London at present, but this concession will end on New Year’s Eve.

The organisation warned customers would still see some residual delays when contacting customer services, particularly with regard to refunds for overpayments for concessionary cardholders affected by the cyber attack.

Shashi Verma, chief technology officer at TfL, said: “We’re pleased that customers can now access their contactless journey history again, meaning that all TfL fares services impacted by the recent cyber incident are now reinstated. We apologise for any inconvenience that this incident has caused our customers,” said TfL CTO Shashi Verma.

“We are now able to process contactless and Oyster refunds for those requiring them, though customers should anticipate there may be some delays due to the expected backlog. We have also contacted all new photocard customers who were impacted by not being able to apply for their new photocard. I want to also personally thank our engineers and customer services teams who have worked hard during this incident to support customers and restore services.”

SonicWall EMEA executive vice-president, Spencer Starkey, commented: “Due to [its] importance, safeguarding critical national infrastructure [CNI] is vital to maintain order and prevent potential disasters caused by threats such as cyber attacks.

“Ensuring the cyber security of critical national infrastructure requires a comprehensive and ongoing effort. The ramifications of an attack and ensuing outage on CNI can be disastrous and it’s important to place the utmost amount of time, money and efforts on securing them.

“In a divisive landscape, we’re seeing a continued geo-migration of threats, and governments are under constant cyber threat. These cyber attacks raise concerns about a country’s own national security, critical national infrastructure as well as the safety of sensitive information.

“Protecting government networks relies on constant communication and cooperation, working together with the private sector and imposing strict punishments, to deter future attacks,” he added.

Source

Posted on

US TikTok ban imminent after appeal fails

An appeals court in the United States has upheld a law passed by Congress earlier in 2024 to ban China-owned video-sharing social media platform TikTok in the US on national security and data protection grounds

The law sailed through the US legislature back in April, after being included in a wider package of aid for Israel, Taiwan and Ukraine. It gives TikTok’s parent, ByteDance, notice to either sell TikTok to a US-based entity or be removed from online app stores for good – with both Apple and Google facing financial penalties if they do not comply.

The law’s passage came amid a growing freeze in relations between the US and China, and a spate of accusations from Western cyber security agencies claiming widespread Chinese cyber espionage.

TikTok appealed against this, but the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columba Circuit today [6 December] unanimously denied this petition.

In the court’s opinion on the case of TikTok and ByteDance Ltd versus Merrick Garland [US attorney general], judge Douglas Ginsberg said the decision had significant implications for both TikTok and its users, because unless ByteDance divests the business by 19 January 2025, or the president grants a 90-day extension, the TikTok platform will “effectively be unavailable in the United States…. Consequently, TikTok’s millions of users will need to find alternative media of communication.”

Ginsberg wrote this burden was attributable to China’s hybrid commercial threat to US security and not the US government, which he wrote has been engaged with TikTok for some time in efforts to find alternative solutions.

Ginsberg also dismissed TikTok’s arguments that a ban infringed its First Amendment rights – the First Amendment, dating back to December 1791, guarantees freedom of speech and the press in the US.

“The First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States. Here the government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States,” he wrote.

“The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue,” a TikTok spokesperson said, via social media site X.

“Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people. The TikTok ban, unless stopped, will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on 19 January 2025.”

According to US news network CNBC, TikTok plans to seek an injunction to have the case heard before the US Supreme Court in Washington DC.

Trump’s change of heart?

The one saving grace for TikTok may yet be the incoming Republican administration led by president elect Donald Trump, who returns to the White House in January for an historic second term.

Prior to the 2020 election Trump had led calls for a ban on TikTok, and came close to achieving this goal. However, after the Biden administration’s legal intervention, he now appears to have had a change of heart. Indeed, back in September, he briefly positioned it as a campaign issue, encouraging TikTok users to cast their vote for him. At the time of going to press, however, Trump had not stated whether he will actually enforce a ban.

Time’s up

Craig Singleton, senior fellow and China program director at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who contributed extensively to an amicus brief on which the court heavily relied, said the ruling underscored a growing consensus that time was up for TikTok, at least in its current form.

“The unanimous decision is a clear warning shot to foreign companies operating in sensitive sectors – they must play by the rules or face the consequences,” said Singleton.

“Expect TikTok to pull every lever – lobbying, lawsuits, and public pressure – to stall divestiture. But. the bipartisan appetite for action means the company’s runway is rapidly shrinking.”

The ruling also serves as a bellwether for how the US, and by extension its core allies including the UK, confront tech threats from authoritarian regimes, and for policymakers, the saga so far serves as a test of whether the law can keep up with emerging threats, he said.

“For Beijing, this is more than just about TikTok – it’s a symbolic and strategic loss in the broader tech competition with Washington,” added Singleton. “There can be no doubt that this ruling undercuts Beijing’s ability to use TikTok as a powerful tool for influence, data collection, and narrative control within the US, marking a significant strategic loss.

“China has few meaningful options apart from retaliatory rhetoric or tit-for-tat measures targeting U.S. companies operating in China,” Singleton told Computer Weekly in emailed comments.

“While Beijing is likely to issue strong condemnations, we shouldn’t expect any dramatic responses – China may complain loudly, but with its economy under strain, this is more a diplomatic headache than an immediate crisis.”

Source