Skip to content
WARNING: The content here only serves educational purpose. You are fully responsible for your actions.
We do not encourage any kind of sensitive activity or crime.

Technology either serves you, or the state

Different types of technologies

Before delving further into this topic, I would like to distinguish between two major categories of technologies:

  • Technologies that track you (Basically spying on you)

  • Technologies that do not

Technologies that track you typically require you to share your identity, record your activities, your location, or other personal data.

Here are a few examples:

Email providers:

  • Google

  • Yahoo

  • Outlook

Web browsers:

  • Google Chrome

  • Edge

  • Safari

Devices:

  • Most smartphones

  • Connected speakers such as Alexa, Google Nest, and Apple HomePod

  • Electronic payment terminals

Here is an interesting quick article explaining what is tracked by single websites.

By using this kind of technologies, you are highly putting your anonymity and confidentiality at risk.

On the other hand, technologies that do not track you are those that do not ask for personal information and do not monitor your activities. Here are a few examples:

VPN:

Web Browser:

Email providers:

  • Riseup

Devices:

  • Computers with Tails OS

These kinds of technologies, mostly open-source, are essential if you want technology to serve you — and only you. However, it is important to be cautious. Some open-source technologies, which are generally known for not collecting data, have in some cases been found to do so after all. Here is a link about how VLC (Open-source media player) is collecting data by default.

That's not something that they are talking about in their description:

What can go wrong when technologies are spying on you?

Now, I’d like to present a scenario to illustrate what could happen if you rely on technologies that track you.

Let’s imagine you are using all the technologies mentioned in the previous section:

  • A computer running macOS or Windows

  • The Google Chrome web browser

  • A smartphone with Android (let’s say a Google Pixel 7)

  • An Echo Dot with Alexa

  • A connected car, such as a Tesla

I understand this may sound like a lot, but I can assure you that most people use at least this much—often even more—when it comes to technologies that track them in their daily lives.

Now, let’s imagine that you become dissatisfied with the government in power and begin participating in protests aimed at bringing about change.

But unfortunately, as is often the case with many governments, they may not tolerate freedom of speech or political opposition. This is where the real problem begins. Once you are identified as an opponent of the government in power, and given their influence over major companies, they can begin to collect detailed information about you.

Here is an article illustrating it.

First of all, they will rely on existing regulations to compel companies to share the data they have collected about you. For example, in the United States, the Patriot Act allows authorities to access data from any American company if they have even a vague "suspicion" about you. This legal framework gives governments broad powers to obtain personal information without your knowledge or consent.

Moreover, when companies that collect your data are not subject to regulations requiring them to share it with the authorities, corruption can come into play to obtain the information the state is seeking.

Once this data has been collected and analyzed by the government, they will know where you are, where you plan to be, what conversations you’ve had—whether online or at home—what you’ve purchased, and much more.

Given all this, how long do you think it would take them to find you and charge you—potentially for any reason they choose?

As stated in this article, everyone is a criminal.

Real life examples

Here, I would like to share some examples of people who ended up in prison based solely on evidence gathered from collected data.

1) Purvi Patel (Indiana, 2015)

Convicted of feticide and neglect after using abortion pills. Prosecutors used her cell phone, e‑mail, and internet search history to establish intent and actions

She initially received a 20‑year sentence. Though her feticide conviction was later overturned, she still served time.

2) Latice Fisher (Mississippi, 2018)

Faced second-degree murder charges after a stillborn birth. Prosecutors used cell‑phone searches for abortion pills as evidence.

Charges were eventually dropped, but initial tech-driven assumptions put her behind bars.

3) Zachary McCoy & Avondale, AZ (2018)

A routine bike ride placed Zachary near a burglary, flagged by a Google location‑history subpoena (“geofence warrant”).

He was held for six days and spent thousands on legal fees—only to be released when exonerating evidence emerged.

4) Convictions via GPS Evidence

In United States v. Jones (2012), Antoine Jones was sentenced to life in prison based primarily on illegally obtained GPS tracking from his wife’s car.

In United States v. Garcia (2007), warrantless GPS data led to a meth lab conviction.

In Massachusetts, a man on probation wore a GPS monitor; prosecutors used its data to convict him for burglary.

In Illinois, Eric Hanson’s Garmin GPS showed he was at the scene of a family murder—used to convict him and eventually sentence him to death.

5) Wearables & Smart Devices

A smartwatch in the UK helped convict a hitman by showing his proximity to the victim’s home shortly before the crime.

An Amazon Echo recorded evidence used in solving a 2017 double murder in the U.S.

A smartwatch’s heart‑rate data in Adelaide, Australia, helped to determine the victim’s time of death, leading to conviction.

In Maryland, prosecutors used phone and wearable data to convict a former police chief for arson.

6) AI‑Driven Evidence

Cybercheck, an AI-based tool, claimed to place a suspect's phone near a crime scene with 90 % accuracy—driving a life sentence conviction in Ohio (Adarus Black, 2022). Later, Cybercheck’s reliability was highly questioned; charges in related cases were dropped.

As you can see, there are numerous cases where people were sentenced based on evidence provided by technologies that were originally meant to serve them. And this is the purpose of this article: you need to carefully consider whether the technologies you use truly serve you—or whether they also serve the interests of the state. The government is the enemy, sharing too much information can put you at serious risk. Be mindful: not all technologies are neutral, and not all should be trusted.

What technologies should be used?

To help you choose tools that are open-source and do not track your activity, here is a selection of recommended options:

Open sources solutions have a lot of advantages compared to proprietary ones:

Transparency

The source code is publicly available.

You can verify how the technology works, what data it collects, and whether it respects your privacy.

Security Through Peer Review

Open code can be reviewed by independent experts worldwide.

Bugs and vulnerabilities are usually detected and fixed faster.

User Control

You have the freedom to modify the software to suit your needs.

You are not tied to a single provider or forced to accept updates you don’t want.

Privacy

Open-source projects often have fewer hidden data collection mechanisms.

In many cases, open-source tools are specifically designed to minimize or eliminate tracking.

Community Support

Supported by active, global communities rather than locked customer service centers.

Improvements, updates, and security patches are often driven by the community’s real needs.

Cost Efficiency

Most open-source software is free to use.

There are no hidden fees, licensing costs, or forced subscriptions.

Longevity and Independence

Open-source software cannot be suddenly discontinued, limited, or restricted by a company decision.

Even if the main developers stop working on it, the community can continue development.

Let’s say you are reviewing how SimpleX handles message encryption.

Example from SimpleX Chat's encryption module

pub fn encrypt_message(message: &str, key: &Key) -> Result<Vec<u8>, EncryptionError> {
    let nonce = generate_nonce();
    let cipher = Aes256Gcm::new(&key.into());
    let ciphertext = cipher.encrypt(&nonce.into(), message.as_bytes())
        .map_err(|_| EncryptionError::EncryptionFailed)?;
    Ok([nonce.as_slice(), ciphertext.as_slice()].concat())
}

How a User Can Review It:

Accessibility:

The full source code is published and publicly accessible on GitHub. Anyone can open the repository and read the code.

Clarity:

This function is clearly encrypting the message locally using AES-256-GCM, a strong encryption standard.

It shows that the encryption happens before sending the message.

Privacy Validation:

The encryption key is provided by the user’s session.

The message content is never sent in plain text—only the encrypted data is transmitted.

Red Flags to Check For:

Look for functions that could send raw, unencrypted data to servers.

Check whether keys or messages are logged anywhere (this code does not).

Community Review:

Other developers can open pull requests, report issues, or suggest improvements.

Security researchers frequently audit the code for vulnerabilities.

Open-source code can be inspected line by line to verify whether the product behaves as claimed.

Users with technical skills can confirm what data is collected, how it is stored, and whether it is encrypted.

Even if you personally can’t read the code, open-source projects are typically reviewed by independent experts who often publish audits or analyses.

Here is an example of a security audit performed on SimpleX.

Conclusion

To conclude this article, I would like to share some important reflections with you.

First, you should not fully trust any company that sells or offers a mainstream product. In most cases—probably 99%—these companies have close ties to governments (which often reward them with favorable regulations or low taxes) or are solely driven by profit. As a result, they do not hesitate to track as much data as possible, either to sell it or to share it with state authorities.

Secondly, you should never use a technology that you do not understand. This is why open-source solutions are such valuable options. Open-source software allows you to review the code, understand how it works, and even modify it if necessary. If you don't know how a technology operates, you can't know whether it truly serves your interests—or someone else's.

If the way a technology works is hidden, it is rarely for patent protection. More often, it is because there is something they don't want you to see.

Remember: knowledge is power.

There is also a well-known saying that often applies to free technologies: "If the product is free, then you are the product."

Be vigilant. Make conscious choices.


Suggest changes
Crabmeat 2025-07-06
Donate XMR to the author:
89aWkJ8yabjWTDYcHYhS3ZCrNZiwurptzRZsEpuBLFpJgUfAK2aj74CPDSNZDRnRqeKNGTgrsi9LwGJiaQBQP4Yg5YtJw2U