Welcome to the CAVEAT Weekly Newsletter, where we break down some of the major developments and happenings occurring worldwide when discussing cybersecurity, privacy, digital surveillance, and technology policy.
At 1,800 words, this briefing is about an 8-minute read.
At a Glance.
- Justice Department looks to block Juniper and Hewlett Packard merger.
- Garante targets Deepseek over data protection concerns.
Justice Department sues to stop Juniper and Hewlett Packard Merger.
The News.
Last Thursday, the United States (US) Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit to prevent Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) from acquiring Juniper Networks. For context, this merger was originally announced last January when HPE stated that it planned to acquire Juniper for fourteen billion dollars. With this lawsuit, the DOJ argues that this merger would reduce necessary competition in the wireless networking industry. Through this argument, the DOJ emphasized how Juniper’s growth improved the networking marking forcing other competitors to invest in new products and lower prices, and that these advantages would be lost through the consolidation.
In this lawsuit, Omeed Assefi, the acting assistant attorney general of the DOJ’s antitrust division, wrote:
“HPE and Juniper are successful companies. But rather than continue to compete as rivals in the [wireless local area network] marketplace, they seek to consolidate - increasing concentration in an already concentrated market. This proposed merger would significantly reduce competition and weaken innovation, resulting in large segments of the American economy paying more for less from wireless technology providers.”
HPE and Juniper have pushed back against the DOJ’s claims stating that the lawsuit was “fundamentally flawed.” The two companies also stated that they “will vigorously defend against the [DOJ’s] overreaching interpretation of antitrust laws and will demonstrate how this transaction will provide customers with greater innovation and choice, positively change the dynamics in the networking market by enhancing competition, and strengthen the backbone of US networking infrastructure.”
The Knowledge.
As the Trump administration took power, one of the largest looming questions revolved around how the new administration would handle antitrust efforts. For context, the former Biden administration was one of the most aggressive administrations in terms of antitrust enforcement. Through the Biden administration, his various federal agencies pursued numerous antitrust cases, including a widely covered case where Google was found guilty of being a monopolist, as well as crafted numerous new aggressive antitrust policies. Furthermore, the Biden administration was not just pursuing cases and new policies, but aiming for significant changes as Biden’s DOJ wanted to break up Google after it was ruled a monopoly and put policies in that made it significantly harder for businesses to merge.
Due to former President Biden’s efforts, antitrust experts largely regarded this as a major turning point. Rebecca Haws Allensworth, a professor at Vanderbilt Law School, commented on the Google ruling emphasizing that it was “a sign that the tide is changing in antitrust law generally away from the laissez-faire system that we’ve had for the last forty years.” Roger Alfor, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, echoed these sentiments stating that this case was “one of the most important monopoly cases that the Department of Justice has brought since the [2001] Microsoft case.”
Given this context and how critical President Trump has been of the former administration, most would assume that Trump’s second administration would aim to undo many of Biden’s antitrust policy initiatives. However, this initial reaction may not be fully accurate. When considering the fact that many of the ongoing antitrust cases were started under the first Trump administration, it would not be surprising if Trump’s second administration aimed to continue pursuing them. While it is unlikely that President Trump will pursue the highly aggressive outcomes and policies that former President Biden hoped to achieve, it is also unlikely that the nation will see a return to the more relaxed antitrust environment that characterized the last several decades. Rather, it is more likely that the Trump administration will find a middle ground between these two extremes.
The Impact.
Despite this lawsuit having only just been filed, this move strongly indicates that the Trump administration intends to continue pursuing many of the antitrust efforts he did under his first administration. However, while both businesses and US citizens should expect these antitrust efforts to continue, people should be aware that these efforts will be noticeably toned down compared to the outcomes and policies pursued under the Biden administration. Rather than pursuing breakups, people should expect this second Trump administration to adopt more traditional punishments when pursuing cases, such as imposing significant fines or being more willing to find settlements to resolve cases. For consumers, this dynamic will likely be less overt and will have less impact on how services are currently delivered.
Italian watchdog blocks DeepSeek.
The News.
Last Thursday, Garante, Italy’s Data Protection Authority, formally ordered a block on the Chinese artificial intelligence (AI) model, DeepSeek. This order comes after the company failed to address the regulator’s concerns regarding the AI model’s privacy policies. For context, last week, Garante formally requested details on how DeepSeek handles collected personal data. More specifically, Garante wanted to know the following about DeepSeek:
- What personal data is collected
- What sources DeepSeek use to collect personal data
- How Deepseek uses any collected personal data
- Where personal data is stored, and if it is stored in China
- What legal basis is used to collect personal data
Garante’s orders were rooted in protecting Italian user data and were issued after DeepSeek responded to their request. In their official statement, Garante wrote that the information DeepSeek provided “was considered to be totally insufficient.” This order is set to take effect immediately and Garante also announced that they are opening an official investigation into the AI model. Agostino Ghilglia, one of the four members of Garante’s board, stated that “not only did DeepSeek’s response not give us any reassurance, it worsened their position, and that’s the reason we [decided] to order the block.” Ghilglia continued stating that “if there is no cooperation, DeepSeek will continue to be blocked in Italy.”
The Knowledge.
With this block, Italy joins several other nations that have actively taken steps against DeepSeek. Notably, on Monday, Taiwan banned DeepSeek from all of its government departments. This effort came after Taiwan Premier Cho Jung-tai stated that the government was attempting “to ensure the country’s information security.” Other nations, including South Korea, France, the Netherlands, and Ireland, have also begun investigating the AI platform with Texas banning the model on government-issued devices.
While many other nations are actively making efforts to investigate DeepSeek, this is not the first time the Garante has taken actions to ban an AI model. In 2023, Garante temporarily banned ChatGPT. In this instance, Garante investigated the AI model and found numerous privacy concerns. Aside from this temporary ban, Garante also fined ChatGPT in 2024 for fifteen million euros over privacy violations. In this instance, the fines were administered after closing an investigation into how the AI model used personal data. Garante stated that these fines came after OpenAI trained “ChatGPT without having an adequate legal basis and violated the principle of transparency and the related information obligations towards users.”
The Impact.
With nations around the world reacting to DeepSeek’s sudden emergence across the world, it should not be surprising that privacy watchdogs and governments are expressing concerns regarding the AI model’s Chinese development. While users and organizations do not have control over whether or not this model is banned, people take time to understand the various privacy risks that could be associated with the model. Additionally, organizations should not become overly dependent on the model until it is more certain that it will not be suspended or banned as multiple nations are continuing to investigate it.
Highlighting Key Conversations.
In this week’s Caveat Podcast, our team met with Jeff Williams, the former Global Chairman of OWASP and the Founder and Chief Technology Officer of Contrast Security. During this conversation, our team and Williams discussed what could happen to the “Secure By Design” principle during the Trump administration and how the messaging coming out of both the White House and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) will change.
Like what you read and curious about the conversation? Head over to the Caveat Podcast for the full scoop and additional compelling insights. Our Caveat Podcast is a weekly show where we discuss topics related to surveillance, digital privacy, cybersecurity law, and policy. Got a question you'd like us to answer on our show? You can send your audio file to caveat@thecyberwire.com. Hope to hear from you.
Other Noteworthy Stories.
Lawsuit accuses Amazon of tracking consumers through cellphones.
What: A class action lawsuit filed against Amazon has accused the company of tracking user movements through their cellphones.
Why: Last week, a class action lawsuit was filed in a San Fransico federal court alleging that Amazon utilizes “backdoor access” to consumers’ phones. With this alleged access, the lawsuit claims that Amazon has collected enormous amounts of timestamped geolocation data about consumers, including where they live, work, shop, and frequently visit. The complaint wrote that “Amazon has effectively fingerprinted consumers and has correlated a vast amount of personal information about them entirely without consumers’ knowledge and consent.”
The complaint was filed by Felix Kolotinsky.
Taiwan to help companies relocate to US following tariffs.
What: The Taiwanese Government plans to assist companies that are looking to relocate to the US.
Why: On Monday, Taiwan announced its support to help companies find partners among other assistance efforts if they plan to relocate to the US. This support comes after President Trump’s newly announced tariffs would be imposed on international semiconductor chipmakers. Aside from relocation assistance, Taiwan’s Industrial Technology Research Institute branches in North America will also actively aim to facilitate cooperation between Taiwanese and US companies. With this announcement, the government released a statement that they will aim to provide “the most timely support and assistance to ensure that [these companies] find the best strategies to cope with the changes.”
Twelve European countries express concerns regarding foreign election interference.
What: Several European countries want the European Commission to better protect European elections.
Why: Last Thursday, twelve EU nations expressed their concerns regarding foreign election interference to the European Commission. These countries urged the Commission to use its powers under the Digital Services Act to better protect European elections. In their letter, the countries wrote that “the escalating threats of foreign interference and disruptive interventions in public debates during key electoral events represent a direct challenge to our stability and sovereignty.” The letter continued emphasizing that “we urge the Commission to lead by fully leveraging the power granted under the Digital Services Act.” More specifically, the diplomats emphasized that their concerns primarily involved interference from both Russia and China.
The twelve nations that signed this letter include France, Germany, Belgium, Cyprus, Croatia, Denmark, Greece, Spain, Slovenia, Romania, the Netherlands, and the Czech Republic.