The UK has become the latest major jurisdiction to ban TikTok from government devices. The measure is in place with immediate effect following a security review ordered by ministers. The move is part of broader restrictions on third-party apps on government devices.

"The security of sensitive government information must come first, so today we are banning this app on government devices," Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Oliver Dowden, the government's second highest-ranking minister, said in a statement. "The use of other data-extracting apps will be kept under review."

Dowden noted in Parliament that this is a precautionary measure. "We know there is already limited use of TikTok across government, but it is also good cyber hygiene," he said.

The ban is intended to protect sensitive data on government devices as well to prevent things like location data harvesting. The measure doesn't apply to personal devices belonging to government employees, ministers or the public. In addition, the UK government will only allow its staff to use a third-party app on an official device if it's on an approved list.

There will be exceptions to the TikTok ban in cases where the app is needed for work purposes, such as for law enforcement or those working on projects related to online harms. These exceptions will be granted on a case-by-case basis and security measures will need to be in place.

The government noted that people should be aware of each app's data policies. It said TikTok requires users to give permission for the app to access certain information stored on a phone or tablet, such as geolocation data and contacts. Officials say they are worried about how this data may be used.

Leaders in many countries and other territories have expressed concern that China may gain access to their residents' or officials' data through TikTok. ByteDance, which owns TikTok, is headquartered in Beijing. Many legislatures have banned TikTok from government-owned devices in recent months, including the US, dozens of states, Canada and the European Commission.

On Wednesday, it was widely reported (and confirmed by TikTok) that the US government has told ByteDance to sell the app or face a complete ban in the country. There are several pieces of legislation in progress that seek to grant President Joe Biden or the Commerce Secretary the power to ban TikTok. The reported development comes almost three years after former President Donald Trump attempted to force ByteDance to sell TikTok and a week before TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew will testify before a House committee.

The Biden Administration is significantly increasing pressure on ByteDance just days before TikTok’s CEO is set to testify in front of Congress. The United States government is now “demanding” that ByteDance sell TikTok, according to a new report in The Wall Street Journal.

The new demand, which TikTok confirmed to Reuters, is a major blow to the company, which has spent more than two years negotiating with the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) over its future in the country. Those negotiations resulted in a sweeping partnership with Oracle and other measures meant to safeguard US users' data.

Now, CFIUS has reportedly told TikTok that it wants ByteDance to sell its stake in the company after all. If it doesn’t, the app could face a national ban. The House and the Senate have both recently introduced bills that would make it easier for government officials to ban TikTok and other services deemed to be a national security threat.

TikTok didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The company has previously stated that divesting from ByteDance wouldn’t address the government’s underlying concerns about data security. However, Bloomberg reported earlier in the week that TikTok executives were “discussing the possibility of separating from ByteDance” if the CFIUS talks were to fall through.

Of course, this isn’t the first time the United States government has tried to force ByteDance’s hand. Former President Donald Trump also attempted to compel TikTok to sell itself, but was ultimately unsuccessful. The latest threats of a total ban on the app are, however, sure to amp up pressure on TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew, who is set to make his first Congressional appearance next week.

The Biden administration just made good on one of its promises to make EV charger funding available to local governments. The Department of Transportation is now accepting applications for its $2.5 billion Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program, which will hand out funds to cities, counties, regional governments and tribes to help deploy EV chargers, hydrogen fuel stations and other reduced-emissions systems near their residents.

Half of the program's funding will go to chargers and stations in "publicly accessible" places like parking facilities, parks and schools. The rest will install this equipment in "alternative fuel corridors" along highways to help with long-distance travel. The initial round of funding will make $700 million available, with the rest coming over the program's five-year span. Officials have to apply no later than May 30th.

The initiative is part of President Biden's broader campaign to build 500,000 charging stations by 2030, or about five times as many as there were in early 2022. The money, assigned as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, is meant to ensure charging access within 50 miles of someone's location in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. While the effort is intended to spur overall EV adoption, there's an added focus on underserved communities like some urban and rural areas.

A strong charging infrastructure is widely considered vital to successfully transitioning away from combustion engine cars. Existing stations can sometimes be crowded or unreliable, and don't always support the fast charging available with recent EVs. The government funding isn't guaranteed to fix these problems, but should increase the likelihood that you can travel cross-country in an electrified ride.

The Biden administration just made good on one of its promises to make EV charger funding available to local governments. The Department of Transportation is now accepting applications for its $2.5 billion Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program, which will hand out funds to cities, counties, regional governments and tribes to help deploy EV chargers, hydrogen fuel stations and other reduced-emissions systems near their residents.

Half of the program's funding will go to chargers and stations in "publicly accessible" places like parking facilities, parks and schools. The rest will install this equipment in "alternative fuel corridors" along highways to help with long-distance travel. The initial round of funding will make $700 million available, with the rest coming over the program's five-year span. Officials have to apply no later than May 30th.

The initiative is part of President Biden's broader campaign to build 500,000 charging stations by 2030, or about five times as many as there were in early 2022. The money, assigned as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, is meant to ensure charging access within 50 miles of someone's location in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. While the effort is intended to spur overall EV adoption, there's an added focus on underserved communities like some urban and rural areas.

A strong charging infrastructure is widely considered vital to successfully transitioning away from combustion engine cars. Existing stations can sometimes be crowded or unreliable, and don't always support the fast charging available with recent EVs. The government funding isn't guaranteed to fix these problems, but should increase the likelihood that you can travel cross-country in an electrified ride.

Uber and Lyft don't have to worry about reclassifying its workers in California for now. An appeals court has just ruled that gig workers, such as rideshare drivers, can continue to be classified as independent contractors under Proposition 22. 

If you'll recall, California passed Assembly Bill 5 (AB5) in September 2019 that legally obligates companies to treat their gig workers as full-time employees. That means providing them with all the appropriate benefits and protections, such as paying for their unemployment and health insurance. As a response, Uber, Lyft, Instacart and DoorDash poured over $220 million into campaigning for the Prop 22 ballot measure, which would allow them to treat app-based workers as independent contractors. It ended up passing by a wide margin in the state.

In 2021, a group of critics that included the Service Employees International Union and the SEIU California State Council filed a lawsuit in 2021 to overturn the proposition. The judge in charge of the case sided with them and called Prop 22 unconstitutional. He said back then that the proposition illegally "limits the power of a future legislature to define app-based drivers as workers subject to workers' compensation law." 

The three appeals court judges have now overturned that ruling, though according to The New York Times, one of them wanted to throw out Prop 22 entirely for the same reason the lower court judge gave when he handed down his decision. While the appeals court upheld the policy in the end, it ordered that a clause that makes it hard for workers in the state to unionize be severed from the rest of the proposition. That particular clause required a seven-eighths majority vote from the California legislature to be able to amend workers' rights to collective bargaining. 

David Huerta, the president of the Service Employees International Union in California, told The Times in a statement: "Every California voter should be concerned about corporations’ growing influence in our democracy and their ability to spend millions of dollars to deceive voters and buy themselves laws." The group is now expected to appeal this ruling and to take their fight to the Supreme Court, which could take months to decide whether to hear the case. 

US regulators have announced that they're taking action to "fully" protect all deposits at Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), CNBC has reported. The institution is home to a large number of startups and established companies like Roku and Etsy, which will have full access to their funds as of today. At the same time, officials said there will be "no bailouts" and that shareholders and unsecured creditors won't be protected. 

"Today we are taking decisive actions to protect the U.S. economy by strengthening public confidence in our banking system," the FDIC, Treasury Department and Federal Reserve said in a joint statement. "Depositors will have access to all of their money starting Monday, March 13. No losses associated with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank will be borne by the taxpayer."

The FDIC took over SVB on Friday following the largest US bank collapse in nearly 15 years. There were concerns that numerous tech startups and companies wouldn't be able to make their payrolls, and Etsy said yesterday that payments to merchants may be delayed. On Friday, Roku announced that it could lose as much as 26 percent of its cash reserves, or more than $487 million, due to the collapse.

On top of SVB, Signature Banks was closed by regulators on the weekend. It's one of the largest banks used by cryptocurrency companies, as the Coinbase exchange, for one, had $240 million in deposits at the bank. In the same joint statement, federal regulators said that "all depositors of this institution will [also] be made whole."

Silvergate, another institution popular with crypto exchanges (and known for purchasing Diem, the ambitious crypto project funded by Facebook), collapsed on March 8th. That marks a run of three key banks with ties to technology firms closing in the space of a week. 

To reassure depositors no doubt nervous over these events, the government said that it will make additional funding available to other eligible institutions. The new program will allow banks to put up treasuries and other safe government securities as collateral in return for central bank loans of up to one year. It's designed to fix a key issue that led to SVB’s failure: unrealized losses on government securities caused by rapidly rising interest rates.

"The U.S. banking system remains resilient and on a solid foundation, in large part due to reforms that were made after the financial crisis that ensured better safeguards for the banking industry," the joint statement reads. "Those reforms combined with today's actions demonstrate our commitment to take the necessary steps to ensure that depositors' savings remain safe."

TikTok's efforts to address US data privacy fears may have holes. A self-proclaimed whistleblower talking to The Washington Post says the social network's plan to protect American users' data, Project Texas, has major flaws. The former Trust and Safety team member claims the $1.5 billion initiative will still let TikTok connect to parent company ByteDance's Toutiao, a well-known Chinese news app. That link could theoretically allow China to access US data. A truly secure approach would require a "complete re-engineering" of the service's infrastructure, the ex-employee says.

The staffer also claims to have met with the offices of Sen. Chuck Grassley and Sen. Mark Warner to discuss the alleged weaknesses. Representatives for both senators acknowledged that meetings had taken place.

We've asked TikTok for comment. Unnamed people at the social media giant tell The Post that the claims are "unfounded," and the Toutiao code only amounts to a "naming convention and technical relic" that doesn't tie the app to China. They also believe that the relocation of US data to Oracle servers undercuts the assertion that Toutiao could affect the US business. The whistleblower was only employed for half a year, and he supposedly left months before Project Texas was finalized. He may not know the full picture, in other words.

TikTok has repeatedly denied cooperating with the Chinese government, and there's no publicly known evidence to that effect. Douyin, the equivalent app available inside China, has completely separate content.

The timing of the purported revelation isn't good for TikTok. House and Senate bills (Warner co-sponsored the latter bill) could lead to nationwide TikTok bans if they become law, and CEO Shou Zi Chew is set to testify before the House on March 23rd to address security and child safety concerns. Politicians are worried the Chinese government may use TikTok to collect data on Americans and spread propaganda, and the report doesn't help ease those fears.

Senators aren't giving up on a bill to safeguard your online data. Hawaii's Brian Schatz and 18 other senators have reintroduced the 2018-era Data Care Act to set higher standards for sensitive info. Companies will need to "reasonably secure" identifying data, including prompt customer notifications for breaches. They also can't use that data in harmful ways, and must ensure third-parties treat any shared data with the same amount of respect.

The measure gives the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the authority to fine companies that violate the rules, including third parties. States could take their own civil actions, but the FTC could step in.

The senators largely consist of Democrats, including Big Tech critics like Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar. Independents Bernie Sanders and Angus King also back the potential legislation. The original Data Care Act had the support of 15 Democrats.

There's no guarantee the revived Act will succeed. The original bill never came to a vote after its December 2018 introduction. And while Democrats control the Senate in 2023, the Republicans lead the House. If a vote on an equivalent bill is split along partisan lines in the House, it won't reach the President's desk for approval.

The conditions may be more favorable this time around, however. President Biden has been eager to rein in Big Tech, with a particular focus on limiting the collection and use of data. Meanwhile, both major parties in Congress are increasingly concerned about data privacy and security. The Data Care Act theoretically satisfies these politicians, if just by shifting more of the responsibility to businesses.

The Oversight Board has agreed to review a case related to Meta’s handling of election content in Brazil. In a statement, the board said they planned to scrutinize the social network’s policies surrounding election content in “high-risk” areas.

The case stems from a user who posted a video in early January calling for people to “besiege” Brazil’s congress following the election of President Lula da Silva. The video also featured clips of a speech from a Brazilian general, who called for people to go into the streets and government buildings. The video was reported seven times by four different users, according to the board, but remained on Facebook even after it was reviewed by five separate moderators. Meta later opted to remove the post and issue a “strike” to the person who had originally posted it, following the Oversight Board’s decision to review the case.

Though the case is related to Brazil’s most recent presidential election, the board’s recommendations could have a more-far reaching impact. “The Board selected this case to examine how Meta moderates election-related content, and how it is applying its Crisis Policy Protocol in a designated ‘temporary high-risk location,’” the group wrote in a statement.

As the board points out, Meta’s “Crisis Policy Protocol,” is a central aspect of the case. The protocol, which was created after the Oversight board weighed in on the suspension of Donald Trump, allows Meta to respond to situations when there is a risk of “imminent harm” either offline or online. So any recommendations that address that policy could end up affecting election-related content around the world, not just in Brazil.

However, that outcome is still months away. For now, the Oversight Board is asking for public feedback on various issues associated with the case before it makes recommendations to Meta. The company will then have 60 days to respond, though, as usual, Meta is not required to adopt policy changes suggested by the board.

It's not just House representatives that want the federal government to ban TikTok. A bipartisan alliance of senators has introduced a bill that would give the Commerce Secretary the authority to ban TikTok and other foreign technology perceived as a national security threat. The would-be law would be limited to tech emerging from China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia and Venezuela.

The group is led by senators Mark Warner and John Thune. It includes high-profile politicians from both parties, including Joe Manchin and Mitt Romney.

The move comes just days after the House Foreign Affairs Committee advanced a bill, the Deterring America's Technological Adversaries (DATA) Act, in a partisan vote. A House vote is expected later in March. That measure is more targeted and meant to prevent Americans' data from falling into the hands of the Chinese government. In December, a section of an omnibus spending bill banned TikTok on federal government devices following similar restrictions in multiple states.

In all cases, the concern remains the same. Critics are concerned the Chinese government might use TikTok to collect data on Americans and spread propaganda. TikTok has repeatedly denied cooperation with Chinese officials, and has tried to assuage fears by moving data and traffic to US-based servers. Oracle, which runs the US servers, has been reviewing TikTok's algorithms and moderation systems.

There's no certainty the Senate will pass its bill and reconcile it with a House equivalent. The Commerce Secretary also isn't guaranteed to exercise the power if granted. However, the introduction of the bill adds pressure to TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew as he testifies before the House on March 23rd. He'll be fighting a Congress that's even more determined to limit his company's business.