Welcome to my Writing Adventure

Category: Tech

Securing My Digital Sovereignty

a laptop over a round table
Photo by Dan Nelson on Pexels.com

Ever since reading about how the Trump administration ordered Microsoft to block Outlook access to certain members of the ICC, I’ve been thinking about how few protections the US has around citizen privacy and their access to our data. And I’m looking at the EU’s efforts to enact digital sovereignty, and I’m thinking it’s time for me to make similar moves.

On February 6, 2025, Microsoft allegedly blocked the Outlook email account (and associated services) for ICC prosecutor Karim Khan, reportedly due to sanctions Trump imposed after the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes in Gaza. Microsoft president Brad Smith disputed the “blocked” framing, telling reporters the company never stopped or suspended services to the ICC — he described it instead as a “disconnection” of Khan’s individual account, with Microsoft staying in contact with the ICC to keep other services running. Whatever you call it, Khan was locked out and had to switch to Proton Mail. Trump was upset because the ICC was investigating people he wanted protected. The CLOUD Act gives the US government the right to compel handing over the personal data of anyone it desires, even if the data is stored outside the US. The Trump administration will tell you not to worry, to trust them that they’re only going after the bad guys. Do you believe that? Given how they’ve been treating people exercising their constitutionally protected rights to free speech, and how they’re trying to declare people who support trans rights as terrorists, I don’t trust them one bit.

The EU has a comprehensive data protection framework primarily through the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which emphasizes strict consent, transparency, and accountability, imposing heavy fines for violations. The GDPR mandates that anyone storing data on an EU resident must come with a minimal amount of guarantees. The EU issues certifications for those who do. It should not be a surprise to learn that the US does not meet the EU’s requirements. For some time, there was an agreement between the EU and the US called “Safe Harbor,” but when it was shown that intelligence agencies routinely ignored the provisions when spying on EU residents communicating with US residents, that agreement was challenged in court and was overturned. They tried again with something called Privacy Shield, but that too was struck down in the courts. There is another agreement, the EU US Data Privacy Framework, but the recent Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. Slaughter likely means that the FTC, the current guarantor for privacy in the framework, is no longer independent, violating one of the terms of the framework. Maximilian Schrems, the man who successfully sued to strike down the previous two agreements, has indicated he plans to sue over the current one.

The EU has started urging member nations to look into digital sovereignty, to move away from software products and services that are offered by companies headquartered in the US as a way to protect its residents from the vagaries of administrations like the Trump one. Honestly, this sounds like a very good idea, and as my husband and I are working on our move to Spain, it has me contemplating how we could make a similar move.

I’m currently not looking to move away from the Apple ecosystem. At the moment, we are too tied to the ecosystem, and there aren’t many alternatives, none of which interoperate as smoothly as the Apple ones do. But I recognize that as a US company, Apple is subject to the CLOUD Act just like Microsoft is. I am much more comfortable with Apple’s privacy policies and practices than I am with Microsoft or Google (and I can vouch for how privacy is a core value that is discussed with the design of each service and product, having worked there for sixteen years). I think we’ll eventually look at other options, but we’re not ready to make that step yet.

The first step is disassociating ourselves from companies like Microsoft and Google. Microsoft is easy. Neither of us uses Outlook or Teams, and there are plenty of Office replacements in the open-source environment. While Apple’s office products are pretty good, and do a reasonable job at being able to handle Office’s file formats, they’re not awesome. I’m personally looking at OnlyOffice, the Office replacement that forms the basis of EuroOffice, but I’ll probably finalize on LibreOffice, since I much prefer that UI (I hate the “Ribbon” interface that has taken over the various Microsoft Office products). So ditching Microsoft should be simple. Ditching Google is more difficult. So many people depend on Google services like Meet, Drive, and Classroom, and if I’m interacting with them, I need a Google account. Ditching my Google account would also mean losing a lot of the customization features of YouTube. And I haven’t found a good replacement for the Google Flights website. The fact that Google is subject to the CLOUD Act is bad enough, but Google’s focus on packaging and selling user data to advertisers is just beyond the pale. I definitely want to divorce myself from them; I’m just not entirely sure how.

Beyond that, I’m looking at things like moving my web hosting to a company based in the EU and subject to the GDPR. My current hosting provider is Nearly Free Speech .Net, which has been a great service. But they’re based in the US. I’m currently looking at Hetzner. Obviously we’ll be getting phone and cable service from a local Spanish provider, but we’ll maintain a bare minimum plan in the US, probably with Tello, so we can still get 2FA texts. I’m not sure what else I’ll need to do to minimize my use of US-based digital services.

I personally feel that everyone in the US should be looking at the powers retained by the US government and how they intersect with your digital privacy rights. If what the US is allowed to do concerns you, I urge you to take action to protect yourselves as much as you can, especially if you are anything other than a straight, white, heterosexual, cisgender, Christian male. There are plenty of signs that the Trump administration is coming after us. We should all give them the smallest target possible.

Thoughts about Modern Software QA

I recently retired from a career in High Tech that spanned over 40 years, with the last 25 or so focused on Software Quality Assurance (SQA). There were several reasons behind my decision to retire. The most prominent one was my desire to pursue a childhood dream. However, I must admit that another factor was the evolving nature of Software QA in modern times, and my inability to keep up with the changes.

As we age in the High Tech industry, many of us struggle to keep pace with the latest advancements in software engineering. During our youth, particularly in college, we dedicated our days to learning and applying new concepts. Our minds were sharp and receptive to absorbing new information. However, after a decade or more, it becomes increasingly challenging to stay up to date. Non-learning tasks consume a significant portion of our time, and falling slightly behind leads to a snowball effect where catching up with the latest developments becomes overwhelming. That’s precisely what happened to me.

I found myself surrounded by young and brilliant software engineers who continuously produced astonishing frameworks and libraries. These advancements were both inspiring and intimidating. Unfortunately, just as I would start grasping one set of testing protocols and APIs, another would emerge and replace it. Each new paradigm was cutting-edge and had the potential to catch me off guard. I was certain that within a year or so, I would be unable to keep up, and my relevance would diminish. Retiring on my own terms was a privilege, and not everyone in my position could afford to do so.

Another concern of mine revolves around the excessive focus on software testing automation as the defining role of Software QA. Leaders in software companies, regardless of their size, increasingly view test automation as the key to maintaining high product quality while incorporating an ever-growing number of features. Admittedly, when test automation works, it excels at detecting certain types of regressions in products. Consequently, companies adopting this approach end up replacing traditional QA engineers with software developers who hope to transition into product engineering. However, software engineers and Quality engineers have fundamentally different priorities. Software engineers are primarily focused on making things work, especially through clever and efficient implementations. On the other hand, good Quality engineers concentrate on uncovering issues with the product—issues that Software engineers may not have anticipated. The best QA engineers possess the ability to envision the various ways users might utilize and potentially break the product. They excel at identifying logic flaws and ensuring that potential crashes and data problems are resolved before customers encounter them. This level of thoroughness cannot be achieved through testing automation alone. It requires humans to think creatively and deviously, a trait that software cannot yet emulate.

Hence, I observe the growing trend toward software testing automation with a certain amount of unease. As hands-on QA roles diminish and “software engineers in test” positions increase, who will be the ones scrutinizing the finer details? In my experience, software engineers tend to focus on testing the expected paths and often overlook testing for error conditions or deliberately pushing their products to their limits. Unless software firms recognize the need for some level of hands-on QA involvement, driven by individuals who find joy in discovering the most elusive bugs before customers do, software quality is bound to decline.

© 2026 John Kusters Jr.

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑