Thread by @carljackmiller

I'm tweeting this weekend about our investigation into possible state-based, systematic editing of Wikipedia for geopolitics bbc.co.uk/news/technolog…

A thread on the most important issue it raises: in a world of info warfare, how do you protect platforms outside of big tech?

We've seen info warfare break out across Twitter, FB, Insta, YouTube, VK - basically almost any platform that can be used as a channel for influence.

Our reaction: chastise the tech giants. Embarrass them, criticise them, get them to react.

And they have reacted (arguably not enough). FB has hired tens of thousands of info sec teams. The others have built health teams too. And these teams work full time, every day, detecting and mitigating threat actor activity. It's dynamic, non-stop mathematical combat.

Models, heuristics, detections built by the tech giants - but then attackers work out what they are and adapt. And so onwards it goes, a constant to-and-fro.

But info warfare will *not* forever be constrained to big tech.

Quora, Soundcloud, forums, or, indeed, wikipedia will become hotly contested sites too, if they're not already. But outside of the billions tech giants have, it's far more difficult for them to pay for the same teams and expertise to detect and shut down this activity.

A new solution really needs to be found - more public-interest platform detection capabilities that can be used across the open-source, open-knowledge and community-based online spaces to protect them. Otherwise we may see a big gap open between protected spaces and all others.