ICE wants its mask back, and hired a company to ask

Government agencies can now buy takedown services to remove inconvenient public information about their employees.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) hired ZeroFox, a cybersecurity firm, to request the removal of icepi.cx, a website that published work-related information of government employees. FlokiNET, the hosting provider, declined the request, arguing the site served as an accountability tool for journalists and citizens, and that publishing work details of public officials was distinct from doxxing. ICE's "Doxing Mitigation Initiative," as it was internally known, aimed to remove publicly available information about its employees. However, even though FlokiNET refused the takedown, the domain was ultimately suspended by its registrar, CentralNic, which had reached an independent decision. The site has since reappeared on a new domain, icepicx.is. The DHS has a $15 million contract with ZeroFox, allowing the company to file takedown requests on behalf of ICE and other agencies until 2028.

The case highlights a growing trend where government entities are outsourcing the removal of online information to private contractors, blurring the lines between public accountability and censorship. ZeroFox's business model, which relies on volume and automated detection, raises concerns about the validation of takedown requests, especially when the origin and accountability of the claims are obscured. This commercialization of takedowns shifts the burden of verification from the claimant to the hosting provider and registrars, potentially impacting legitimate journalism and free speech.

This development signals a shift towards a more aggressive, commercially driven approach to managing public perception and information control by government agencies. The ability for a government body to contract a third party to scrub public records, especially with automated processes, presents a significant challenge to transparency. It suggests that future battles over online information may increasingly involve private intermediaries, complicating efforts to ensure open access and accountability for public officials.