Across various digital communication strategies, from completely open to highly secure, a fundamental principle remains, similar to that of a Signal conversation: the security of information is tied to the least secure device that accesses it. As you evaluate your threat model, assess the devices and accounts within your group that hold your most sensitive information. Ensure these are adequately protected, which involves implementing full-disk encryption—specific guidelines can be found for both Windows and Mac—utilizing strong passwords (with a password manager recommended), and enabling multifactor authentication for all accounts linked to cloud services and self-hosted solutions.
Summary: A range of collaborative tools is available, from less secure options like Google Docs to end-to-end encrypted solutions such as Proton and CryptPad, and even local file handling shared via Signal. Pick the method that aligns with your threat model.
Prioritize Safe In-Person Meetings
If you are geographically close to others you are collaborating with, consider whether it makes sense to skip complex digital protections and meet face-to-face. Experts suggest this is often a sound decision. However, it’s essential to apply the same threat model you developed for online organizing to in-person interactions. Assess whether your affiliation with these individuals is already public or if keeping the existence of your collaboration confidential is paramount. Evaluate the meeting location and any potential venues you might visit together with the same scrutiny as you would apply to sensitive data storage.
If there’s a risk of being recognized together or observed entering or leaving confidential venues, in-person meetings may not enhance your privacy. Potential surveillance can come from various sources: bystanders, law enforcement, cell phone tracking, and numerous surveillance technologies including cameras and license plate readers. This reality necessitates caution when meeting in person.
Numerous contexts exist where your affiliation may be public or non-sensitive—connecting with familiar faces in your community, for instance, or individuals you volunteer with in recognized organizations. Experts stress that in scenarios where you can interact freely without concern for confidential information being disclosed, physical meetings can provide one of the most effective and secure collaboration methods.
Holmes from the Freedom of the Press Foundation emphasizes that “the communication that occurs in person cannot be replicated,” celebrating its unique value. However, he warns about the pervasive nature of surveillance architecture that can undermine these benefits.
Summary: Meeting face-to-face reduces many technical risks that could threaten your organization’s privacy. Nevertheless, evaluate your threat model: if discretion is crucial concerning your meeting, physical tracking could render in-person gatherings as risky as, or riskier than, digital communication.
Evaluate Risks Before Acting
According to Taylor Fairbank from Distribute Aid, every organizing effort that opposes powerful interests, whether online or offline, carries inherent risks of surveillance. “There will always be some degree of risk involved when helping others,” Fairbank notes, urging individuals to reflect on their activities critically. Construct your own threat model, and if you’re not prepared to accept the risks associated with a particular action, reconsider your involvement.
However, Fairbank also stresses that risk assessment should not deter proactive efforts. “Evaluate risks in context, make informed decisions, and strive for safety,” he advises, while underscoring the critical need for collective action: “Go out there and assist others; the need is pressing.”