Loading story…
Lawyers and executives linked to Appin Technology, its cofounder Rajat Khare, and the Association of Appin Training Centers have been accused of using lawsuits and legal threats to suppress reporting that Appin operated as a hack-for-hire outfit. The pressure campaign followed a Reuters investigation alleging that Appin spied on opposition leaders, corporate rivals, lawyers, and wealthy individuals for clients around the world; an interim Delhi court order then required Reuters to remove that article, and Reuters has challenged the order in India.
The takedown effort expanded to other publishers and platforms, prompting a public pushback from Techdirt, MuckRock, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. They argue the Indian injunction applies only to Reuters and Google, does not create a global removal obligation, and would be difficult to enforce in the United States under the First Amendment and the SPEECH Act. The dispute has instead amplified scrutiny of the original allegations, with republication efforts and wider coverage turning the attempted suppression into a broader anti-censorship fight.
Mallory correlates global threat intelligence with your attack surface — know if you’re exposed before adversaries strike.
6 events from the most recent confirmed update back to the earliest known activity.
The takedown campaign triggered a Streisand Effect, prompting renewed media attention and republication efforts, including by Distributed Denial of Secrets. This backlash drew fresh attention to the original allegations against Appin Technology.
On February 1, 2024, the Electronic Frontier Foundation responded on behalf of Techdirt and MuckRock, arguing that the Indian injunction was not a global takedown order and would be limited by U.S. law, including the SPEECH Act and First Amendment protections. Techdirt simultaneously announced it would not remove its reporting, framing the response as pushback against legal suppression.
Lawyers and executives linked to Appin Technology and the Association of Appin Training Centers allegedly expanded their censorship campaign beyond Reuters, using lawsuits and legal threats to pressure more than a dozen publications and platforms to remove or amend coverage. The effort targeted reporting about Appin's alleged cyber-mercenary activities and Rajat Khare.
On 2023-12-07, Reuters took down its investigation into Appin Technology after a Delhi court order in a defamation case. Reuters said it would challenge the order, marking the start of its legal fight over the report's removal.
After the Reuters investigation, a court in Delhi issued an interim order in litigation against Reuters that required the outlet to take down the article. Reuters contested the order in India.
Reuters published an investigation in November 2023 alleging that Appin Technology conducted cyber-mercenary operations, including spying on opposition leaders, corporate rivals, lawyers, and wealthy individuals for clients worldwide. The reporting also linked scrutiny to Appin cofounder Rajat Khare.
Vulnerabilities, threat actors, malware, products, organizations, and breaches Mallory has linked to this story.
5 references tracked. Mallory keeps watching after this page renders.
wired.com
Open sourcetechdirt.com
Open sourcethewire.in
Open sourcelawfaremedia.org
Open sourcereuters.com
Open sourceMap indicators from this story to your assets and identify affected systems in minutes.
Every observed campaign, victim, and pivot linked to actors named in this story.
Malware, exploits, and IOCs connected to the activity described here.
YARA, Sigma, and Snort rules deployed to your SIEM as soon as they’re published.
Get matching new stories delivered to your team as they break — not the next morning.
Ask questions about this story and take action on the answers.
Other stories Mallory is tracking that overlap on entities, sources, or topic labels.
SentinelOne said it temporarily removed its research article **"Elephant Hunting | Inside an Indian Hack-For-Hire Group"** after receiving notice of a pending court order. The company identified the report as research by Tom Hegel and said the takedown was made out of an abundance of caution while related legal proceedings continue. The company said it **stands by its findings** and maintained that the report was based on many hours of research, verified sources, and transparent presentation of supporting evidence. SentinelOne added that it is monitoring the legal action tied to the article, signaling that the dispute now extends beyond the underlying cyber-espionage allegations to a legal challenge over publication of the research.
Jun 29, 2026
India’s Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (`I4C`) ordered GitHub to disable access to three public repositories tied to **Bitchat**, a decentralized Bluetooth Low Energy mesh messaging app created by Jack Dorsey through Permissionless Technologies. The notice, issued under Section `79(3)(b)` of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Rule `3(1)(d)` of the Information Technology Rules, 2021, named `permissionlesstech/bitchat`, `permissionlesstech/bitchat-android`, and `permissionlesstech/bitchat-android/releases`, and reportedly gave GitHub three hours to comply. Authorities said Bitchat’s peer-to-peer design, lack of mandatory registration, absence of centralized servers and logs, and ability to work without internet connectivity obstruct lawful interception, subscriber attribution, and criminal investigations. The order is notable because it targets **open-source code repositories** rather than a live website, social platform, or deployed application, marking a direct regulatory challenge to decentralized communications software. Reports said the move came amid protests in New Delhi, where internet shutdowns had been imposed and demonstrators were reportedly using offline tools such as Bitchat; critics including the Internet Freedom Foundation called the action unconstitutional and authoritarian, arguing the cited law does not authorize blocking and that the compressed deadline limited legal recourse. As of reporting, the repositories were still accessible on GitHub, while forks and previously installed copies were expected to reduce the practical effect of any takedown.
Jul 24, 2026
Civil liberties groups and media advocates are escalating claims that US government entities are pressuring or leveraging authority in ways that chill speech and shape online information flows. The **EFF** is pursuing FOIA litigation to uncover communications between federal officials and technology platforms, arguing that government requests around content moderation—particularly involving criticism of **ICE**—may have crossed from persuasion into unconstitutional coercion; advocates say platforms could resist by demanding court orders and that prior litigation has prompted the government to withdraw certain unmasking requests. Separately, a **GAO** report obtained by *Nextgov/FCW* found the **FBI** used its “assessment” authority from 2018–2024 to collect information on more than 1,000 individuals and organizations—including journalists, religious groups, and elected officials—using tools that can include physical surveillance, subpoenas for electronic communications information, and confidential sources without the evidentiary predicate required for a criminal investigation. In a related speech-and-platform governance dispute, the **FTC chair** sent a letter to Apple alleging *Apple News* suppresses conservative outlets and suggesting potential consumer-protection violations, drawing criticism that the move resembles government pressure over editorial decisions despite the letter citing no specific terms-of-service provisions allegedly breached.
Jun 29, 2026