Microsoft has taken a major stand against alleged mass surveillance. The company “ceased and disabled” certain services to a unit within Israel’s Ministry of Defense after an internal review found evidence supporting claims that the unit was using Microsoft technology to monitor Palestinian civilians. The announcement was shared directly with employees by Microsoft Vice Chair and President Brad Smith, highlighting the company’s seriousness.
The allegations first surfaced in a Guardian article on August 6, which reported that a unit of the Israel Defense Forces was “using Azure for the storage of data files of phone calls obtained through broad or mass surveillance of civilians in Gaza and the West Bank.” Microsoft immediately launched a review to determine whether its technology was being misused.
Smith emphasized that the decision was guided by long-standing company principles. Microsoft does not provide technology to facilitate mass surveillance of civilians, a rule applied globally for more than two decades. Its standard terms of service prohibit such use, and the company’s review was focused on enforcing these rules.
Importantly, Microsoft did not access any of the IMOD’s actual data. The review relied on the company’s own business records, including financial statements, internal emails, and usage logs. Despite not looking at customer content, the company found evidence supporting parts of The Guardian’s reporting. This included data on the IMOD’s use of Azure storage in the Netherlands and their AI services, which suggested the technology was being used for surveillance purposes.
As a result, Microsoft informed the IMOD that it would “cease and disable specified subscriptions and services, including their use of specific cloud storage and AI services and technologies.” The company stressed that this step is about enforcing its terms of service and ensuring that its technology is not used for mass surveillance of civilians.
Smith also expressed appreciation for The Guardian’s reporting, noting that the outlet’s work, partly based on external sources, helped inform Microsoft’s review. This move marks a significant moment, showing that a major U.S. tech company is willing to push back against a military client when its principles are at stake.
