Battling the Digital Dark Side: Insights from Whistleblower Danielle Spencer

The rapid advancement of technology has brought unprecedented challenges to privacy, security, and ethical governance. As our world becomes more interconnected, the responsible use of technology and data is increasingly crucial. At the forefront of these issues stands Danielle Spencer, author of “Digital Assassins” and a senior leader in the U.S. Federal government.

With over 20 years of experience in business, finance, and acquisition management, Danielle has been a change agent in transforming and improving business operations. Her unique blend of expertise in business administration, information systems, and cybersecurity offers a compelling perspective on the ethical dilemmas faced by professionals in the digital age.

Danielle’s decision to take a stand against corruption led her to become a whistleblower, giving her rare insights into the potential misuse of technology and data by those in power. In this interview, we’ll explore Danielle’s thoughts on cyberterrorism, data theft, and the ethical responsibilities of organizations and individuals in our increasingly digital world.

1. Your career spans both the public and private sectors. How do you see the relationship between government and technology evolving, and what concerns you most about this evolution?

From my experience, certain sectors of the government are quicker to research and adapt technology than others (e.g. national defense versus tax administration). However, the evolving relationship between the government and technology doesn’t concern me; it is the relationship between bad actors and technology. Bad actors, with access to unlimited government resources, concern me. 

Every government employee takes an oath when they accept government employment, part of that oath states that individuals will “…support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;” another part says “…that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.”. It is my belief that several people not only failed to discharge their duties (e.g. Inspector General’s offices) but also violated my constitutional rights using taxpayer-funded technology and faced no consequences for doing so. 

Based on my experience, false and/or inaccurate documents and events were electronically manufactured and presented as facts. One instance I described in my book was when someone close to me received a driving ticket that had been fabricated. We knew the ticket had been fabricated because, at the exact same time as the alleged traffic offense, the person who received the ticket was at a doctor’s appointment. When I brought the issue to state authorities, the ticket was voided, however, no one could or would explain how the ticket was electronically generated. Bad actors having the ability and resources to perform acts like this concerns me.

2. Can you elaborate on the term “cyberterrorism” and how it relates to your experiences as a whistleblower?

I define cyberterrorism as the deeds/acts of Bad Actors, who use computers and/or technology to threaten and attack a person, organization or other entity so that they are frightened into submission to the bad actors’ objectives. For example, an event such as a hacker stealing embarrassing data from a celebrity and threatening to release that information publicly unless that celebrity did certain things, like pay a ransom or agree to a certain political/social viewpoint could be considered cyberterrorism. 

I believe cyberterrorism relates to my whistleblower experience because technology was used to scare and/or frighten me to prevent me from speaking up and sharing my story with others. For many people, things such as the constant surveillance of all electronic communications could be a frightening experience. Knowing that all your emails are being read by someone or being intercepted and re-directed is unnerving. Logging into your bank account and seeing multiple ‘bill pays’ pending on your account, and you didn’t initiate any of them, or having credit card accounts closed or credit limits decreased based on false information is scary. All these events, plus what I documented in my books, which all occurred after I became a whistleblower, are acts that I would classify as cyberterrorism. 

3. How has your understanding of data theft changed since your time in government, and what do you think are the most overlooked aspects of this issue?

I have been a government employee for over 20 years. However, until I became a whistleblower, I didn’t know what data theft was. The first time I recognized it was when I was contacted by another government employee under the guise of obtaining my personally identifiable information (PII) to REMOVE me from a government system. We know that the reasoning for obtaining PII is not sound for those of us with both a system and security background. People and records can be removed from systems by a system or database administrator without any data input. 

After that incident, I encountered many other incidents that I would classify as data theft incidents. Based on my experiences, I think that most people really don’t know or understand what data theft is, why it happens, and how they can protect themselves. I also don’t think that people who are in these ‘trusted positions’, who can commit data theft understand that data theft is a type of privacy violation and that more organizations are starting to treat it as a serious security violation.  

4. In your opinion, how can organizations strike a balance between technological innovation and ethical responsibility, particularly when it comes to handling sensitive data?

My experience has been that there IS a balance between technological innovation and ethical responsibility, the challenge is with bad actors. Based on my experience, the problem is that more people in positions of power need to be more willing to hold those people accountable when they mis-step as opposed to covering up the bad deed or act. 

5. Your work touches on the abuse of power through technology. What safeguards do you believe need to be put in place to prevent such abuses in the future?

There is no one solution that will fix this problem. Until the end of time, there will always be bad actors looking to circumvent the law and rules to better themselves or their situation. Therefore, I don’t believe that there is one solution that will prevent this from occurring in the future. 

I believe that the best way of combating this issue is for the public to revise the way we think about abuses of power; that we should think about them as ongoing challenges that need to be thought about and addressed on a regular basis by outside entities. From a government standpoint, on paper, all the safeguards to protect people from abuses of power are in place. Every organization, public and private, have offices and/or entities to whom they can report abuses. However, when there are bad actors in positions of power or certain special interest groups who want certain political or legislative outcomes, these safeguards can become null and void. 

This is why I am advocating for the people, regular citizens, to organize and create national organizations and media outlets where abuses of power can be reported. Lawlessness and bad acts flourish in the ‘dark’. National exposure can assist with not only stopping the bad acts and abuses of power, but also with ensuring that those who report these abuses are protected.

6. How has your role as a “change agent” in improving business operations prepared you for your current advocacy work?

My role as a “change agent” often involved creating and implementing processes and procedures, to which people had to comply. In most cases, it also involved changing the way the organization currently operated. Doing so required a lot of patience from me in dealing with hostility from impacted co-workers and convincing of management and coworkers to accept a new way of doing business. 

For several years, I have contacted many advocacy groups and have had a myriad of experiences. One whistleblower group basically told me to forget about what happened to me and get on with my life. Others have told me they couldn’t assist me – even though I wasn’t asking for assistance, I was looking to partner with them to assist others who may have similar experiences. Despite these responses, I will continue to reach out in hopes that one day I contact that one person who is willing to address these issues. I’m also looking to run for elected office in the future so that I can raise these issues via a candidate forum.