Why Trusting Your Business (and Data) to Tech Giants Can Backfire

In our increasingly connected world, the phrase “digital transformation” has become synonymous with progress and efficiency. Yet beneath this veneer of technological advancement lies a troubling reality: our digital lives rest on foundations controlled by a handful of tech giants who can, without warning or explanation, pull the plug on years of work, memories, and business operations.

The year 2025 has brought this vulnerability into sharp focus through a series of high-profile cases that demonstrate just how precarious our relationship with Big Tech has become. From multinational corporations to individual developers, no one seems immune to the sudden, often inexplicable suspension of services that have become essential to modern life and business.

Case 1: The Nayara Energy Debacle

The most dramatic example emerged in late July 2025 when Microsoft abruptly suspended all digital services for Nayara Energy, a major Indian refinery with ties to Rosneft. Microsoft accused Nayara Energy of needing to comply with EU sanctions and suspended all its digital services, including Outlook, Teams, and cloud access, without prior warning, despite full license compliance.

The implications were staggering. An entire enterprise operation—one that had paid for premium Microsoft services—found itself cut off from critical business tools overnight. Email communications ceased, collaborative work ground to a halt, and cloud-stored data became inaccessible.

Nayara filed an emergency petition in India’s Delhi High Court around July 28, forcing Microsoft to restore services by July 30. No satisfactory explanation was provided for the suspension or its abrupt reversal. The speed of the reversal following legal intervention raised serious questions about the initial justification for the suspension.

This case highlighted several alarming realities:

• Loss of operational control: Even paid, enterprise-grade contracts don’t guarantee access
• Data held hostage: Services and data availability rest entirely on the provider’s unilateral decisions
• Weak recourse: Domestic businesses have limited leverage when facing global tech decisions dictated from abroad

Case 2: The LibreOffice Developer’s Kafkaesque Experience

While the Nayara Energy case involved geopolitical complexities, the experience of Mike Kaganski, a veteran LibreOffice developer, demonstrates that even the most mundane activities can trigger automated enforcement systems with devastating consequences.

Kaganski found his Microsoft account locked after attempting to send a routine email to the LibreOffice mailing list. The notification vaguely claimed “a violation of the Microsoft Services Agreement,” though no specifics were provided.

What followed was a textbook example of bureaucratic hell in the digital age:

• Phone-based identity verification repeatedly failed
• Support is required to sign in with the blocked account, creating a catch-22
• A support ticket submitted via his spouse’s account was automatically closed after providing no new guidance

Kaganski lamented publicly: “Microsoft… once an IT tech leader, became utterly incompetent in IT.” His frustration resonated with countless others who have found themselves trapped in similar digital purgatory.

Case 3: The 30-Year Data Loss

In June 2025, another Microsoft user reported losing access to “30 years of photos and work” stored in OneDrive after Microsoft suspended their account without warning, reason, or legitimate recourse. Despite filing recovery forms 18 times, the user received no response from Microsoft.

This case illustrates perhaps the most devastating aspect of Big Tech dependency: the potential loss of irreplaceable personal and professional data accumulated over decades. Unlike physical possessions, digital assets stored in cloud services can vanish instantly, leaving users with no recourse and no alternatives.

The Broader Pattern: Digital Authoritarianism

These incidents are not isolated anomalies but symptoms of a broader systemic issue. Several troubling patterns emerge:

1. Algorithmic Justice Without Appeals

Automated systems flag accounts based on opaque criteria, often without human oversight or meaningful appeal processes. The algorithms that govern our digital lives operate as black boxes, making decisions that can destroy livelihoods while remaining utterly inscrutable to those affected.

2. Guilt by Association

The Nayara Energy case demonstrates how geopolitical tensions can suddenly impact businesses that may have no direct involvement in sanctioned activities. Complex international relationships are reduced to binary algorithmic decisions with no room for nuance or context.

3. Circular Support Systems

Perhaps most frustratingly, the support systems designed to help users navigate these crises are often themselves broken. Requirements to sign in with suspended accounts, automated responses that provide no new information, and support tickets that disappear into digital voids create a Kafkaesque experience that leaves users powerless.

4. Data as Hostage

When accounts are suspended, users don’t just lose access to services—they lose access to their own data. Years of emails, documents, photos, and work product become instantly inaccessible, held hostage by the same systems that were supposed to protect them.

The Scale of Vulnerability

The scope of this problem extends far beyond individual cases. In 2024, governments worldwide fined major tech companies a combined $8.2 billion, with Google alone facing $2.9 billion in penalties. Yet these fines represent mere pocket change for companies that can generate enough revenue to pay them off in less than three weeks.

This financial reality underscores a crucial point: for Big Tech companies, the cost of poor user experience, false positives in automated enforcement, and even regulatory violations is negligible compared to the cost of building more nuanced, human-centered systems.

Beyond Individual Cases: Systemic Risks

The implications extend beyond individual frustration to broader societal risks:

Economic Disruption

When businesses become dependent on Big Tech platforms, sudden service disruptions can cause immediate economic damage. Supply chains, customer relationships, and operational efficiency can all be compromised overnight.

Democratic Participation

Tensions between X and the Brazilian government reached boiling point in August 2024 when Supreme Court Judge Alexandre de Moraes ordered the platform to block accounts belonging to journalists and politicians accused of spreading misinformation. This demonstrates how platform policies can directly impact democratic discourse and press freedom.

Innovation Suppression

When developers and innovators can lose access to essential tools without warning or recourse, it creates a chilling effect on innovation and competition—ironically, the very forces that created the tech giants in the first place.

Mitigation Strategies: Reclaiming Digital Autonomy

While the problems are systemic, individuals and organizations can take steps to reduce their vulnerability:

1. Diversification is Survival

Never rely exclusively on a single platform or provider. Maintain accounts across multiple services, and ensure critical data is accessible through various channels. The old investment advice—don’t put all your eggs in one basket—applies equally to digital assets.

2. Local and Self-Hosted Alternatives

Explore platforms like Nextcloud for file storage, self-hosted email solutions, and other open-source alternatives that provide greater control over your digital infrastructure. While these solutions require more technical expertise, they offer independence from corporate whims.

3. Regular Data Backups

Implement robust backup strategies that don’t rely on the same ecosystem as your primary services. If your data lives only in Google Drive, ensure copies exist outside Google’s ecosystem entirely.

4. Contractual Protections

For businesses, negotiate service level agreements that include specific protections against arbitrary service termination, guaranteed data portability, and clear appeal processes. While enforcement may still be challenging, documented agreements provide legal recourse.

5. Geographic and Jurisdictional Diversity

Consider using service providers subject to different jurisdictions and regulatory environments. What’s censored or suspended in one region may remain accessible in another.

Regulation and Market Solutions

The solution to Big Tech’s unchecked power over digital infrastructure requires both regulatory intervention and market-based alternatives:

Regulatory Approaches

Governments worldwide are beginning to recognize the need for digital rights legislation. Europe’s GDPR provides a model for user protection, while emerging “right to repair” movements could extend to “right to data portability” regulations.

Market Competition

The most effective long-term solution may be genuine competition. As more organizations and individuals recognize the risks of Big Tech dependence, market opportunities emerge for alternative providers who compete on reliability, transparency, and user rights rather than just features and convenience.

The Time for Complacency Has Passed

The cases of Nayara Energy, Mike Kaganski, and countless others represent more than isolated technical problems—they’re symptoms of a fundamental power imbalance in our digital ecosystem. We’ve willingly traded autonomy for convenience, only to discover that the convenience was never guaranteed.

The comfort of seamless integration and “it just works” simplicity comes with a hidden cost: the surrender of control over our own digital lives. As we become increasingly dependent on digital infrastructure for everything from business operations to personal memories, the stakes of this surrender continue to rise.

The time for treating these incidents as mere inconveniences has passed. They represent a systematic threat to digital autonomy, economic stability, and even democratic participation. The question is no longer whether Big Tech will abuse its platform power—the question is whether we’ll continue to accept that abuse as the inevitable price of digital convenience.

In a world where your business can be shut down overnight, your decades of personal data can vanish without explanation, and your ability to communicate can be severed by algorithmic whim, digital resilience isn’t just good practice—it’s essential for survival in the modern world.

The path forward requires both individual action and collective response. We must diversify our digital dependencies, support alternative platforms, and demand regulatory frameworks that protect user rights. Most importantly, we must remember that in the digital age, vendor lock-in isn’t just about inconvenience—it’s about fundamental freedoms.

The giants of technology gained their power through innovation and user trust. If they continue to abuse that power through arbitrary enforcement and opaque decision-making, they risk losing both. The question is whether we’ll wait for them to change, or take proactive steps to ensure our digital futures remain in our own hands.

• SAP vs. Microsoft: Which is the Best Platform for Managing your company
• Powerful Search Features in Google Photos You Should Be Using