A/HRC/35/22 41. The design of network equipment and technology with multiple uses raises freedom of expression and privacy concerns. Deep packet inspection devices, for example, are used for innocuous technical purposes such as the management of network congestion, but have also been employed to filter Internet content, intercept communications and throttle data flows. Mobile networks are configured to monitor the real-time location of cell phones to ensure that cellular services may be accessed from any location, but such monitoring may also be used to target users.80 42. Some evidence suggests that vendors may provide support for government censorship and surveillance. In a case pending before United States courts, Cisco has been accused of designing, implementing and helping to maintain a Chinese surveillance and internal security network known as the Golden Shield. 81 (Cisco denies those allegations.) 82 In Ethiopia, human rights groups found that ZTE Corporation had designed and installed a customer management database for Ethio Telecom that enabled intrusive surveillance. 83 E. Other private actors 43. The findings and recommendations in the present report apply to any entity that engages in the provision of digital access as described above. A growing number of Internet companies are adding critical digital access and infrastructure services to their portfolio. For example, Alibaba and Tencent, two of the biggest Chinese Internet companies, now also offer content delivery network services. 84 Google has been experimenting with methods to provide wireless access that bypass traditional providers; in 2010, it launched a high-speed Internet connection service to homes and businesses in select cities in the United States.85 It is also working with Facebook and Microsoft to build undersea cable networks that would enable them to connect users without relying on third-party equipment or systems.86 44. Standards developing organizations (SDOs), although not strictly “industry actors”, establish technical protocols and standards that enable inter-operability in the telecommunications and Internet infrastructure. Standards development that neglects human rights considerations may adversely impact freedom of expression. For example, the failure to mandate Transport Layer Security (TLS) as a feature of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) left web traffic vulnerable to censorship and surveillance. The technical community’s efforts to incorporate human rights due diligence into standards development is therefore a step in the right direction.87 IV. Human rights responsibilities of digital access providers 45. The Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights recognize the responsibility of business enterprises to respect human rights, independent of State obligations or the implementation of those obligations (see A/HRC/17/31, annex; and A/HRC/32/38, paras. 910). They provide a minimum baseline for corporate human rights accountability, urging companies to adopt public statements of commitment to respect human rights endorsed by 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 Ibid., p. 13. United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, Doe et al. v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al., Case No. 5:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx (18 September 2013). John Earnhardt, “Cisco Q&A on China and censorship” Cisco blogs (2 March 2006). Human Rights Watch, “They know everything we do: telecom and Internet surveillance in Ethiopia” (25 March 2014). Tencent Cloud CDN and Alibaba Cloud CDN. Klint Finley, “Google eyes blazing-fast wireless as a way into your home”, Wired (12 August 2016). Joon Ian Wong, “Google and Facebook are doubling down on Internet infrastructure with a new Pacific cable”, Quartz (17 October 2016). Internet Research Task Force, “Research into human rights protocol considerations” (25 February 2017). Available at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-hrpc-research/?include_text=1. The supplementary annex analyzes the roles and responsibilities of standards developing organizations in more detail. 13