Russia’s Max app: how a ‘patriotic’ messaging platform became a surveillance tool

The day’s news is dominated by the quiet creep of state power into the palm of your hand. As Russia tightens its grip on digital life, a new investigation reveals how a seemingly innocuous messaging app has become a tool of mass surveillance. Elsewhere, a French novelist’s audacious literary experiment challenges the myth of male genius, while a former Labour deputy leader’s move to a controversial US tech firm reignites debates over public sector ethics. Here’s what you need to know.

Russia’s Max app: the ‘patriotic’ platform that spies on its users

Over the past 18 months, tens of millions of Russians have been nudged—sometimes forced—into downloading Max, a violet-blue app that promises secure messaging and seamless payments. Marketed as a homegrown alternative to WhatsApp and Telegram, Max has become the country’s most popular messaging platform this summer, buoyed by endorsements from celebrities and state media. But new research, published today by The Guardian, reveals that Max is less a communication tool than a backdoor into users’ devices.

Security analysts describe the app as a “digital Trojan horse.” Unlike encrypted platforms such as Signal or Telegram, Max does not offer end-to-end encryption. Instead, it routes all messages and transactions through servers controlled by the Russian state, granting authorities unfettered access to user data. The app’s terms of service, buried in legal jargon, explicitly permit the collection of “metadata, content, and device information” for “national security purposes.”

The rollout has been anything but voluntary. In regions with high dissent, local authorities have made Max a condition for accessing government services, from welfare payments to public transport tickets. Schools and universities have also been pressured to adopt the app for administrative communications, effectively enrolling students and parents in a system of state surveillance by default.

Russia’s digital ministry has dismissed concerns, framing Max as a necessary step in the country’s “digital sovereignty” strategy. But critics argue it marks a new phase in the Kremlin’s control over information. “This isn’t just about monitoring dissent—it’s about normalising surveillance,” said Andrei Soldatov, a Russian cybersecurity expert. “Once people accept an app as part of daily life, they stop questioning what it’s really doing.”

The implications extend beyond Russia’s borders. Max is already being promoted in Belarus and Kazakhstan, raising fears that Moscow is exporting its surveillance model to allied regimes. For now, Western governments have yet to respond, but the EU’s digital rights watchdog has flagged the app as a potential threat to the privacy of Russian expatriates in Europe.

What if the Beatles had been written by a woman? A French novelist’s bold experiment

In a literary provocation that has sent ripples through the English-speaking world, French novelist Michel Bussi has published Code Yesterday, a thriller that rewrites history: every song credited to the Beatles, it claims, was actually written by a woman—Yvonne, a fictional French-British songwriter erased from the band’s legacy.

Bussi, best known for his bestselling mysteries, insists the premise is not as far-fetched as it sounds. “The music industry has always been a boys’ club,” he told The Guardian. “What if the greatest pop songs of all time were the work of a woman whose contributions were systematically ignored?” The novel’s release coincides with renewed scrutiny of gender disparities in music, from the underrepresentation of female producers to the erasure of women from rock’s canonical narratives.

Reactions have been swift and divided. Music historians have dismissed the idea as “conspiratorial,” pointing to the Beatles’ well-documented creative process. But feminist scholars and cultural critics have embraced the book as a thought experiment that exposes the structural biases of the industry. “It’s not about whether Yvonne existed,” said Dr. Lucy O’Brien, author of She Bop: The Definitive History of Women in Popular Music. “It’s about asking why we assume genius is male by default.”

The novel’s timing is serendipitous. This year marks the 60th anniversary of A Hard Day’s Night, and debates over the Beatles’ legacy have resurfaced amid the release of previously unseen footage and unreleased tracks. Bussi’s book, already a bestseller in France, is set for an English translation next month—just in time for the holiday gift season.

Tom Watson’s Palantir move: a test for Labour’s tech ethics

Former Labour deputy leader Tom Watson has joined Palantir, the US data analytics firm at the centre of a storm over its contracts with the UK public sector. Watson, who served under Andy Burnham before stepping down in 2019, will work alongside Palantir’s UK and Europe chief executive, Louis Mosley, as the company battles to retain its £330m NHS contract and fend off legal challenges from London mayor Sadiq Khan.

Watson’s appointment has reignited debates over the revolving door between politics and the tech industry. Palantir, co-founded by billionaire Peter Thiel, has faced criticism for its work with US immigration authorities and its role in developing predictive policing tools. In the UK, its contracts with the NHS and the Metropolitan Police have been scrutinised for their handling of sensitive data.

“This is a company that thrives in the shadows,” said Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch. “Having a former Labour deputy leader on board is a PR coup, but it doesn’t change the fact that Palantir’s business model is built on surveillance.”

Watson, who has been vocal about the need for ethical AI regulation, defended his move in a statement. “Palantir is at the forefront of using data to solve complex problems, from healthcare to national security,” he said. “I believe in its potential to do good—but that potential must be matched by transparency and accountability.”

The controversy comes as Burnham’s government prepares to review all public sector contracts with Palantir, a move that could set a precedent for how the UK regulates the use of AI in government. For now, Watson’s appointment serves as a reminder of the tightrope Labour must walk between embracing innovation and safeguarding civil liberties.

A Scottish activist’s bail: a rare victory in India’s legal labyrinth

The family of Jagtar Singh Johal, a Scottish Sikh activist detained in India since 2017, announced today that he has been granted bail after nearly a decade in custody. Johal, a 36-year-old from Dumbarton, was arrested in Punjab on charges of terrorism, which his supporters and human rights groups have long dismissed as politically motivated.

Johal’s case has become a flashpoint in UK-India relations, with successive British governments raising concerns over his treatment. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has twice ruled his detention unlawful, citing violations of international law. Despite this, Indian authorities have repeatedly denied bail, arguing that Johal’s release would pose a “threat to national security.”

The granting of bail, while a significant development, does not signal the end of Johal’s legal ordeal. His family has warned that the charges against him remain in place, and that the Indian state could still pursue a conviction. “This is a step forward, but Jagtar is not free yet,” said his brother, Gurpreet Singh Johal. “The fight for justice continues.”

The case has drawn parallels with that of British-Iranian nationals detained in Iran, highlighting the risks faced by dual citizens in countries with strained diplomatic ties. For Johal, the road ahead remains uncertain—but for the first time in years, there is a glimmer of hope.

What to watch

Russia’s Max app is a reminder that in the digital age, convenience and control often go hand in hand. As governments and corporations vie for access to our data, the line between innovation and intrusion grows ever thinner. Elsewhere, the debates sparked by Bussi’s novel and Watson’s career move underscore a broader reckoning: who gets to shape history, and who profits from the future? The answers, it seems, are still being written.