Data Sovereignty Starts at Home
Governments are rethinking data sovereignty as reliance on foreign tech becomes risky. This guide explains what data sovereignty really means—and how individuals can apply the same principles to their own digital lives.
Data sovereignty means keeping control over who can access your data and which laws govern it. You can apply the same principles governments are debating today by choosing tools, providers, and setups that minimize foreign legal exposure and vendor lock-in.
Governments are suddenly talking about data sovereignty as if it’s a new idea. It isn’t—but the risks have become impossible to ignore. As the UK debates its Cyber Security and Resilience Bill, the question ordinary people should be asking is simpler and more urgent: if governments are worried about foreign control of their data, why aren’t you?
Prefer listening? Click play below, or listen to this episode on RedCircle.
What is data sovereignty—and why is it suddenly a political issue?
Data sovereignty refers to the principle that data is subject to the laws and governance structures of the country where it is stored or processed. In practice, this determines who can legally access your data, under what conditions, and with how much oversight.
This issue re-entered the spotlight after the Open Rights Group (ORG) urged UK lawmakers to reduce reliance on US tech companies during debate over the Cyber Security and Resilience Bill. ORG’s argument is straightforward: infrastructure can be technically secure yet politically fragile if it depends on a small number of foreign suppliers governed by foreign law.
You can read the original reporting here:
https://www.digit.fyi/open-rights-group-urges-uk-to-ditch-us-tech-in-data-sovereignty-push/
That argument applies just as strongly to individuals as it does to governments.
Why does reliance on US cloud companies create sovereignty risks?
Most consumer and business data in the UK and Europe flows through a handful of US-based providers, including Amazon, Google, and Microsoft.
The problem is not that these companies are malicious. It’s that they are legally obligated to comply with US law, including:
- The US CLOUD Act
- National security letters
- Executive sanctions and trade controls
Even if your data is stored “in Europe,” US jurisdiction can still apply. That’s not a theoretical concern. If this distinction is new, this breakdown of how data privacy compliance works across multiple jurisdictions explains why location alone doesn’t determine control: https://www.teamim.com/blog/data-privacy-compliance-across-multiple-jurisdictions/ ORG highlighted cases where service access was disrupted due to geopolitical pressure, including the International Criminal Court moving away from Microsoft services after sanctions pressure.
From a sovereignty perspective, location is less important than legal control—a distinction many privacy guides still get wrong.
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, Amazon Music, RSS
How does data sovereignty affect individuals, not just governments?
Most advice frames data sovereignty as a state-level problem. That’s outdated.
For individuals, sovereignty failures show up as:
- Account lockouts with no appeal
- Sudden policy changes tied to foreign law
- Loss of access due to sanctions or trade disputes
- Silent compliance with secret data requests
The John Deere “kill switch” incident cited by ORG is instructive: a remote control feature celebrated in one political context becomes deeply unsettling when you realize it can be repurposed under pressure.
The same dynamic applies to your email, cloud storage, backups, and identity.
What’s the most misunderstood part of “keeping data local”?
The biggest misconception is that choosing a European company automatically solves the problem.
It doesn’t. What matters is:
- Where the company is legally headquartered
- Whether it is subject to extraterritorial laws
- Whether it relies on US infrastructure underneath
A “European” service running on AWS is still exposed to US legal risk. This dependency layering is rarely disclosed clearly and almost never explained in marketing materials.
This is where many well-intentioned privacy recommendations quietly fail.
To set The Privacy Report as a Preferred Source in your Google searches, you can click this link and check the box to the right.
Which tools actually improve personal data sovereignty—and what are the tradeoffs?
Looking at tools through a sovereignty lens (not marketing claims) means weighing jurisdiction, control, and exit costs—not just encryption.
Proton (email, VPN, cloud)
| Strengths | Tradeoffs |
|---|---|
| Swiss jurisdiction outside US/EU | Centralized provider |
| Default end-to-end encryption | Subject to Swiss legal orders |
| Transparency reports | Limited control if accounts are frozen |
Sovereignty takeaway: A meaningful improvement over US tech giants, but you are still trusting a single company to mediate access.
Nextcloud (self-hosted cloud)
| Strengths | Tradeoffs |
|---|---|
| Full control over data location | Security depends on your setup |
| Open-source and auditable | Requires maintenance |
| Easy data export and migration | Hosting provider still matters |
Sovereignty takeaway: High sovereignty when hosted under a trusted jurisdiction; resilience comes from replaceability. If self-hosting feels abstract, Privacy Guides maintains a practical overview of self-hosting options and threat models that explains what’s realistic for individuals: https://www.privacyguides.org/en/self-hosting/
Tresorit (encrypted cloud storage)
| Strengths | Tradeoffs |
|---|---|
| End-to-end encrypted storage | Proprietary software |
| EU-focused compliance posture | Vendor lock-in risk |
| Business-grade access controls | Less transparency than open source |
Sovereignty takeaway: Better than mainstream cloud storage, but still a centralized dependency.
Protect your digital life—subscribe for trusted privacy and security insights.
How can individuals apply data sovereignty principles step by step?
Here’s where government-level thinking becomes practical.
- Map your critical data
Email, identity, backups, documents, photos. If you’ve never done this before, this guide to understanding your digital footprint helps clarify what most people overlook: https://atomicmail.io/blog/digital-footprint-guide-what-it-is-and-how-to-protect-yourself - Identify governing jurisdiction
Not “server location”—legal headquarters and ownership. - Reduce single-vendor dependency
Avoid putting email, storage, auth, and backups with one provider. - Prefer open standards and exports
If you can’t leave easily, you don’t have sovereignty. - Self-host selectively
Start with backups or file sync before going all-in.
This approach mirrors ORG’s warning: resilience comes from replaceability, not just security.
For readers who want a more structured way to do this, this step-by-step data privacy audit guide shows how to inventory and assess your data realistically: https://www.cookieyes.com/blog/data-privacy-audit/
How do mainstream cloud providers compare on sovereignty risk?
| Provider | Headquarters | Foreign legal exposure | Easy to exit |
|---|---|---|---|
| AWS | United States | High | Low |
| Google Cloud | United States | High | Low |
| Microsoft Azure | United States | High | Low |
| Self-hosted Nextcloud | You | Low | High |
Is data sovereignty the same as privacy?
No. Privacy is about who should access your data. Sovereignty is about who can force access.
You can have strong privacy tools that still fail sovereignty tests if they operate under hostile or opaque legal regimes. That distinction is increasingly important as geopolitical tensions rise.
FAQs
Is storing data in Europe enough for data sovereignty?
No. Legal jurisdiction matters more than physical location.
Are US tech companies unsafe by default?
Not unsafe—but structurally exposed to US law in ways users can’t control.
Does encryption solve sovereignty issues?
Encryption helps, but companies can still be compelled to disable accounts or services.
Is self-hosting realistic for non-technical users?
Yes, if limited to specific functions like backups or file sync.
Why are governments worried about this now?
Because geopolitical pressure has turned theoretical risks into real incidents.
What should you do next?
Audit where your most important data lives and identify which foreign laws currently govern it.
