The nonprofit Derechos Digitales released a report detailing more than 100 cases of digital surveillance, data leaks in Latin America.
The In Focus 2: An Overview of Digital Threats in Latin America report published by the nonprofit organisation Derechos Digitales through the Latin American Observatory of Digital Threats (OLAD), documents more than 100 cases recorded between June 2024 and May 2025. Its findings suggest that digital threats cannot be understood solely as isolated cybersecurity incidents: they also reflect broader questions of political power, institutional accountability and the protection of fundamental rights in digital environment.
The report identifies a diverse range of threats, including government surveillance, spyware, cyberpatrolling, internet shutdowns, biometric data exploitation, large-scale data breaches, election disinformation and technology-facilitated gender-based violence. In Venezuela, authorities have reportedly used spyware against activists, journalists and other citizens, while access to messaging applications, social media platforms and other online services has been restricted. In Argentina, more than 665.000 medical records were reportedly offered for sale. In Paraguay, a breach involving electoral authorities exposed personal information relating to nearly seven million people.
The report also highlights the use of sexually explicit deepfakes against female political candidates in Brazil and extensive technology-facilitated abuse documented by civil-society organisations. These cases demonstrate how digital vulnerabilities can affect political participation, personal privacy, public trust and individual security.
The report points to a convergence between technical vulnerabilities and governance failures. Some incidents result from inadequate security practices, such as databases exposed without authentication or the misuse of legitimate access; others involve deliberate surveillance or restrictions imposed through law and public policy. This distinction matters because the remedies differ: technical weaknesses require secure system design, access controls and incident response, while abuses of surveillance powers require legal safeguards, independent oversight, transparency and effective remedies.
The report also highlights dependence on imported surveillance technologies, including spyware developed abroad, which can limit local understanding of systems and create opaque dependencies. Meanwhile, AI-enabled disinformation and synthetic sexual imagery introduce new risks to electoral integrity and the safety of women in public life. Together, these developments show that digital security is inseparable from questions of rights, sovereignty and democratic accountability.
The expansion of digital technologies across Latin America is creating new opportunities for communication, public services and political participation, but it is also increasing the capacity of governments and private actors to monitor individuals, restrict information and exploit personal data.
According to Derechos Digitales, governments have introduced or expanded legal frameworks that authorise monitoring of online activity without judicial oversight, while independent oversight and transparency safeguards have not kept pace. In Ecuador, the Organic Intelligence Law 2025 authorises surveillance and detention of individuals without necessarily requiring a court order. In Argentina, the resolution 428/2024 of the Ministry of Security, allowing systematic monitoring of open‑source information and the use of automated technologies, and Decree 383/2025, which adds “cyber‑patrolling” powers to the Federal Police without the need for judicial authorisation. In Cuba, the Social Communication Law regulates digital content and strengthens state control over information.
The report also cites state‑led domain blocking of independent media in Nicaragua.
The findings strengthen the case for clear legal limits on surveillance, judicial or independent authorisation where appropriate, robust data-protection enforcement, secure public databases, transparent procurement of surveillance tools and effective remedies for victims.
Analyst Ximena Cuzcano, digital‑security specialist at Derechos Digitales, told EL PAÍS that “these practices are not so different between authoritarian and more democratic regimes” and warned that imported surveillance technologies, such as Israeli‑origin spyware, are increasingly being normalised and later legalised.
Why does it matter?
In Focus 2 illustrates how cybersecurity, digital rights and information integrity increasingly overlap. Data breaches, spyware, shutdowns and AI-enabled manipulation are distinct phenomena, but each can undermine trust in institutions and constrain people’s ability to participate safely in digital life. The regional evidence also cautions against treating digital repression as exclusive to one political system: risks emerge wherever technological capabilities expand faster than effective safeguards and accountability. The central challenge is therefore not simply to secure digital infrastructure, but to govern how digital capabilities are acquired, deployed and controlled. Strengthening resilience requires both technical protections and institutions capable of ensuring that security measures respect human rights, remain transparent and are subject to meaningful oversight.
