Once they are provided said data after litigation, what can they do with it? The data provided by these platforms is basically raw data that's useless alone. T

Once they are provided said data after litigation, what can they do with it? The data provided by these platforms is basically raw data that's useless alone. They need a platform to attribute metadata to a person, store said metadata at scale, or target a user with said metadata directly. This is where the surveillance players listed come in, and they don't ask for a warrant or subpoenas because they are vendors selling a platform. Don't get me wrong - I agree with you that user data collection needs to be better regulated (GDPR and similar regulations like CCPA), but the companies listed are way more mercenary and are the companies that unmask users from the raw metadata provided, and can go well beyond the capabilities platforms like Meta or Google can provide. Finally, it's safe to say that social media subpoenas are often used for parallel construction, when LE or Intelligence used one of the vendors listed. ShdwDrgn is a good example of that. Edit: After a bit of thinking, maybe this list needs much more nuance. There are various types of surveillance tech, and used for different reasons/tasks. For example, throwing Palantir in the same bucket at Candiru doesn't make sense, but both can be used in conjunction, and imo it doesn't feel right to put Meta in the same bucket as Candiru or Zerodium I might be a bit pedantic, but I feel like that pedantry is needed in order to make a better case about how scary the entire surveillance/intel market can be. That said, I still stand by my statement that a Gnu or FOSS stack wouldn't protect against a number of the vendors listed.