Cambridge Analytica: UK data watchdog applies for warrant to search firm's servers as Facebook told to 'stand down' its own probe

Britain’s Information Commissioner will seek a warrant to search computers and servers used by the London-based political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica (CA), which is accused of using the personal data of tens-of-millions of Facebook members to influence 2016’s US presidential election.

Elizabeth Denham said the company had failed to cooperate after she issued a Demand for Access to records and data it held on 7 March.

“Cambridge Analytica has not responded to the commissioner by the deadline provided. Therefore, the Information Commissioner is seeking a warrant to obtain information and access to systems and evidence related to her investigation,” her office said in a statement.

Later, CA issued a statement saying it had been “fully compliant and proactive” in its communications with the ICO, and that it had been in contact with the watchdog since February 2017. “We have offered to share with the ICO all the information that it asked for and for the ICO to attend our office voluntarily, subject to our agreeing the scope of the inspection,” it said.

A whistleblower, Christopher Wylie, who worked with CA, claimed the company had amassed the data of some 50 million people through a personality quiz on Facebook called This is Your Digital Life, created by academic Aleksandr Kogan, of Global Science Research.

CA had contracted the firm to gather the data, but denies that it used the data for its work with Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

It has also emerged that Ms Denham was forced to intervene to halt Facebook’s own enquiries into how its users’ data was passed to CA.

Damian Collins, chairman of the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) committee, tweeted: “Facebook have confirmed that auditors and legal counsel acting on behalf of the company were in the offices of Cambridge Analytica this evening until they were told to stand down by the Information Commissioner. These investigations need to be undertaken by the proper authorities”.

Ms Denham later stated: “Such a search would potentially compromise a regulatory investigation.”

Facebook has said Dr Kogan’s decision to pass on the information, which he had gained legitimately according to its rules at the time, violated its policies. It said at the weekend that it had suspended CA and Mr Wylie while it investigated.

The social media giant saw £25bn was wiped off the value of its stock – a drop of about 7 per cent – after Ms Denham announced her intention to seek a warrant.

Other tech giants like Apple, Microsoft and Alphabet also saw declines as political pressure on Facebook intensified, building on months of deepening scrutiny of the sector by elected officials.

Ms Denham is investigating whether the Facebook data was acquired illegally as part of a wider probe in to the use of data analytics for political purposes.

“A full understanding of the facts, data flows and data uses is imperative for my ongoing investigation,” she said, adding it would include any new information, statements or evidence that had come to light in recent days.

“Our investigation into the use of personal data for political campaigns includes the acquisition and use of Facebook data by SCL [CA’s parent company], Dr Kogan and Cambridge Analytica,” she said. “This is a complex and far reaching investigation for my office and any criminal or civil enforcement actions arising from it will be pursued vigorously.”

Cambridge Analytica faced further scrutiny on Monday evening after its chief executive Alexander Nix was secretly filmed appearing to boast about ways to discredit politicians online.

Asked about what ”deep digging” could be done on a political candidate, he told an undercover reported from Channel 4 News: ”Oh, we do a lot more than that.”

One way to target an individual was to “offer them a deal that’s too good to be true and make sure that’s video recorded”, he said.

He went on to suggest that the firm could “send some girls around to the candidate’s house”, adding that Ukrainian girls “are very beautiful, I find that works very well”.

Describing how the firm could offer someone a bribe and use secret footage of it to their detriment, he said: “We’ll offer a large amount of money to the candidate, to finance his campaign in exchange for land for instance, we’ll have the whole thing recorded, we’ll blank out the face of our guy and we post it on the internet.”

In a separate interview with BBC’s Newsnight after the footage was aired, Mr Niix said the undercover investigation was “intended to embarrass us”.

He said: “We see this as a co-ordinated attack by the media that’s been going on for very, very many months in order to damage the company that had some involvement with the election of Donald Trump.”

In a statement, the company claimed the two managers pictured were “humouring” an undercover reporter who had tried to entrap them with questions about unethical practices. It said the pair left the meeting with “grave concerns”.

It went on to quote Mr Nix, who said: “In playing along with this line of conversation, and partly to spare our ‘client’ from embarrassment, we entertained a series of ludicrous hypothetical scenarios.

“I am aware how this looks, but it is simply not the case. I must emphatically state that Cambridge Analytica does not condone or engage in entrapment, bribes or so-called ‘honeytraps’, and nor does it use untrue material for any purpose.

“I deeply regret my role in the meeting and I have already apologised to staff. I should have recognised where the prospective client was taking our conversations and ended the relationship sooner.”

On Tuesday morning Ms Denham indicated that Facebook would also face scrutiny over what the company has denied is a “data breach”.

The firm said last week that “people knowingly provided their information, no systems were infiltrated, and no passwords or sensitive pieces of information were stolen or hacked”.

But Ms Denham said: ”The allegation is that Cambridge Analytica acquired personal data in an unauthorised way. The Data Protection Act in the UK is a strong law, it’s getting stronger, but we’re looking at whether or not there was sufficient consent for individuals to be able to share their data with the application in the first place.

“We’re looking at whether or not Facebook secured and safeguarded personal information on the platform and whether, when they found out about the loss of the data, whether they acted robustly and whether or not people were informed.

“There are provisions in the Data Protection Act that require a platform like Facebook to have strong safeguards in place.”

Her comments came after Mr Collins, the DCMS committee chairman, accused Facebook of consistently understating the risk of users’ data being taken without consent in its previous evidence to the panel.

He would write to the company’s founder and chief executive Mark Zuckerberg personally to ask whether he, or another senior executive who could not “seek to avoid asking difficult questions by claiming not to know the answers”, would appear before MPs.

“We need to hear from people who can speak about Facebook from a position of authority that requires them to know the truth,” he said.

“The reputation of this company is being damaged by stealth, because of their constant failure to respond with clarity and authority to the questions of genuine public interest that are being directed to them.”

Mr Collins also said he would summon Mr Nix to give evidence for a second time after the executive gave “misleading” answers in a previous session.

CA denied the charge and said it would be “very happy” to answer further questions.

Additional reporting by agencies