Safeguarding Digital Public Infrastructure: Protecting Public Trust in the Digital Age

Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) is quickly becoming as essential to modern life as roads, power grids, or clean water. From national ID systems and payment networks to platforms for accessing health or education services, DPI is the new foundation beneath how states serve people in the digital age. But as these systems scale, so do the risks: exclusion, surveillance, misuse of data, and broken trust. What’s emerging is a global realization that DPI, like any infrastructure, needs rules, checks, and protections built in from the start.

This is where DPI Safeguards come in.

In today’s edition, we take a steady look at what those safeguards are, why they’ve become urgent, and how countries are responding. From India to Mexico and back to the UN, the examples offer insight and warning. So let’s raise anchor and take a deeper dive into the guardrails that could determine whether the digital future empowers or undermines the public good.

What is DPI?

At its core, Digital Public Infrastructure includes the fundamental digital systems that governments and societies rely on. Commonly cited examples are digital ID, digital payments, and data exchange platforms that form the backbone of e-government and digital services.

Proponents (governments, international agencies, and philanthropies) hail DPI as a catalyst for development; a robust digital infrastructure can accelerate inclusion, innovation, and economic growth. For instance, a country with a reliable digital ID can more easily roll-out social benefits or enable citizens to access services online. Indeed, DPI has been pitched as a game-changer for achieving Sustainable Development Goals, bringing billions into the digital economy, and streamlining governance.

However, what exactly counts as DPI –and how it should work– is hotly debated.

Originally, digital rights activists imagined DPI as community-driven, open infrastructure (much like public libraries or town squares online) to empower civic life. Today, though, the dominant vision led by major players (e.g. the UN Development Programme-from where we at TWC stem our deffinition- and big foundations) frames DPI more narrowly: as government-led platforms for service delivery and financial inclusion, often built around a core national digital ID system. This shift in focus has prompted concern that we’re emphasizing economic gains and administrative efficiency while glossing over crucial safeguards for privacy, equity, and civil liberties.

In other words, are we building digital highways without speed limits or police?

Well, civil society groups have warned for years that many digital ID and DPI programs, as currently implemented, are “fundamentally incompatible with human rights,” documenting harms to vulnerable communities. They argue that the rush to roll out DPI has often overlooked the necessary guardrails (like data protection, user consent, and accountability), resulting in systems that can exclude or exploit instead of empower.

This growing awareness has given rise to the concept of DPI Safeguards. These are the technical standards, legal norms, governance practices, and civic checks that ensure digital infrastructure serves the public good without doing harm.

So, until recently, we actually had built all this infrastructure (or digital highways) without any safeguards (or speed limits). However, and very importantly, the need for safeguards is now being recognized at the highest levels. In 2024 the United Nations launched a Universal DPI Safeguards Framework, a set of actionable guidelines to help countries design safe, inclusive digital infrastructure. This came alongside a global agreement (the U.N.’s proposed Global Digital Compact) where virtually all its member states acknowledged DPI’s transformative potential –but also the responsibility to put up “guardrails” as we digitalize. As per the United Nations, the goal is to “mitigate risks at both the individual and societal level” and “foster trust and equity” in how DPI is built and used.

In short, DPI Safeguards are about baking in public interest protections from the start, rather than reacting to crises later.

Ok, DPI Safeguards Exist, But Why Do Matter?

Because the stakes are incredibly high. When digital public infrastructure works well, it’s largely invisible (we barely notice when our ID number unlocks a service or when an online portal just works). But when it fails or is abused, the impact is painfully visible.

Charter a course for our first stop: India

Take India’s Aadhaar as a cautionary tale. Aadhaar is the world’s largest biometric ID system, used by over a billion people for everything from welfare to banking. While it greatly expanded access to IDs, it also revealed the dangers of weak safeguards. Thousands of Indians, often the poorest, have been denied food rations or pensions because fingerprint scanners failed to recognize them or because Aadhaar was improperly made mandatory without alternatives.

In a landmark 2018 judgment, India’s Supreme Court ruled that Aadhaar cannot be the sole gatekeeper: it should be mandatory only for certain government benefits, and alternative ID methods must be provided so that no one is excluded when technology glitches or if they don’t have an Aadhaar. In practice, however, these safeguards weren’t always implemented: children were still asked for Aadhaar to enroll in school, and adults were often unaware of backup options. The result? People fell through the cracks.

The Aadhaar experience illustrates how over-reliance on a digital system without proper legal and technical safeguards can threaten basic rights –in this case, the right to food, education, or privacy. Even supporters of Aadhaar have come to realize that ignoring safeguards undermines public trust in the system.

Mapping our second stop: Mexico

Another example comes from Mexico. In 2021, the Mexican government proposed the creation of a nationwide digital ID called CUID (Clave Única de Identidad Digital), which was backed by a $225 million dollar World Bank loan. On paper, it aimed to streamline services and inclusion. In reality, it sparked fierce pushback.

A coalition of 25 civil society organizations (led by digital rights group R3D) publicly criticized the draft law, arguing that the biometric ID system “seriously threatens human rights”. Why? They saw a recipe for mass surveillance and exclusion. With all personal data linked to a single ID, there were fears the system could enable authorities to track citizens’ movements and activities (a worrisome prospect in a country where activists and journalists have been targets of surveillance).

At the same time, making this digital ID mandatory for accessing services could exclude the most marginalized: people in remote communities, those lacking documentation, or anyone distrustful of handing over their biometrics. These concerns weren’t hypothetical: in Kenya, a similar digital ID initiative was found to have left many without access to banking and healthcare, since such systems rarely achieve full coverage and often fail to reach those most in need.

Mexico’s Senate was urged to pause and build in protections. For example, make the ID voluntary, drop the biometric requirement, and ensure no one loses services for lack of the new ID. In other words, implement safeguards before flipping the switch. The Mexican proposal’s trajectory (initial enthusiasm, followed by public outcry and calls for fixes) shows how public trust can evaporate when people fear a digital infrastructure will be used as “Big Brother” or create digital underclasses.

Back at captain’s quarters

These cases, from India to Mexico and beyond, highlight why DPI Safeguards matter so deeply today. Governments worldwide are digitizing public services at breakneck speed, often without sufficient checks and balances. The result can be data breaches exposing millions of personal records, identity theft and fraud, or entire communities left unable to prove their identity due to a system outage.

Moreover, without legal guardrails, a digital ID or platform meant for convenience can morph into a tool for government overreach: continuous surveillance, profiling of minorities, or unjust denial of services. The integrity of public institutions is on the line: if people cannot trust that a voter registration system is secure, or that their national ID won’t be misused, it corrodes trust in government itself.

As the UNDP has pointed out, digital public infrastructure must work for the public good and uphold human dignity. Otherwise, it can “veer off course” and do the opposite. In sum, DPI Safeguards are about protecting people from the unintended (and intended) consequences of digital systems, and maintaining the public’s confidence that these new systems will enhance their rights and well-being, not undermine them.

The urgency is clear: around the world, courts, activists, and even forward-thinking officials are ringing alarm bells and demanding guardrails “as development and implementation of digital public infrastructure continues to accelerate” (see here).

So, what do DPI Safeguards actually look like in practice?

At this point, we can pretty much imagine what they entail. In a nutshell, they span several interlocking areas: technical design, legal policy, governance, and civic engagement. All working together to keep our digital infrastructure trustworthy:

• Technical Safeguards: These are the built-in features and best practices that make DPI systems secure and reliable by design. Think of data encryption, cybersecurity frameworks, and privacy-by-design principles that protect personal information from breaches or misuse. Technical safeguards also include ensuring redundancy and fallback options (so, for example, if a fingerprint scanner fails to recognize someone, the system can use a PIN or alternative method). The goal is to embed safety into the software and hardware: strong access controls, audit logs to track who accesses data, and regular security audits to catch vulnerabilities early. By implementing such standards upfront, governments can prevent many harms – much like reinforcing a bridge while building it, rather than waiting for a collapse.

• Legal Safeguards: These are the laws, regulations, and policies that define how DPI can be used – and what happens if it’s abused. A cornerstone here is robust data protection and privacy law. For instance, requiring that personal data collected for a digital ID is only used for its stated purpose (purpose limitation) and not shared arbitrarily. Legal safeguards might mandate independent oversight authorities (such as a Data Protection Commission) that can audit systems and sanction misuse. They also establish rights for individuals: the right to opt out of a digital ID; the right to access and correct your data; or the right to redress if you’ve been wrongfully denied a service. Essentially, the legal framework sets the rules of the road for digital infrastructure, making sure, for example, that no agency can suddenly make a single ID number mandatory for everything without parliamentary approval (as the Indian Supreme Court insisted). Clear legal boundaries help ensure that DPI advances in step with constitutional rights and doesn’t become a free-for-all for surveillance or discrimination.

• Governance Safeguards: Even with good laws on paper, how DPI systems are governed day-to-day is crucial. Governance safeguards include transparency, accountability, and oversight mechanisms. Practically, this could mean creating an independent board or multi-stakeholder committee to oversee a digital ID program, including members from civil society and technical experts, not just government officials. It means regular public reporting on the system’s performance, security incidents, and how citizen complaints are handled. It also involves internal checks: for example, clear protocols that any changes to the system (like adding a new use for the ID data) go through privacy impact assessments and public consultation. Training public servants who operate DPI to follow privacy and security best practices is another often-overlooked safeguard. And crucially, independent oversight bodies (courts, regulators, auditors) must have the power and technical capacity to audit algorithms, review decisions, and step in if something goes wrong. Good governance is about ensuring the institutional integrity of DPI: that these systems are managed in the public interest, not just in the interest of a few, and that there are consequences if those managing them overstep their mandate.

• Civic Safeguards: Last but not least, the public and civil society have a role in keeping digital infrastructure honest. Civic safeguards include engaging citizens in the design and feedback of DPI. For example, holding open consultations or community pilot programs before a nationwide roll-out, so that diverse voices (especially those of marginalized groups) can flag concerns. It also means supporting an active civil society and media that can investigate and spotlight problems. Many of the issues with systems like Aadhaar or CUID came to light only because researchers, journalists, and NGOs were paying attention and, when necessary, filing court challenges. Ensuring people have channels to report grievances or errors –and actually get them resolved– is another civic safeguard that builds trust. Finally, digital literacy and public awareness are key. If citizens understand how a system works and what their rights are, they are better equipped to hold institutions accountable. In short, civic safeguards keep the “public” in public infrastructure: reminding governments that these systems exist to serve society, not the other way around.

In combination, all of these safeguards create an holistic safety net for digital public infrastructure. We should imagine a future where, before a new digital ID system goes live, it has passed a rigorous checklist: security tested, privacy certified, legislated safeguards in place, oversight bodies ready, and citizens informed and consulted. That might sound ambitious, but it’s precisely the kind of approach needed to ensure DPI truly benefits everyone and “people and their rights are protected” throughout its development and use. Without these measures, we risk building skyscrapers on sand –impressive but prone to collapse. With safeguards, we instead lay a solid foundation for the digital era, where innovation and rights go hand in hand.

TWC Insight

At The Wireless Cable, we believe the conversation around Digital Public Infrastructure is fundamentally about public trust. Technology may be evolving at breakneck speed, but trust is built (or lost) in the age-old ways: through transparency, accountability, and consistent respect for people’s rights. It’s worth remembering that society has been down this road before. In the 19th century, we built railroads and factories before we had safety standards, and workers paid the price. In the 20th century, we laid highways and power grids, only later realizing we needed regulations and consumer protections to prevent accidents and abuse. Now, in the 21st century, the “public infrastructure” being built is digital, but the lesson is the same: we should not have to wait for a disastrous data leak or a major exclusion scandal to ask “Did we get the safeguards right?”

One insight that strikes us is how profoundly political DPI is. These aren’t just IT projects; they are the new architecture of power in society. A national digital ID system can reconfigure the relationship between citizens and the state (who gets identified, who gets left out). A social media or communications platform –arguably also part of our public digital infrastructure– can tilt the balance of public discourse. As one forum on the geopolitics of DPI put it: digital infrastructure is “a profoundly political proposition with significant ramifications for our digital future, human rights, the relationship between people and states, and the distribution of power”. In our view, this means decisions about DPI can’t be left to technocrats alone. The public has a rightful claim to ask: How will this system affect my rights? Who controls my data? What happens if something goes wrong? Safeguards are essentially the mechanisms by which we, as a society, assert control over technology that is otherwise easy to portray as inevitable or above scrutiny. Without them, we risk a future where digital infrastructure is deployed “because it’s shiny and new,” rather than because it’s safe and needed.

It’s also insightful to see a growing convergence of voices on this issue. Not long ago, talking about data privacy or algorithmic bias was largely the domain of activists and academics. Now heads of state, central bankers, and U.N. officials are echoing these concerns (perhaps after seeing one too many projects blow up). This shift suggests a maturation in how we view technology: a move from blind optimism to a more critical, values-driven approach.

And that’s a good thing. Embracing DPI Safeguards doesn’t mean dampening innovation –much like having food safety standards doesn’t stop chefs from creating new recipes. Rather, it creates the conditions for innovation to flourish in a way that people can actually trust and adopt.

Trust, once lost, is hard to regain. If citizens lose faith that a digital voting system will count votes correctly, or that a health app will keep their data confidential, the whole purpose of those innovations is defeated. Thus, the most forward-thinking institutions today are those weaving safeguards into the very fabric of their digital initiatives. They recognize that public trust is the currency of the digital age, and DPI Safeguards are how you mint it.

Takeaway

Digital Public Infrastructure Safeguards are no longer a luxury –they are a necessity for any society that wants to harness technology for good while protecting its people. As countries rush to digitize, there’s a tremendous opportunity right now to embed reforms and cooperative measures that will pay dividends for decades. Here are the key takeaways and avenues for action:

• Prioritize Reforms and Standards: Governments should take this moment to update laws and policies in line with the digital reality. That means passing or strengthening data protection laws, enacting clear rules on how digital IDs and public data can be used, and forbidding practices (like unchecked biometric surveillance or making essential services contingent on a single ID) that undermine rightsprivacyinternational.orgprivacyinternational.org. Technical standards should be adopted so that every new system adheres to basic security and accessibility benchmarks. Encouragingly, we see moves in this direction (for example, some countries now mandate privacy impact assessments for any big e-governance project). Reforming procurement practices is another piece: governments can demand that vendors build systems that are open-source or interoperable, avoiding vendor lock-in and enhancing transparency. In short, bake the safeguards into the “blueprints” of DPI projects from the get-go.

• Strengthen Institutions and Governance: Safeguards need champions. This is a chance to empower independent regulators, ombudsmen, or multi-stakeholder councils that can oversee digital infrastructure. It could mean setting up a dedicated Data Protection Authority (if one doesn’t exist) or a cross-sector “Digital Accountability Commission” that regularly reviews major DPI systems for compliance with human rights standards. International bodies are stepping up as well: the U.N.’s new DPI Safeguards Framework provides a global reference point and toolkit for governance best practices. Governments should not only endorse such frameworks but actively use them to self-audit and improve. Building institutional capacity is key: training judges on tech issues, educating lawmakers on algorithmic systems, and hiring technologists in public oversight roles can all boost the governance around DPI. Remember, a safeguard is only as effective as the institution enforcing it. If we ensure those institutions are robust and independent, we fortify the integrity of the whole system.

• Foster Civic Engagement and Digital Literacy: Ordinary people must have a seat at the table. Public consultations, citizen assemblies on digital issues, and participatory design sessions can surface concerns that experts might miss (be it how a login system might exclude certain communities or how a data policy might be misunderstood). Supporting civil society organizations and journalists in this space is equally important; they act as watchdogs and can often alert governments to issues before they escalate. On the flip side, investing in digital literacy and awareness ensures that users of DPI (which is basically all of us, eventually) know their rights and responsibilities. If a new digital payment system rolls out, there should be campaigns to educate users on how to use it safely and what protections are in place. This two-way communication builds trust. As one safeguard example, some countries have established user committees for large digital platforms, giving citizens a forum to voice feedback directly to the system operators. When people feel heard and empowered, they are more likely to trust and adopt digital services, creating a positive cycle where inclusion improves, which in turn enhances trust in the system.

• Global Cooperation and Knowledge Sharing: Digital infrastructure transcends borders, and so should our safeguards. There is immense value in countries learning from each other’s successes and mistakes. International forums and coalitions –from the UN to regional bodies like the African Union or EU– are ideal for sharing playbooks. We’re seeing collaborative efforts emerge: for instance, in late 2023, a UN-led event saw global leaders pledge over $400 million to help build “safe and inclusive digital public infrastructure” in dozens of countries by 2030. This kind of global initiative not only provides funding but also creates a platform to disseminate best practices (and cautionary tales). Likewise, civil society networks (like the #WhyID campaign on digital identity) and open-source communities (through the Digital Public Goods Alliance, etc.) are enabling cross-border learning. A country about to launch a digital ID can study what happened in India or Mexico; a region exploring digital currency can examine Nigeria’s or the EU’s experiences. Global cooperation means we don’t have to reinvent the wheel for safeguards, we can co-create international principles (much as we have done for human rights or cybersecurity) and adapt them locally. It also means being vigilant that today’s digital tools, often supplied by big tech companies or funded by global lenders, adhere to universal standards no matter where they’re deployed. If a system isn’t good enough for one country’s privacy standards, should it be dropped into another country without question? Cooperation can raise the baseline for everyone.

In conclusion, Digital Public Infrastructure Safeguards are about protecting the public trust and the integrity of our institutions in a digital world. They ensure that as we innovate, we do not inadvertently undermine the very social contract that holds our communities together. The opportunity before us is one of alignment: to align technological progress with democratic values and human rights.

The fact that international bodies, national governments, and grassroots movements are all converging on this issue is a promising sign. It means we recognize both the enormous promise of DPI and the peril of getting it wrong. By implementing strong technical, legal, governance, and civic safeguards, we can chart a course where digital public infrastructure truly becomes a public good: empowering people, bolstering institutions, and fostering trust in the digital age.

The road ahead is undoubtedly complex, but with cooperation and commitment, we can build a digital future where the foundations are not only innovative and efficient, but also just and secure for all. That is the vision of DPI Safeguards: a world where our digital bridges are well-built and open to everyone, and where the only thing that collapses is our fear of the digital unknown.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI)?

Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) refers to foundational digital systems—like national ID platforms, payment networks, and data exchanges—that governments use to deliver services to the public. They’re often built as digital equivalents to physical infrastructure (like roads or utilities), aiming to enable access, inclusion, and efficiency at scale.

2. Why do DPI systems need safeguards?

Because when these systems fail or are misused, the consequences can be serious: denial of services, data breaches, or even surveillance. DPI Safeguards are the legal, technical, governance, and civic guardrails that protect people’s rights, ensure accountability, and maintain public trust in digital infrastructure.

3. Who is responsible for enforcing DPI Safeguards?

Governments are primarily responsible for implementing safeguards, but oversight bodies, courts, civil society, and even the tech community all play crucial roles. A strong DPI system requires clear laws, technical standards, independent regulators, and active public engagement.

4. What’s the difference between DPI and regular government software or apps?

DPI refers to core, reusable digital platforms (like digital ID, payments, or data-sharing frameworks) that power multiple services across sectors. Unlike a one-off government app, DPI is infrastructure: it’s meant to be scalable, public-facing, and long-term, much like electricity grids or highways.

5. Can a country build DPI without compromising privacy?

Yes—but only if safeguards are built in from the start. Countries can design DPI systems that respect data minimization, consent, alternative access options, and independent oversight. Without these, even well-meaning systems can end up excluding or surveilling people. Safeguards help align DPI with human rights and democratic values.

6. Where can I learn more about DPI Safeguards?

The United Nations has recently launched a Universal DPI Safeguards Framework. Civil society organizations like R3D, Access Now, and the Digital Public Goods Alliance also publish resources. And at The Wireless Cable, we’ll continue breaking down the key issues and global developments.

---