On this week’s “Newsy albo fake news”, journalist Piotr Łodej set out to examine these claims and invited cybersecurity expert Marcin Maj of Niebezpiecznik.pl to join the conversation
Transparency and audits
According to Marcin Maj, there are no grounds whatsoever for regarding mObywatel as a “spy” app. He stresses: “Nothing has ever pointed to that. mObywatel is a fairly transparent project: parts of the source code have been published, penetration tests have been carried out, and security specialists have scrutinised the app closely.”
The expert emphasises that the results of these checks did not show the app doing anything more than it declares.
Not just an app, but a web version too
An important point that is often forgotten: mObywatel is available not only as a mobile app but also as a web version. Users can log in through a browser without installing anything on their smartphone. Although for many people, including Ukrainians in Poland, this may be less convenient, the alternative exists.
“mObywatel is not compulsory. If anyone has doubts, they can simply not use it,” Maj stresses.
Permissions and platform controls
When it comes to mobile apps in general, there is always a risk of abuse. But, as the expert explains, access to the microphone, GPS or camera is granted only with the user’s consent, via the operating system. In addition, apps available in the official Apple and Google stores undergo additional checks.
By way of comparison, Maj mentions Facebook, which can also request access to the microphone — something that often surprises users. But even in such cases there are multiple layers of control, and apps are isolated from one another.
The data we give away every day
The expert draws attention to the wider context: “A smartphone in itself collects a lot of data about us. Large international corporations — Facebook, Twitter, TikTok — obtain even more. To discuss mObywatel in isolation from this fact is to blur a genuinely important problem.”
In his view, mObywatel serves as a tool for accessing information rather than a mechanism for collecting data on its users. Yes, some telemetry data may be collected, but that is standard practice for improving any digital service.
Digital literacy and disinformation
A separate issue is the level of digital literacy. Maj notes that although Poles are generally at home with technology, waves of fake news (for example, about snowfalls in Russia) show that there is room for improvement. By way of comparison, he mentions Estonia, where digital awareness is considerably higher.
In light of Russia’s war against Ukraine, the disinformation pressure on Poland and Europe will only grow, and we need to prepare for it.
Trust, experts and common sense
Marcin Maj recalls the words of Wojciech Wiewiórowski, a former data protection inspector and later head of the relevant authority, who once remarked ironically that the biggest blow to privacy came when people learned to read and write — after all, documents can leak on paper too.
“I can’t imagine digitalisation without some level of data collection,” Maj concludes. At the same time, he stresses that there is always the option of dealing with the state by analogue means.
Conclusion
mObywatel is not a compulsory tool, and it does not appear to threaten its users’ privacy. Its workings are monitored by operating-system makers, independent experts and the security community itself. In the fight against disinformation, it is important not to rely on “homespun logic” but to listen to those who really understand technology.
“Just as we trust doctors on matters of health, on matters of cybersecurity we should listen to the experts,” Marcin Maj sums up.
This has been Myroslav Trofymuk. We will continue to keep you informed about the key issues in new technologies, artificial intelligence and disinformation.




