To defend customers who have been sued for the theft of confidential data, strategies need to be constructed in combination with legal provisions, public interest principles, and specific cases. The following are the possible defense paths and precautions： --- ###**1. Core ideas of legal defense** 1. **Advocate a "public interest defense”** -**Disclosure of violations and crimes**: If the data involves corporate/government violations (such as corruption, environmental pollution, endangering public safety, etc.), the “Whistle-blower Protection Clause” in domestic law or the principle of “Public interest Exception” in international law (such as Article 6 of the EU's GDPR) can be cited. -**Emergency risk aversion**: If the data disclosure is to prevent imminent major hazards (such as terrorist attacks, public health crises), it can be claimed that the behavior conforms to the principle of “emergency risk aversion” (it is necessary to prove the reality and urgency of the hazard). 2. **The constituent elements of challenging the charges** -**Determination of “confidentiality”**: Whether the company's data is truly “confidential” as defined by law (such as whether the company's data has been encrypted by legal procedures or marked with a secret level). -**Definition of ”illegal acquisition“**: If the customer accesses through a vulnerability but does not break through the technical protection (such as the password is not cracked), it can be argued that the behavior does not meet the technical standard of ”theft". 3. **Dispute over the legality of the procedure** -**Evidence exclusion**: If there are procedural defects in the evidence collection process (such as unauthorized monitoring and non-compliance with data extraction), you can apply for the exclusion of relevant evidence. --- ###**2. Specific strategy and legal basis** 1. **Invoking the “whistle-blower protection” clause in domestic law** -**China**: Article 254 of the Criminal Law provides for penalties for retaliation against whistle-blowers, but it needs to be combined with the “legal, legitimate and necessary” principles of data processing in the "Network Security Law" and "Data Security Law" to emphasize the public welfare purpose of data disclosure. -**United States**: The Whistle-Blower Protection Act and laws in specific fields (such as environmental protection and finance) may provide a basis for defense, but it should be noted that “illegal means” may not be exempted. -**EU**: Article 6(1)(e) of the GDPR allows the processing of data in the public interest, but there is a trade-off between the conflict with the rights of the data subject. 2. **Principles of moral legitimacy and proportion** -Demonstrate that customer behavior is a “last resort” (if a legal report has been tried but ignored), and that the public interest of disclosure is much greater than the damage to the data subject. -Citing similar jurisprudence: such as the public interest nature of data disclosure in the ”Pentagon Papers Case“ (United States) or the ”Cambridge Analytica Incident". 3. **Mitigating sentencing circumstances** -Emphasize that there is no intention to make a profit, no actual losses have been caused, or actively cooperate to repair loopholes and strive for lighter penalties. --- ###**3. Risks and precautions** 1. **Legal boundaries** -Most countries do not recognize “the realization of public welfare purposes by illegal means”. They need to carefully avoid recognizing that the behavior is completely legal, and instead focus on the rationality of motives and consequences. -If the data involves national security, the space for defense is very narrow, and priority needs to be given to plea negotiation. 2. **Balance of public opinion and justice** -Guide the public to pay attention to the public welfare of data content through public opinion, but to avoid being accused of ”interfering in justice", it is necessary to coordinate with the court strategy. 3. **Alternative proposal** -If possible, promote the case to be turned into a civil dispute (such as a corporate settlement), or promote the customer to be turned into a “tainted witness” to expose greater violations. --- ###**Fourth, summary** The defense needs to revolve around “motivation for public welfare” and “harmlessness of consequences”, and flexibly use legal tools in combination with specific jurisdictions, while managing client expectations-complete innocence is difficult, but it may seek to reduce penalties or switch to non-criminal treatment. It is important to emphasize the exemplary significance of the case to the progress of the rule of law in society, and strive for judicial discretion.