suggested Telegram channels for emergency support groups. This warrants further research. Threat assessment Proper understanding of threats and risks on the ground is crucial. As mentioned in the “Low-tech and Analogue Inspections” section, the precise scope of the military junta’s surveillance capabilities, along with the networked, crowdsourced surveillance supporting them, remains opaque. To effectively address the needs of journalists— and pro-democracy activists at large—a more thorough threat assessment is imperative. This necessitates conducting a broad survey or research that investigates the capacities of potential threat actors. This assessment should be informed by journalists’ encounters with these actors and, where feasible, ethnographic studies focusing on the “inside world” of the threat actors themselves. Future research could expand upon studies of Myanmar’s intelligence apparatus, as undertaken by Selth (2021), and draw inspiration from adjacent fields, such as Didier Fassin (2013) in his examination of the French police force and Scott Atran (2010) in his analysis of religious terrorism. Broader assumptions Security practices are always entangled within cultural specificities. Digital security training needs to invest in obtaining a better understanding of the reality on the ground and be cognisant that journalists’ needs are embedded within specific cultural contexts and relational networks within which both their professional and personal lives are entangled. A more holistic approach to security, considering mental health, stress management, and physical security, is needed rather than solely regarding the practice of digital security as a technical problem that can be solved with more training. 50