How do you explain to users that a vendor update quietly moved their files, then removed them — and that they had no meaningful way to opt out? If you follow product and platform behaviour closely, the recent flap around OneDrive feels less like a bug and more like a replay of the worst patterns of platform power: opaque defaults, unilateral control, and outcomes indistinguishable from a ransomware attack. This isn’t only a consumer story — it’s a product leadership problem with regulatory, ethical and operational implications.
Why this matters to product leaders
Users expect cloud storage to be a safe, predictable extension of their devices. When an app unilaterally moves or deletes files, trust evaporates. For CPOs and CTOs, the technical failure is only the start: the reputational damage, legal exposure and erosion of user trust are the long tail. We should be clear — behaviour that surprises users at scale and offers no meaningful opt-out should be treated with the same alarm as malicious actors.
The OneDrive episode in context
News outlets covered the story well; see the reporting on Boing Boing. According to those reports, users found their files gone after an update that migrated and then removed local files. Whether the root cause was an engineering regression, a design decision, or a combination, the visible effect — users unexpectedly losing data — is functionally similar to what ransomware victims experience: surprise, lack of control, and dependence on a platform to make things right.
Three lessons product leaders must learn
1. Defaults are policy
Design decisions about defaults are also policy decisions. When a product chooses an opt-out migration path, it is effectively changing the contract with its users. Product teams must recognise that defaults have legal, ethical and brand consequences. This is especially true for cross-device, sync, and backup behaviours where local copies, cloud copies and user expectations can diverge.
2. Transparency is non-negotiable
At a minimum, users must be informed in plain language about what will happen to their files, how to opt out, and how to recover data if things go wrong. Technical release notes buried in developer portals are not enough. Products that touch user data need clear in-app disclosures, migration previews, and straightforward rollback paths.
3. Fail-safe over convenience
Engineering teams love convenience features that reduce friction. But when convenience can delete customer data, the balance must shift toward conservatism. Implementing staged rollouts, mandatory backups before destructive migrations, and prominent confirmational nudges are basic risk controls. In regulated contexts, such as enterprise IT or education, these controls should be mandatory.
Practical steps for product teams
Here are pragmatic actions product and engineering leaders can take today:
- Audit defaults: Review any feature that changes data location or ownership. If an action can remove user access to a local copy, treat it as high risk and require explicit opt-in.
- Improve visibility: Implement migration previews, progress indicators, and easy rollback options. Provide one-click ways to restore pre-migration state.
- Staged rollouts and canaries: Use non-destructive canaries to validate behaviour in real-world conditions before a full release.
- Legal and product alignment: Coordinate with legal and compliance teams to ensure user contracts and terms reflect real behaviours — not just hopes.
- Design for recoverability: Ensure backups and versioning are defaulted on where loss would be catastrophic.
Regulation, marketplaces and the responsibility gap
Part of the problem is systemic. Large platforms operate in spaces where users have little bargaining power and markets are concentrated. That’s one reason European policy interventions such as the Digital Markets Act and broader consumer safeguards matter — they aim to rebalance defaults, transparency and interoperability. Similarly, control exerted by app stores can amplify platform power; consider how distribution rules shape what behaviour reaches users. When marketplaces and platforms converge, the responsibility gap widens: who is accountable when things go wrong?
Example: how other companies handled dangerous migrations
Contrast OneDrive’s case with how some enterprise SaaS vendors handle schema or storage migrations. Companies that avoid customer harm typically take three steps: advance notice with explicit opt-in, automated backups and a rollback window. For example, several enterprise backup providers create immutable snapshots before any migration and retain them for a defined period — a simple, low-cost insurance policy that preserves trust. Product leaders should borrow that playbook for consumer and enterprise-facing features alike.
What this means for product strategy
Trust is a product feature. The next time your roadmap includes changes that affect user data, treat trust preservation as a first-class requirement. That means measurement (NPS, support volume, data-loss incidents), engineering guardrails, and cross-functional sign-off. It also means being vocal about what you will not ship because it risks user control. Saying no is a product leadership skill.
If regulators and marketplaces lag, product teams must lead. Build defaults that favour user control, bake in recoverability, and make transparency a KPI. Otherwise we’ll keep seeing incidents where a trusted app feels indistinguishable from a malicious one — and the longer that continues, the more users will lose their data and their faith.
Start by running a “data-migration safety” audit for any product you own. If you find gaps, prioritise fixes above new convenience features. The cost of inaction is not only support tickets: it’s the erosion of the most valuable asset a product can have — trust.
Leave a Reply