Loading page…
The restrictions took effect in July, not with this week’s disclosure. They include a 60-day removal requirement and a prohibition on future purchases.
Listen to this story
The order bars federal civilian executive agencies from both retaining covered DeepSeek technology and buying it in the future, including third-party products built using DeepSeek implementations. Signed by DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin on July 24 and effective in late July, it was made public in October; that disclosure did not restart the 60-day removal period. The scope excludes the Department of Defense, the intelligence community and national security systems, making this a targeted procurement and systems-removal restriction rather than a government-wide ban.
DHS cited data sent to and stored on servers in China, security and privacy vulnerabilities, and risks from inaccurate, biased or harmful model outputs.
Agencies were urged to monitor network traffic, increase logging and use data-loss-prevention controls during removals.
CISA’s FASCSA Order Implementation Team will oversee implementation.
Federal civilian agencies were given 60 days to remove DeepSeek technology under an order the Department of Homeland Security made public on October 19, 2026. The restrictions reach beyond DeepSeek’s own products to third-party offerings built using its technology. But the disclosure is new; the order took effect in late July.
DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin signed the order on July 24 under the Federal Acquisition Supply Chain Security Act of 2018, according to MeriTalk. DHS disclosed it through a Federal Register notice scheduled for publication on October 20. The public notice therefore does not mark the start of a new 60-day removal period.
The order combines two requirements: agencies must remove covered products and services from their IT systems, and they cannot procure the technology in the future. It addresses both technology already installed and subsequent purchases, rather than simply restricting new contracts.
Its coverage includes products and services developed by Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence Co., Ltd. and its affiliates. Third-party offerings built using DeepSeek implementations are also covered. Buying through another supplier does not, by itself, place a product outside the restriction.
The directive applies to federal civilian executive branch agencies. It excludes procurements by the Department of Defense and the intelligence community, as well as national security systems. Those exclusions define this order’s reach; it is not a government-wide removal directive covering every federal system.
DeepSeek presents multiple threat vectors that pose significant risk to the cybersecurity of U.S. government systems
Department of Homeland Security, in the signed order, as quoted by MeriTalk
DHS’s stated rationale centers partly on where information goes. The department cited DeepSeek’s collection and storage of user data in China, including the transmission of user prompts and AI-generated responses to servers there. It said those practices could expose sensitive information about U.S. users and government programs.
The department also cited security and privacy vulnerabilities identified through forensic analyses. Its concerns extended to model outputs: DHS warned that DeepSeek models could produce inaccurate, biased or harmful content. These are the department’s stated grounds for the restriction, not independently verified findings by Superpower Daily.
Removal was accompanied by advice to watch for information leaving agency systems. DHS urged agencies to monitor network traffic, increase logging and use data loss prevention controls during the process. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency will oversee implementation through its FASCSA Order Implementation Team.
Story updates
DeepSeek’s exclusion from U.S. civilian government systems drew a diplomatic challenge from Beijing on October 20, 2026. China criticized the restrictions after the Department of Homeland Security publicly disclosed an order requiring agencies to remove the company’s technology—including third-party products built using it—and barring future purchases.
At a regular briefing in Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said China would safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies. Her response challenged the national-security framing of the U.S. action, arguing that science, technology and trade should not be politicized.
China consistently opposes the overstretching of the concept of national security and the politicizing of science, technology, economic and trade issues.
The DHS directive applies to federal civilian agencies and reaches beyond software bearing DeepSeek’s name. Agencies must remove DeepSeek and affiliated products, along with third-party products and services developed using DeepSeek, from their IT systems. The scope therefore includes another supplier’s offering when it is built using the company’s technology.
A separate procurement prohibition bars civilian agencies from buying DeepSeek products and services. Together, the requirements address both technology already on government systems and future purchases. This is a restriction on federal civilian use and procurement, rather than a nationwide prohibition on access to DeepSeek.
The timing separates the public disclosure from the underlying decision. DHS made the notice public on October 19. Bloomberg Law reported that the accompanying order was dated July 24, 2026, and signed by Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin. Beijing’s response followed this week’s disclosure of a months-old order, not a newly signed ban.
The Federal Register notice alleges that DeepSeek’s models present “multiple threat vectors.” DHS cited the location of the company’s servers in China and the possibility that Chinese authorities could access private company infrastructure and sensitive U.S. data. That is the department’s stated security concern, not a finding that such access occurred.
DeepSeek did not immediately respond to the Associated Press’s request for comment. Its open-source models remain widely available, including in the United States, and are mostly free to use. That availability sits alongside the government restriction: access to the models does not make them eligible for use in covered civilian-agency systems.
bloomberglaw.comLoading discussion...
Join the conversation
Explain whether those products should face a separate security review.
Be the first to share a perspective or an experience.
Reader comments
Newest comments first. Replies stay oldest first.