Between May and July 2026, The Engine Room collaborated with the Guardian Project to research how Indigenous communities and other at-risk users across Latin America use Butter Box, a tool designed to generate a local Wi-Fi network and allow access to content, apps, maps and an internal chat, without an internet connection. Like Butter Box, offline knowledge sharing tools are particularly important for indigenous, environmental and land defenders in Latin America who are at the frontlines of protecting local knowledge, languages, territories and cultural practices and whose work is increasingly surveilled and targeted in the region.
Over the past few months, we had the opportunity to engage closely with Butter Box users, many of whom are based in Mexico, Colombia and Venezuela, to learn about opportunities to strengthen the usability and security of this tool for their activism, communities and cultural practices. In the process, we found valuable lessons that may be relevant for our community partners, tool developers and civil society organizations that are looking to integrate offline information sharing tools into their digital security toolkits.
This post shares three key findings from our research, along with security tips for organizations using Butter Box or similar tools. An executive summary of our findings can be found at the end of the post.
#1 Offline information sharing tools can build data sovereignty
Offline knowledge sharing tools, such as Butter Box, have significant potential to help at-risk users stay connected and protected when internet access is unstable or insecure. However, we found that users also saw offline sharing as a form of building shared community infrastructure. Teachers used it to share educational content in the classroom, language activists used it to preserve local languages, community knowledge and their own cultural forms, and, amid recent natural disasters in Latin America, there is emerging interest in using tools such as Butter Box to support communication and coordination during emergencies, when everything else fails.
To make the most of these possibilities, organizations should create opportunities for communities to safely explore and adapt these tools to their own needs and cultural approaches. This includes providing guidance on responsible data management, localized support, rhythms and trusted local contacts who can provide help when needed. Giving communities space to experiment can help ensure that offline tools remain flexible and responsive to different educational and cultural community needs, while remaining focused on dynamics specific to the Global Majority.
#2 Community relationships and trust are key to developing ownership over these tools
Second, we found that continued use of tools for information and knowledge sharing can depend on strong community relationships and on having specific people who take responsibility for managing the tool. People felt more confident using Butter Box when it was introduced by someone they know and trust, or when they could have access to examples of how it is being used in a context similar to their own. Because of this dynamic, knowledge about the tool was often concentrated in one person, meaning that this knowledge and continuity can be lost when that person changes roles, leaves, or no longer has time to support the tool. This is especially important for communities with limited access to devices, where families share one or two phones between all members.
To support more sustainable and locally situated use of offline sharing tools, we recommend that organizations focus on building community ownership around them rather than only contacting and supporting a single person to maintain and support the tool. This could include training several community members, creating accessible handover kits in local languages, or planning activities for people to learn and experiment with the tool together. A handover kit can be as simple as a one-page checklist covering where the device is kept, basic troubleshooting, and local decisions about its use. This should be passed on whenever responsibility for the tool changes.
#3 Offline does not automatically mean secure
Finally, we found that being “offline” or hosting locally does not automatically make the information stored on these tools secure, even if they have been designed with strong security features. Security will also depend on the practices and habits around the tool, as well as the security of the devices that connect to it, which may be old or no longer receive security updates.
We recommend that organizations take a holistic approach to security when introducing offline tools. This means building community capacity to manage and protect sensitive information, discussing the physical and digital security risks associated with losing or having a device confiscated, and helping users understand how the security of connected devices can affect the safety of the wider network. Offline tools can reduce some digital risks, but their security ultimately depends on how they are introduced, maintained, and cared for by the community.
Security tips for organizations planning to use offline sharing tools
If you are a civil society organization or grassroots collective operating in a context of low connectivity and are planning to integrate offline sharing tools, we also offer the following recommendations to ensure a safe and secure experience:
- Vet any software before loading it onto the tool: Our research found that some communities were loading their own custom-built apps onto the device to distribute to their members, without any security review of those apps. For an offline sharing tool that community members trust, they may assume that everything on it is safe, so unchecked software is unlikely to be questioned. Before any application is loaded onto an offline sharing tool, it’s worth asking where it came from, who built it, what data it collects and whether anyone has checked what it actually does.
- Decide in advance what happens if the device is seized or lost: We highly recommend that communities plan for this more concretely and develop a plan for when this happens, including who in the community needs to be informed, what was in the device at the time, and what steps to take next. This is especially important in contexts where a seized device stores information that could put individuals at risk.
- Understand that the tool is only as secure as the devices that connect to it: We found that many community members rely on older mobile devices that may no longer receive security updates. Communities should consider device security as part of supporting their members to stay safe, including providing practical guidance on keeping devices and apps they use on their own devices updated, identifying and addressing any signs of compromise to their members’ devices, and how to configure their devices for better security. Where devices cannot be adequately secured or updated, the group should consider limiting the sensitivity of information shared through the tool.
- Appoint more than one security champion: As stated before, we recommend having more than one community member able to take care of the tool. Having several security champions who know how to take care of and secure the tool, and who can explain and practically teach security skills to the community members is very important. This ensures that if one community member who administers the tool leaves or changes roles, key knowledge and skills are not lost while the tool and the safety of the community can still be ensured.
We would like to extend our special thanks to the local participants who generously shared their experiences, insights and time with us. We learned from each one of them: the teacher, musician, psychologist, media organization, feminist activists, and everyone who attended our workshop in San Cristóbal and engaged with us at the Rising Voices fair. Their willingness to spend an hour with us and share their perspectives over two months helped us better understand their needs and provided valuable guidance for the Butter Box team and TER as we continue learning about intercultural approaches, technologies and autonomous infrastructures. We are also deeply grateful to our partners at the Guardian Project and Butterbox for their collaboration and support throughout the research process. You can find the copy of the Executive Summary here.