The recent bankruptcy filing of iRobot, the U.S. pioneer and manufacturer of Roomba robotic vacuum cleaners, has raised serious economic and national security concerns, as the company has effectively come under the control of Shenzhen-based Picea Robotics, a Chinese firm. In an op-ed published in National Review, Sunny Cheung, Global Fellow at the Research Institute for Democracy, Society, and Emerging Technology (DSET), argues that the case goes far beyond commercial competition and touches upon risks involving America’s leading smart home robotics platform, sensitive data, and long-term software development trajectories.
Cheung emphasizes that the transaction should be understood within the broader context of U.S.–China competition in the robotics sector. He notes that China has sought to compete with U.S. robotics firms through state-backed industrial strategies, including large-scale manufacturing, preferential financing, and comprehensive supply chain integration. Titled “Why China’s Interest in iRobot Deserves Scrutiny,” the op-ed highlights that Picea Robotics was originally a design and manufacturing partner for iRobot. At the same time, iRobot itself has a clear dual-use technological lineage: its early tracked robot, PackBot, was deployed by the U.S. Department of Defense for bomb disposal and reconnaissance missions. This history underscores that robotics technologies retain inherent dual-use characteristics even after changes in corporate ownership.
Cheung further argues that the development of China’s robotics industry is not the result of isolated, market-based competition. Rather, the Chinese government has actively expanded global market share through national-level industrial policies while treating consumer products as critical testing grounds for technological scaling. He cites Germany’s 2016 approval of the acquisition of industrial robotics leader KUKA by a Chinese firm as a widely recognized case that accelerated China’s rise and technological autonomy in industrial automation.
The iRobot case also raises significant cybersecurity concerns. Modern robotic vacuum cleaners function as highly networked, mobile Internet-of-Things (IoT) sensing platforms. Equipped with LiDAR, cameras, and simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) technologies, these devices can precisely map residential layouts while continuously collecting data on users’ movement patterns, daily routines, and behavioral habits. Cheung warns that control over a major U.S. smart home platform and access to American user data could allow China’s robotics industry to further strengthen its domestic robotics and AI ecosystem through data-driven feedback loops, advancing Beijing’s self-sufficiency strategy in advanced technologies.
The op-ed further notes that under China’s legal and institutional environment, corporate data can be incorporated into the state’s governance and national security apparatus. In recent years, Beijing has actively pursued the integration of consumer data, algorithms, and cloud infrastructure into national-level data systems. Cheung stresses that although iRobot has claimed that its data will never leave the United States, Washington should still pursue rigorous legal action through the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and block the transaction if necessary.
Cheung concludes that even if CFIUS review mechanisms are triggered, blocking a single transaction is insufficient to address the broader data security challenges of the IoT era or to counter China’s pursuit of self-sufficiency and leadership in advanced technologies. What is urgently needed, he argues, is a comprehensive national robotics strategy to ensure that China does not gain long-term and irreversible advantages. The case also highlights the necessity of accelerating regulatory action by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to ensure that IoT devices meet baseline cybersecurity standards.
