

National Security Letter: loophole? - plg

It&#x27;s been widely publicized that if one receives a national security letter (NSL) one is prohibited by law to reveal that fact. So if you receive an NSL and someone later asks you if you have, you are not allowed to say yes.<p>Are you allowed to say no?<p>Along the same lines, if someone who hasn&#x27;t received an NSL is asked whether they have, are they allowed to say yes?<p>I presume someone who hasn&#x27;t received an NSL is allowed to confirm that they haven&#x27;t ... Or are all citizens required by law to answer &quot;I&#x27;m not allowed to answer&quot; if asked, even if they haven&#x27;t received an NSL?<p>If we all agree to answer &quot;I can&#x27;t answer&quot; if we have received one, and &quot;no&quot; (or &quot;yes&quot;) if we haven&#x27;t, then would that (a) be against the law and (b) be a way around this issue?<p>Just asking a hypothetical legal question of course, not suggesting anyone do anything of the sort...
======
dangrossman
Title 18 Section 2709 (c) of the US Code:

> ...no wire or electronic communications service provider, or officer,
> employee, or agent thereof, shall disclose to any person (other than those
> to whom such disclosure is necessary to comply with the request or an
> attorney to obtain legal advice or legal assistance with respect to the
> request) that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained
> access to information or records under this section. The request shall
> notify the person or entity to whom the request is directed of the
> nondisclosure requirement...

 _How_ you disclose is irrelevant. If you tell everyone in advance "I will
throw rotten eggs from my roof if I receive an NSL", receive an NSL, then
start throwing rotten eggs from your roof, you're going to be sanctioned.

Let's boil it down to this: would a reasonable judge think you are complying
with the spirit of the nondisclosure agreement? He's not going to compute a
mathematical proof about information transfer to answer that question.

~~~
plg
So it seems to me that any citizen who answers the question "have you received
an NSL" differently, before vs after they receive an NSL, can be found in
violation. So by extension, if you are EVER asked this question before you
have received an NSL, you had better remember your answer, because after you
receive an NSL if you don't give the identical answer, you can be found in
violation???

~~~
plg
And so what happens if you answer "no" if asked, before you receive an NSL,
whether you have received one... Are you then required by law to answer "no"
again? Because if you change your answer, then that's a bit flip and you have
transmitted information?

What if you answer "yes" before? Are you required to answer "yes" after ?

------
Uhhrrr
I remember reading about a service provider who put up such a dead man switch
- a web page saying they hadn't been served an NSL, which they would
presumably take down once served.

Here we go:
[http://brokenhut.livejournal.com/285348.html](http://brokenhut.livejournal.com/285348.html)

------
Spoom
A judge isn't stupid. They'll see through any trickery that has the result of
disclosing the NSL. If you have to lie to avoid disclosing, the law requires
that you lie.

