
Google Reveals It Received Secret FBI Subpoena - aestetix
https://theintercept.com/2016/10/14/freed-from-gag-order-google-reveals-it-received-secret-fbi-subpoena/
======
cwkoss
I wonder if anyone has ever sent a fake National Security Letter. The
inability to speak about or verify these letters is concerning to me.

Seems like you could cause a lot of damage by sending a fake NSL ordering a
company to send you private data. At minimum it would cost the company several
thousand dollars in legal fees to determine its fake.

~~~
tedunangst
Where would the fake NSL demand you send the collected info?

~~~
robryk
"FBI office" at an address where no (real) FBI office exists (with a slightly
obfuscated address that doesn't mention FBI by name, but something that sounds
like a department in FBI but isn't, so that the postal service doesn't get
suspicious).

------
appleflaxen
The insane thing about this is that it is wholly unnecessary. Why can't the
feds go court and get a search warrant if they really have anything more than
a "hunch". And if that's all they have, do we really want them issuing secret
orders with no public oversight at all? That's exactly where you need
scrutiny.

The current and previous administration is going to find out in a hurry why
checks and balances are important if Trump gets into office. He's exactly the
kind of chief executive who will be terrible to behold with that kind of
power.

~~~
adekok
> .. do we really want them issuing secret orders with no public oversight at
> all?

do _they_ want to issue secret orders with no public oversight at all?

Yes. Yes, they do.

------
Fej
There is zero surprise.

When a Three Letter Agency wants information, they get it. The current United
States government is the most powerful single entity to exist in human history
(insofar as it can be called a single entity). Especially those who frequent
HN should be well aware of that at this point.

Dear God I am depressed about our chances at this point. Reigning in who I
would call traitors seems impossible.

~~~
mSparks
I reckon Ive done just enough to waste their time including me in their letter
:)

Playing with honeypots much safer and more fun than active hacking.

~~~
Fej
> Playing with honeypots much safer and more fun than active hacking.

How so?

~~~
mSparks
how is it safer or how is it more fun?

The former, because it wont get you extradited, the later, well, that would be
telling.

lets just say there are a lot more organisations than a few analysts in
Maryland monitoring the internet and our communications, and they are
interested in much more than unhappy muslims. Then leave it at that.

------
M_Grey
Honestly at this point you just have to assume this is a nearly constant
reality.

~~~
bitskits
This is sadly true, but I think we also need to reject that this is the new
normal. We need to continue to push back firmly on secret government request
without oversight.

~~~
visarga
You can't put the genie back into the bottle. It has already escaped. In our
days, surveillance is being performed by all governments and many private
companies. For US to be the only country that doesn't do it, it would be
uncompetitive. We have to accept the new reality - ever since digital cameras
became popular (year 2000) and ever since cell phones became packed with
sensors and always on connectivity (and continuous auto-updates), hard drives
cheap and large, face recognition software efficient - there has been no way
to stop surveillance. It is an emergent situation based on a confluence of
technologies.

We need AI to protect privacy, capable of detecting information leaks and
unintended exposures right in the browser and OS, similar to an antivirus that
is always scanning the data flowing in the system. We need to have software
educating people about consequences and making it really easy to remain
private. It won't solve the problem fully, it's impossible to do that today.

~~~
ced
_In our days, surveillance is being performed by all governments and many
private companies. For US to be the only country that doesn 't do it, it would
be uncompetitive._

How does surveillance improve competitiveness?

~~~
Cozumel
Governments spy on other nations businesses, then pass the information back to
their companies who process to undercut the competition (because they have all
the information)

Here's China doing it to America [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/china-
business/10842339/A...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/china-
business/10842339/America-sues-China-over-corporate-spying.html)

'According to the indictment, five hackers “stole trade secrets” which allowed
Chinese companies to undercut their American competitors, or gave them
“insight into [their] strategy and vulnerabilities”. '

And here's America doing it to everyone else (including allies both domestic
and foreign) [https://theintercept.com/2014/09/05/us-governments-plans-
use...](https://theintercept.com/2014/09/05/us-governments-plans-use-economic-
espionage-benefit-american-corporations/)

~~~
wbl
Except that passing the information back never actually happened in The
Intercept article.

------
seanwilson
Given Google's size and how much information they have, you'd imagine they've
been subjected to every secret demand allowed.

Are there any good examples of a gag order like this which was reasonable?
When would they ever be justified?

~~~
rtkwe
The basic idea of of the gag order and not being able to reveal the details
has pretty sound roots in not tipping off the people being investigated. The
issue is they're incredibly broad so companies receiving them can't usually
even reveal the exact number received.

------
pistle
Anyone have a reference for how NSL's are estimated for the "hundreds of
thousands" reference in this article?

It seems more like ~20-30k/yr at this point from my cursory search.

I interpret "hundreds of thousands" to imply 200k+ which made me think...
dayum - that's a lot of fear.

~~~
jacquesm
20 to 30k / year times the number of years they are in use would easily get
you there.

~~~
pistle
The author says "hundreds of thousands of letters issued each year"

------
marme
The only reason this continues to go on is that no one is brave enough to risk
arrest and just publicly read the full contents of these NSLs when they get
them. Gag orders have only been declared constitutional when they are used to
protect someones right to a fair trial. No one has ever challenged a gag order
that protects a police investigation. It is much easier to challenge these gag
laws when you have been personally charged with violating them, then you have
a criminal trial you can appeal and escalate through to federal appeals and
the supreme court. Otherwise it is just civil suits that can be thrown out
easily as you cant justify why you need to take this to trial because you are
not suffering any monetary damages.

------
anondon
One of the solutions is to move to a model where all data that companies like
google have in their servers is encrypted by a key that only the user has in
his device.

The side effects are:

-No server side analysis/logging/sharing/selling to advertisers of the user's data

-All decryption takes place at the client side

-Targeting ads/content becomes impossible

-gag orders are rendered useless to seek user data from service providers

-Privacy

~~~
binaryanomaly
It exists you just need to use it:

[https://signal.org/](https://signal.org/)

[https://protonmail.com/](https://protonmail.com/)

and many others. Most people are too convenient or careless though to take the
(little) extra effort for privacy.

~~~
bogomipz
The literature for Protonmail looks really good, thanks for the tip. Can you
recommend them service-wise?

~~~
bas_ta
I started using Protonmail 2 weeks ago and I am quite satisfied (planning to
migrate all my communication from Gmail to Protonmail). It does feel slower
than Gmail (because of the decryption, but that's not that much of a problem).
Also, you have to use their own app, it cannot be connected to a mail client,
that's a bit of a downside, but I suppose I will be willing to make that
compromise.

