
Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website - dylanfw
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/judge-orders-tech-company-to-release-web-user-data-from-anti-trump-website/2017/08/24/19abeac4-88e7-11e7-a50f-e0d4e6ec070a_story.html
======
jdavis703
I'm not really surprised at this. I was in DC for the inauguration at an
officially permitted protest. Afterwards I'm heading back on the Metro with a
small sign saying "illegitimate president." When I get to the platform level
there are several armed people in camoflauge, I'm assuming military, but I'm
not 100% positive. I'm told by one of them that I need to leave the station
immediately. I responded "is this a joke?" (Hindsight 20/20 that probably
wasn't the best idea) and she says "no" as more armed people start
approaching. Needless to say I left the station, but at that moment I realized
something was different this time. You may disagree with the message I was
carrying, but having military (or their look-a-likes) booting out people with
messages against the official government line is pretty scary.

~~~
enraged_camel
Stuff like this is why we need to have more political discussions on HN. If we
don't talk about these issues openly and try to come up with solutions, we
will look back and wonder how we managed to spend this era of USA's transition
to fascism discussing utterly trivial stuff like the latest JavaScript
frameworks.

To paraphrase the famous saying, evil succeeds when good men and women do
nothing. I have seen this happen in my own country. Don't want to see it
happen in the USA as well.

~~~
jbergstroem
The same reason the Go 1.9 changelog won't be discussed in political forums,
opinions on USA's political landscape surely has a better home on the Internet
than here.

~~~
jdavis703
Most sites are either echo chambers or fighting cages. The civility of Hacker
News makes it a great place for not having shouting matches. Perhaps you know
of other political sites with a HN-like community?

~~~
yodsanklai
> The civility of Hacker News makes it a great place for not having shouting
> matches

Maybe, but maybe we'll lose this civility if we encourage this type of
discussions.

------
andy_ppp
This is terrifying; am I reading it correctly that the government is, on
behalf of the President, going after people who have opposed him and is
starting a register maybe of those persons who hurt the feelings of the
glorious leader? I wonder how far down the rabbit hole we are going :-(

~~~
ptero
While I am strongly opposed to this warrant as being ridiculously too broad, I
think you are off the mark.

The government is not investigating those who hurt Trump's feelings (does he
have any? sorry :) ). It is the law enforcement that is going after violent
rioters whatever their political views are. I hope it does and keeps doing it
every time there is a violent riot.

To me, the problem is in trying to grab a lot of private information in the
hopes of easily finding leads. Instead they should focus on other sources: I
suspect DC has all sorts of video monitors and was swarming with agents during
the inauguration. Cannot this serve as the source of leads? Maybe cops can
walk around some more and talk to people? I doubt a crowd can riot without
leaving traces to the identities of a number of rioters. My 2c.

~~~
andy_ppp
Hmmmm. Seems like a really really big coincidence, but okay. I presume this
information will be released by the court once it’s used in evidence or can it
be sealed only for this dubious case.

------
jakebasile
There's lots of disturbing internet precedents being set in the last few
weeks, both legal and corporate policy. I try not to be hyperbolic but I
really am beginning to worry about the future of freedom of expression and
association on the net.

~~~
metaphorm
I don't think its hyperbole. This is deeply concerning. We're entering a new
era of authoritarianism.

~~~
to_bpr
More accurately we're entering a new era of politically slanted selective
memories.

See: The bulk phone data collection programs instituted by the Patriot Act,
the vast expansion of NSA data collection (of us all) under the Obama
administration, the straight-to-the-wire tapping of critical internet
infrastructure and providers such as Google, Microsoft etc. enabled by the
establishment of the secret FISA court which has never denied a warrant, and
so much more.

Let's also not forget the persecution endured by the whistleblowers for the
above institutions by the Obama regime.

Set your partisan, hyperbolic "outrage" aside.

~~~
Taek
Should we not be outraged though? Everything listed in both the patent and the
grandparent is worrying to me. I feel like I owe 80% of my identity to my
activities and time on the Internet. Many my age feel the same.

My home is under attack.

~~~
dingo_bat
The thing is that it has been under attack for a long time now, and acting as
if some new threat is active is disingenuous and partisan.

~~~
SomeStupidPoint
I don't think people are acting as if it's a new threat, but rather alarmed
that it's reached the levels it has.

That is _new_ , even if it has been ramping up a long time.

~~~
to_bpr
What stands out to me personally about this is that I'm 99% sure the
administration could have silently achieved the same results through a FISA
ordered warrant, but chose to go public in what I'm perceiving to be sending a
message.

The Obama administration also sent messages but they seem to have been ignored
willingly or not. Remember when the intelligence services entered the offices
of the free press in the U.K. and forced the destruction of computer
equipment?

The warning signs have been here for years. If the loud mouthed Trump is what
triggers a movement to change things then so be it.

~~~
willstrafach
> Remember when the intelligence services entered the offices of the free
> press in the U.K. and forced the destruction of computer equipment?

This was not under any direction from President Obama, this was GCHQ as most
of the Snowden leaks were their documents.

------
twoquestions
How did this travesty pass 4th Amendment muster?

"Yes Mr. Bar Owner, a few of your patrons stole a car a few weeks back. We'll
need the names and addresses of all the people who visited this place for the
last year please."

~~~
tptacek
Wait, don't the police get similar information dumps from similar fact
patterns kind of routinely? I know they can't properly use dragnet searches as
a _starting point_ for an investigation, but if they have a reasonably
specific criminal inquiry they're pursuing, can't they get their hands on a
lot of stuff?

I'm not sure the fact pattern you're providing really illustrates the concern.

Rather, I think the concern is that the prosecutors have what appears to be a
very diffuse criminal inquiry, and that the specific information they're
looking for has a clear side-effect of intimidating lawful protesters. The
concern is that the "investigation" is a pretense for intimidation.

You can't say that about the police investigating bar patrons for a specific
car theft or whatever.

~~~
twoquestions
> Wait, don't the police get similar information dumps from similar fact
> patterns kind of routinely?

It does, and that's bad. Hopefully more people start realizing this.

> The concern is that the "investigation" is a pretense for intimidation.

Absolutely, and that's the toxic cherry on this poisoned cake.

------
mnm1
Dreamhost is a hosting provider. Why do they keep these records in the first
place and especially over six months later? It seems to me that there will be
a big market for hosts that don't keep such logs or delete them after a
specified period where they might be useful to debug issues (24-48hrs).

~~~
fraserharris
They received a preservation order requiring they do not delete the logs for
this domain for period of time prior to the inauguration.

~~~
ArchReaper
How is that legally sound?

~~~
icebraining
_18 USC § 2703(f) - A provider of wire or electronic communication services or
a remote computing service, upon the request of a governmental entity, shall
take all necessary steps to preserve records and other evidence in its
possession pending the issuance of a court order or other process._

~~~
ArchReaper
OK, let me be more specific. How is the request legally sound?

~~~
icebraining
I don't understand your question. What's there to be legally sound about? The
Feds make a request, the site has to comply.

~~~
ArchReaper
Why are they allowed to request this with no reason? Why can the government
dictate what I'm doing with no legal basis?

------
alansammarone
Every week we're seeing more and more news like that - whether its the
government or internet companies - in which people's right to privacy and to
freedom online are being severely threatened. I'm not an american, but I grew
up seeing the USA as an example of freedom and progress. It's very sad that
this is becoming less and less true every passing day.

We must build a decentralised web. Now.

~~~
nnfy
The outrage on this site is more selective than I would have anticipated. If
you think your rights have only been eroded over the last few weeks, you've
been drinking kool-aid.

~~~
icebraining
The parent's post makes zero reference to how long they think this has been
going on.

~~~
nnfy
The GP starts his post with "every week," and I interpreted it as being
structured to indicate a recent trend.

It is ambiguous, I admit, but I don't think I'm reaching with my
understanding.

------
nnfy
>Prosecutors’ original request in July would have yielded IP addresses for
about 1.3 million users of the site, court filings show.

Whether I agree or not, here is another example of sensationalism which has
made me distrustful of news media. How many of those "1.3m users" were
actually unique?

------
ArchReaper
This is absolutely insane. I hope this eventually reaches an appeals court
that understands the 4th amendment.

------
kchoudhu
Note to self: purge records. Religiously.

You can't hand over what you don't have.

~~~
mtgx
One more reason (other than data breaches) for why services should look for
ways not just to minimize storage of records and data on users that they don't
_absolutely need_ to provide the service and that alone, but also to offer
users way to encrypt the data with their own key.

------
dsfyu404ed
Buried in the article is a key detail.

>Prosecutors earlier this week scaled back their request and changed it to
seek emails associated with Disruptj20.org and email addresses of third
parties associated with the website, such as individuals who volunteered to
help provide supplies or support to rioters.

>As part of his ruling, Morin ordered prosecutors to tell him who was going to
review the data DreamHost provides and, once that information is found,
explain to him why prosecutors deem the information “critical” to their case.

>Under Morin’s ruling, any information prosecutors find unrelated to the
rioting would be sealed and could not be shared by prosecutors with anyone
else or any other government authority.

~~~
nnfy
>Under Morin’s ruling, any information prosecutors find unrelated to the
rioting would be sealed and could not be shared by prosecutors with anyone
else or any other government authority.

May as well be unsealed because of parallel construction.

~~~
dsfyu404ed
If they want to do parallel construction they can already get the base
information a handful of other ways that don't as directly open them up to the
allegation of parallel construction.

------
trgv
I wonder if this isn't part of the games that prosecutors play. It seems like
prosecutors might request the largest amount of data possible, knowing that
someone will object and they'll get only a fraction of that.

In general the logic in the article doesn't follow. It says 200 people have
been charged, so why not request information relating only to those 200
people? Regardless, internet messages can't prove participation in a violent
riot, so I would assume the prosecutors have other, harder, evidence. if not
they're just wasting everyone's time.

------
appleflaxen
why does the site seem like a place to investigate a riot? were there posters
saying "I'm leaving now to go riot"?

If there is nothing specific, then why is this allowable at all?

And if there is something specific, then why can't they request those specific
messages?

~~~
makomk
DisruptJ20 appears to have been created for the quite specific purpose of
organising people to disrupt the presidential inauguration through illegal
"direct action" tactics, with particular focus on teaching people to interfere
with police checkpoints, resist arrest, etc. (By the way, remember those
photos of the endless empty seats at the inauguration parade? The site in
question has a post up bragging about how they shut down most of the security
checkpoints, stopping people from entering:
[https://archive.is/SZwAO](https://archive.is/SZwAO) For some reason that
didn't make the press, then or now.)

~~~
1_2__4
I suspect because it's a complete and utter lie and there's no evidence to
support it.

------
sbov
The article is pretty vague on the specifics of the ramifications of the new
request. It says 1.3 million, but that seems to be in reference to the broader
request. From what I can tell the more narrow request both narrows down the
timeframe, and specifies disruptj20.org visitors? It's hard for me to tell
from the article.

------
irascible
I am spartacus@192.168.1.13

------
xienze
Pretend we're talking about Daily Stormer and Charlottesville and I bet you'd
see things differently.

~~~
williamscales
"Yes Mr. Bar Owner, a few of your patrons incited a racist mob a few weeks
back. We'll need the names and addresses of all the people who visited this
place for the last year please."

Nope, I still feel the same. It's going too far.

~~~
0xbear
Pretend further that an angry mob at work would get you fired if they don't
like your stance on this issue.

~~~
spaceribs
Pretend they have first amendment rights to tell you to your face and through
their actions that your opinion is garbage and not something they respect.

*adding: I find it amazing some people are up in arms about people getting fired for their opinions, maybe you should direct your anger to "Right to Work" laws anti-union folks have pushed down our throats everywhere?

There used to be a due process before someone was fired, I wonder where that
went and who took it away?

~~~
AndrewUnmuted
At work, your free speech rights are under the limitations of your employer.
You should do some reading on the concept of positive vs negative rights.

~~~
Vivtek
Pretty sure nobody in Charlottesville was actually at work at the time.

------
koolba
> Prosecutors John Borchert and Jennifer Kerkhoff argued that their request
> had to be somewhat broad because they have no idea who was associated with
> the rioting through the website until they review the data.

For people who think this is wrong, assuming you accept the premise that they
should be investigating rioters, what alternative is there to find out who
they are?

~~~
jasonjei
In the old days before computers, I assume, one wouldn't have to hand over all
"database" records. If one were being requested to hand over all patient
records, that would probably be a small mountain of data.

I think technology has made data very easy to transport, and modern day
governments have taken advantage of this sort of fishing expedition.

~~~
horusthecat
This isn't true. Even 10 years ago it was pretty normal for litigation
involving the SEC to routinely have half a million or more hard copy pages
shipping between law firms and the gov't, and 10 years ago about half of all
documents that printing and scanning vendors were handling in discovery were
paper. The American legal system and US-based law firms are notorious for that
sort of thing. See also Iron Mountain.

