31–40 of 157 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Panic. When cornered people make strange moves. It's easy enough to look at this rationally after the fact but I'm trying to imagine being in the focal point of such a powerplay and I'm not sure I'd make every move by the book.
Ok. You see, though, how his holding action probably harmed his users, right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are Aldous Huxley's version of totalitarianism, where we are drugged and entertained into submission.
Yeah, but I'm wondering more about the inaction of other federal powers. Congress, President, I don't really know whose job it is, but someone in this country should have the power to deal with rogue government agencies? They don't appoint themselves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I truly don't understand why nothing is done about that. Why doesn't anyone lose their job over this, let alone go to jail? My suspicion is that the FBI and various three-letter-agencies have dirt on most of the elected representatives. The mass surveillance apparatus is the perfect tool for collecting blackmail material on current and future leaders.
That is certainly the most amusing and dramatic explanation of what's happening. A simpler explanation might just be that Congress broadly supports what DOJ is doing, and cares a lot less about the integrity of specific online services than they do about DOJ's role in combating terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and foreign intelligence services.
Key quote: "According to the Justice Department’s inspector general, the FBI issued a staggering 143,074 NSLs between 2003 and 2005. And every NSL was accompanied by a categorical and permanent gag order." That's almost one per 2000 americans. I wonder how does this number compare to actual court orders.
Another key quote: > I found it particularly difficult to be silent about my concerns while Congress was debating the reauthorization of the Patriot Act in 2005 and early 2006. If I hadn't been under a gag order, I would have contacted members of Congress to discuss my experiences and to advocate changes in the law. The inspector general's report confirms that Congress lacked a complete picture of the problem during…
This is reporting that Nick Merrill, who was under a gag order restricting his ability to talk about a subpoena he received in 2004, is no longer gagged. It links to an editorial he wrote (anonymously) about that gag order, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03... , in which he writes: > "Based on the context of the demand -- a context that the FBI still won't let me discuss publicly -- I suspe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is certainly the most amusing and dramatic explanation of what's happening. A simpler explanation might just be that Congress broadly supports what DOJ is doing, and cares a lot less about the integrity of specific online services than they do about DOJ's role in combating terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and foreign intelligence services.
The FBI's founding director had this very tactic as his modus operandi. It isn't hard to speculate that the culture of the FBI has supported political extortion for well over 80 years now.
"The FBI is run by the modern equivalent of J. Edgar Hoover" is also an amusing and dramatic interpretation of the facts we have now. But they don't square well with other facts we know, such as Ashcroft's hospital-bed refusal to reauthorize STELLARWIND. And that was John Ashcroft, who is not exactly a cuddly Sesame Street muppet on these issues.
In case I need to make this clear:
I don't think sacrificing the integrity of online services for DOJ goals is a good tradeoff. The wins seem very marginal, and the long-term costs are huge. But I'm a technologist with a security/privacy concentration, and Congress is composed mostly of lawyers.
Facebook: https://govtrequests.facebook.com/country/United%20States/20...
Google: https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/U...
Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/transparency
More could be found at: https://www.accessnow.org/pages/transparency-reporting-index
This is reporting that Nick Merrill, who was under a gag order restricting his ability to talk about a subpoena he received in 2004, is no longer gagged. It links to an editorial he wrote (anonymously) about that gag order, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03... , in which he writes: > "Based on the context of the demand -- a context that the FBI still won't let me discuss publicly -- I suspe…
> By all appearances, a significant chunk of the US law enforcement apparatus has simply gone rogue, stopped respecting Congress and the courts and is instead focused on increasing its own power. I truly don't understand why nothing is done about that. Why doesn't anyone lose their job over this, let alone go to jail? I mean, I've gotten used to such indifference in Russia, but US seemed like the country that shouldn…
See also: military industrial complex, corporate lobbying, the blue line, security theater, budget in-fighting
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok. You see, though, how his holding action probably harmed his users, right?
Still a hero though.
To me, there's a difference between a "hero" and "not the worst person in a particular conflict".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another key quote: > I found it particularly difficult to be silent about my concerns while Congress was debating the reauthorization of the Patriot Act in 2005 and early 2006. If I hadn't been under a gag order, I would have contacted members of Congress to discuss my experiences and to advocate changes in the law. The inspector general's report confirms that Congress lacked a complete picture of the problem during…
Wow - it's astonishing that you can't even speak about NSLs with people who (or at least some of whom) have top secret clearance...
I'm not sure of the rules today, but 10 years ago clearances in some agencies/departments didn't even transfer to other agencies due to differing requirements.
(I'm not saying that this system is good, just describing how it works.)