Live data from Hacker News

Cloudflare expands its government warrant canaries

techcrunch.com

161–163 of 163 posts

Re: Cloudflare expands its government warrant canaries

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming they can't compel speech, this would require the canary to be updated and PGP signed daily by someone that can represent the company. Perhaps a principal officer or a board member? Even then, unless your contract states that the canary is managed in a particular way, they can simply lie. I can put a "canary" on a site and update it daily, even if every three letter agency were logged in and watching you real…

A canary in itself does not offer any cryptographic proof. The entire foundation is that the government cannot legally compel speech. The canary does not protect you against the service provider and nobody has claimed that. The theory is that it protects you against NSLs that would otherwise force the service provider to not disclose the NSL. Sometimes a canary is attached to a public financial report or something el…

That is basically what I am saying. Unless all of this is tied into a counter-signed contract, it is all rather meaningless. I would suggest that almost nobody has such an agreement with their end user service providers.

I am no lawyer, but I don't see a problem with putting a lie into a financial statement that is in no way related to financial data. It would just be disregarded as unrelated to financial reporting. I am also not aware of any companies doing this. I could see this causing a deeper dive into an audit however.

Re: Cloudflare expands its government warrant canaries

#162
post #78
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except all those are examples of acting in bad faith. The question at hand here is whether the government can compel you to keep the canary in place after a search/siezure. The only bad faith might be using warrant canaries knowing that they may still be able to be compelled legally to comply.

"The question at hand here is whether the government can compel you to keep the canary in place after a search/siezure." I personally (which is the only viewpoint that matters here) would consider falsely updating the canary to be acting in bad faith. I would consider it to be morally negative. I consider it to be of the same kind as the other examples I gave of acting in bad faith. YMMV.

Wow, so you are saying you will go to jail if given the choice between that and not updating your warrant canary? Brava, but talk is cheap.

Re: Cloudflare expands its government warrant canaries

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://canarywatch.org/ does essentially this. Crap: just noticed they stopped updating it.

even the server is not reachable for me anymore.. maybe crowdsource a new website?

Good idea, will look into that.
Post reply on HN