Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

mailman.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 91 posts

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#21

Post by mpyne »

jes5199 wrote: post #17
mpyne wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it's a real (if secret) court, so I assume it would be what normally happens for contempt of court.

What sort of consequences can they impose without revealing the existence of the secret court?

The existence of the court itself is not secret, the proceedings are. But they could issue a fine or jail sentence without leaking the rest of the proceedings themselves, if I understand the legal process right.

Edit: Way to mind-meld on the comments, team. Holy crap.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#23

Post by rayiner »

betterunix wrote: post #12
wslh wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and shareholders who care more about profits than morals I think this issue goes against shareholders because they can lose real customers feeling defrauded. It's realistic to expect legal actions against Google/Microsoft/etc operations outside US, mainly for Government accounts.

What makes you think these companies are going to lose any substantial number of customers? Most of the anger here is directed at the government, and it is only a small minority of people who even are angry about this. Only a very tiny minority of people will actually stop using Google or Facebook because of this incident.

This is the hear of it, isn't it? You have a whole bunch of people who don't care if Google uses automated scanning of their emails. You expect them to care if the NSA does it? Sure, there is some subset of people who will draw a distinction between the government and a private company, a distinction which isn't baseless, but most just don't care.

Also, look at it from the governments point of view. If you're NSA, do you really feel like you're violating intimate privacies to go through information people knowingly expose to one time acquantances on Facebook? The NSA is made of people, remember. How people view their own information enforces their understanding of where the line is.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#24

Post by steveklabnik »

jes5199 wrote: post #17
mpyne wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it's a real (if secret) court, so I assume it would be what normally happens for contempt of court.

What sort of consequences can they impose without revealing the existence of the secret court?

The existence of the court isn't secret, it's the proceedings that are.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#25

Post by LowKarmaAccount »

magicalist wrote: post #13

Blow the whistle on what? The problem with the "conversation" going on in these threads is that no one is defining that first. If we're talking about the first leaked version of PRISM, we still don't even know if it exists or how it works. Subsequent revisions have made it seem that if the NSA doesn't have the immediate ability to query the companies' backends, then they have some kind of carte blanche ability to ask…

Section 215, known as the "business records" portion of The PATRIOT Act allows "FBI agents to obtain any "tangible thing," including "books, records, papers, documents, and other items," a broad term that includes dumps from private-sector computer databases, with limited judicial oversight."[1]

That Section 215 exits is public record. However, the government has a "secret interpretation" of the law that allows itself many more powers than what is written in the publicly accessible version.

Only congressmen on the Senate Intelligence committee were briefed on the secret interpretation. With the exceptions of Mark Udall and Ron Wyden, who tried warn the American public without revealing anything classified (in 2011), the rest of the congressmen on the committee did not have a problem with what the NSA was doing. Many of the congressmen on the SIC are ex-military or receive large campaign contributions from defense contractors and/or the intelligence community.

[1]: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20067005-281.html

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#26

Post by wslh »

betterunix wrote: post #12
wslh wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and shareholders who care more about profits than morals I think this issue goes against shareholders because they can lose real customers feeling defrauded. It's realistic to expect legal actions against Google/Microsoft/etc operations outside US, mainly for Government accounts.

What makes you think these companies are going to lose any substantial number of customers? Most of the anger here is directed at the government, and it is only a small minority of people who even are angry about this. Only a very tiny minority of people will actually stop using Google or Facebook because of this incident.

Because, outside US, government agencies and companies that considers their communication security critical will choose another provider. They are paying Google Apps, Microsoft 365, etc.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#27

Post by known_unknowns »

Everyone here seems to be assuming that tech company leaders actually knew the whole picture, but that isn't necessarily the case.

Think about it: Let's say you're the CEO of any of these companies. If someone from the NSA or the FBI serves a top secret FISA order on some poor SRE in your datacenter, do you even qualify as one of "those persons to whom disclosure is necessary to comply with such Order", or an attorney?

Now, maybe your General Counsel knows what's going on, or maybe the knowledge is scattered throughout your legal team. Your lawyers, who are supposed to be representing your interests, are now bound to keep these secrets from you, and possibly even from each other. This is something that affects millions of people, and you can't do anything to fight it, because you aren't necessarily allowed to know what's going on in your own company. The only sign might be that a few previously-happy key employees suddenly seem stressed and quit for no apparent reason.

Freedom of speech is such a basic assumption in our society that we struggle to understand the full implications of what can happen when it's taken away.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#28

Post by moultano »

magicalist wrote: post #13

Blow the whistle on what? The problem with the "conversation" going on in these threads is that no one is defining that first. If we're talking about the first leaked version of PRISM, we still don't even know if it exists or how it works. Subsequent revisions have made it seem that if the NSA doesn't have the immediate ability to query the companies' backends, then they have some kind of carte blanche ability to ask…

>If not, and there's a very real chance that neither of these are true, then the question doesn't make sense.

Particularly since every tech company leader (and the NSA) are insisting that neither is true.

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#29

Post by cwzwarich »

wslh wrote: post #26
betterunix wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think these companies are going to lose any substantial number of customers? Most of the anger here is directed at the government, and it is only a small minority of people who even are angry about this. Only a very tiny minority of people will actually stop using Google or Facebook because of this incident.

Because, outside US, government agencies and companies that considers their communication security critical will choose another provider. They are paying Google Apps, Microsoft 365, etc.

Would anyone (especially from a foreign country) who considers their communication security critical really be using any of those services today?

Re: Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

#30

Post by eightyone »

mpyne wrote: post #16
rdl wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly happens if you just don't respond to a FISA warrant?

Well it's a real (if secret) court, so I assume it would be what normally happens for contempt of court.

It's my understanding that the secret court ruled the primary legal justification for PRISM (FISA Section 702) as unconstitutional. The Justice Department is trying to keep that ruling as secret as possible. [1] So, really, what would they do?

[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/government-says-secret...

Post reply on HN