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

Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 85 posts

Re: Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

#41

Post by steveklabnik »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #40
betterunix wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I see it, Google set up a system that is easy to conduct surveillance on. Gigabytes of storage, no way to actually delete messages over IMAP or POP3, and in various subtle ways GMail discourages the use of encryption. This is all probably inadvertent, but it indicates that protecting users from this sort of surveillance is not a priority.

I believe you made this claim twice in this thread. Kindly visit your gmail settings, which offers these choices: When a message is marked as deleted and expunged from the last visible IMAP folder: * Archive the message (default) * Move the message to the Trash * Immediately delete the message forever Ok then.

You don't know that actually deletes anything, and defaults matter.

Also, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5929421

Re: Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

#42

Post by rasterizer »

betterunix wrote: post #20
Jabbles wrote: post #3

What could Google have done better? (Specifically in regards to this case. And assuming they pushed back on orders like this, like they claim to do.)

The way I see it, Google set up a system that is easy to conduct surveillance on. Gigabytes of storage, no way to actually delete messages over IMAP or POP3, and in various subtle ways GMail discourages the use of encryption. This is all probably inadvertent, but it indicates that protecting users from this sort of surveillance is not a priority.

That's stupid. Particularly how you list 'plentiful storage' as a drawback, if that's the case then it's plainly an issue of law as it pits privacy against usability.

Also Gmail is the only webmail that offers server-to-server encryption: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57590389-38/how-web-mail-p...

And as mentioned in another comment you can delete messages over IMAP.

So in the future make sure you do some research as to avoid spreading false information.

Re: Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

#43

Post by chaz »

steveklabnik wrote: post #41
thrownaway2424 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe you made this claim twice in this thread. Kindly visit your gmail settings, which offers these choices: When a message is marked as deleted and expunged from the last visible IMAP folder: * Archive the message (default) * Move the message to the Trash * Immediately delete the message forever Ok then.

You don't know that actually deletes anything, and defaults matter. Also, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5929421

If you don't believe that they delete it when you tell them to delete it, then using Gmail is already a non-starter. Also, yes, defaults do matter: the outcry from users from not being able to undelete an email would be much louder than those wanting instant deletion.

Re: Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

#44

Post by d4nt »

iSnow wrote: post #39

Why for heaven's sake does anyone who does anything that might piss of a government use GMail or any hosted mail provider? This is far beyond me.

The definition of "anyone who does anything that might piss off a government" includes a lot of people. What if I become a political activist in 20 years time, I might well piss of a future government, should I stop using gmail now in case that happens?

Re: Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

#45

Post by wyck »

The online "territory" will shift away from America eventually, especially for non Americans who are still stuck under the USA's influence.

This is exactly the kind of thing, along with recent events, that will eventually deal a major blow to US based tech.

Re: Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

#46

Post by magicalist »

betterunix wrote: post #31
superuser2 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered the possibility that we hear about surveillance of GMail accounts only because so many people happen to use GMail? Is there any particular property of Google that makes it more likely to cooperate with government than any other email provider? Or, if you're in the "host your own email" crowd, what makes you think your ISP won't cooperate with the government just like Google does?

Here is the difference between GMail and a self-hosted email system: when you delete messages over IMAP, they do not get deleted in GMail. "All Mail" keeps all your mail , forever, unless you log in via the web interface and delete it manually. You could always use the web interface, but now encrypting your messages is much harder. These are the sort of design decisions that can have far-reaching implications. Google…

As others have noted elsewhere, that's not true: you can have it delete emails on delete, but you do have to turn that on yourself.

It's not the default, and defaults matter, but it is an option that appears as soon as you click "enable IMAP" in gmail (go ahead and try it in your gmail settings). You'll have to read the options, yes, but considering the whole UX thing for gmail has been "never have to delete an email again", it's not an unmotivated default.

Also, I hope your email client does secure deletes on local disk by default.

Re: Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

#47

Post by tensafefrogs »

acgourley wrote: post #8

Can someone clarify if Google had to reveal they had done this? The article implies that they did not, and thus the reveal was a "not evil" gesture of transparency. But I'm wondering if they may have known it would get out anyway and they are just getting in front of it. Anyone have more information?

Your wording implies that you think Google has something to hide or to be embarrassed about releasing the data, and that is not the case.

The government asks for people's data all the time, and Google is legally obligated to provide the requested data. They then go the extra step and tell the users as soon as they are allowed to.

There's nothing here to "get in front of."

Re: Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

#48

Post by tensafefrogs »

iSnow wrote: post #39

Why for heaven's sake does anyone who does anything that might piss of a government use GMail or any hosted mail provider? This is far beyond me.

Because this is America, and it's supposed to be an amazing country where you have wonderful rights as outlined in the constitution.

Re: Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

#49

Post by superuser2 »

cinquemb wrote: post #29
superuser2 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is worth noting that they often choose to do this the "loud" way, but the FBI has been granted warrants to pick people's locks and copy their hard drives without leaving traces. Alarm monitoring companies are also subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, so that won't help you either.

Someone could rig up their own system to notify themselves which is very doable. I can see the situation where someone gets notified, then emails their server to backup offsite, and wipe the hard drives (and for those well versed in demo, there's always that option…).

Evidence tampering is a federal felony. In this case it doesn't matter how well you covered your tracks - if they can prove you rigged a failsafe, you're going to jail anyway.

Re: Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin

#50

Post by rayiner »

breck wrote: post #9
Jabbles wrote: post #3

What could Google have done better? (Specifically in regards to this case. And assuming they pushed back on orders like this, like they claim to do.)

Push back more on the request? The 4th amendment includes this part: "particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized" Describing what you want as " all e-mails " is exactly the type of description this part of the amendment is meant to prevent. It's way too broad.

> It's way too broad.

No way would that be considered an over-broad warrant. If, e.g., you suspected someone of financial fraud, it would be totally okay to get a warrant for the contents of all the filing cabinets in his office.

Post reply on HN