Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom admin • Hacker News Board

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

#61

Post by betterunix » Sun, Jun 23, 2013, 10:36 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #52

betterunix wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By not having such broad categories of things to be seized. It is not "specific" to seize "every email message he sent to anyone ever."

"betterunix's g-mail account" is plenty specific as a "place to be searched" and "e-mails" is plenty specific as "things to be seized." If you printed out every letter you've ever sent to someone and put it in a filing cabinet, it would be totally fair game for a warrant to get the contents of the filing cabinet. Or if you kept them on a hard drive, it would be totally fair game to get a warrant to get the hard drive…

"If you printed out every letter you've ever sent to someone and put it in a filing cabinet, it would be totally fair game for a warrant to get the contents of the filing cabinet"

Except that people do not typically do that, and it is reasonable to expect that a filing cabinet will contain only important or current documents. With GMail, you typically see personal messages that date back years, probably long before whatever crime the person is suspected of.

"The problem is the amount of information consolidation modern technology enables and encourages."

I think for once, we might agree. The relevant laws were written with a very different model of communication in mind.

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

#62

Post by mayanksinghal » Sun, Jun 23, 2013, 10:40 PM UTC

betterunix wrote: post #57

chaz wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"the outcry from users from not being able to undelete an email would be much louder than those wanting instant deletion." [citation needed] Seriously, I have trouble believing that anyone would complain about "delete" carrying any meaning other than "delete." I also find it hard to take such people seriously, given the existence of a Trash folder as a first stop for deleted messages, and All Mail as a second stop (a…

> a Trash folder as a first stop for deleted messages, and All Mail as a second stop

I was just trying this, I moved something to trash and then did a 'Delete Forever'. Nothing appeared in trash or all mail again.

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

#63

Post by betterunix » Sun, Jun 23, 2013, 10:41 PM UTC

magicalist wrote: post #60

betterunix wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, I missed the option, and usually I am pretty good with noticing if the defaults are what I want. The only reason I even noticed that "delete" was not actually deleting mail was that I had to search through All Mail one day, and I noticed some messages that I was sure I deleted. What makes this worse is the completely counterintuitive nature of deleting messages from All Mail: they just come back. I suppose i…

However, the option is there, and you're a person who notices if the defaults are what you want but didn't read one of only three options presented to you when enabling IMAP, basically the only settings that were even important if you're not using web mail. It's possible that the options screen was different when you originally turned on IMAP, though. However, because of the historical lack of an "archive" IMAP funct…

The lack of an "archive" function is pretty easy to fix: create an "Archive" folder. That is basically what "All Mail" is, at least for me.

The problem with this default is that it makes no sense. Most email clients already have an option to "delete" mail by moving it to the Trash folder (which Google has), and most users expect that deleting something from Trash means deleting it for good. I am just not seeing the use-case for someone wanting to "delete" a message from Trash or All Mail just to have the message reappear in All Mail (why on Earth would anyone want a message deleted from All Mail to come right back to All Mail?!).

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

#64

Post by magicalist » Sun, Jun 23, 2013, 10:41 PM UTC

betterunix wrote: post #59

mayanksinghal wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow this stream of logic. If you have to build technical systems, the sole purpose of which is to sidestep laws, in order to be good then aren't the laws at fault here? I find the acceptance that governments will do whatever this wants, we will just use end to end encryption , TOR and Bitcoin defeats the purpose we have regulated currencies, governments and democracies. If there is an action item on the li…

"If you have to build technical systems, the sole purpose of which is to sidestep laws" Nobody is talking about sidestepping laws. You are not breaking laws, nor breaking the spirit of the law, if your users cannot store many years of their personal communications on your server. Encouraging people to delete mail would have the effect of limiting the government's surveillance power, in an entirely legal fashion. "are…

> "Nobody is talking about sidestepping laws"

> "you can both circumvent unjust laws..."

and

> "aren't the laws at fault here?"

> list of reasons why the laws are at fault...

you have a point in there (work to fix laws while protecting yourself), but you're being weirdly (and ineffectually) contrarian in this thread.

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

#65

Post by chaz » Sun, Jun 23, 2013, 10:42 PM UTC

betterunix wrote: post #57

chaz wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"the outcry from users from not being able to undelete an email would be much louder than those wanting instant deletion." [citation needed] Seriously, I have trouble believing that anyone would complain about "delete" carrying any meaning other than "delete." I also find it hard to take such people seriously, given the existence of a Trash folder as a first stop for deleted messages, and All Mail as a second stop (a…

Using the default Gmail settings of (a) Enable IMAP and (b) Auto Expunge on, I just deleted an email via Sparrow (IMAP). The email instantly went straight into the Trash folder and is not visible in All Mail. I expect the email to be auto-deleted in about 30 days. I agree that the behavior you're describing would be weird, but I'm not seeing it. Can you please double check?

No, I don't have a citation, but is it so hard to believe that lots of people want an undelete? I accidentally delete emails all the time and I go into the trash and fish them out. Not giving users an undo seems ... unfriendly.

EDIT: I see, it applies to Custom Folders and delete only removes the label; doesn't move it to the trash. Here's what Google has to say about it. Is this a default IMAP behavior or Gmail-IMAP specific? https://support.google.com/mail/answer/78755?hl=en

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

#66

Post by betterunix » Sun, Jun 23, 2013, 10:50 PM UTC

mayanksinghal wrote: post #62

betterunix wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"the outcry from users from not being able to undelete an email would be much louder than those wanting instant deletion." [citation needed] Seriously, I have trouble believing that anyone would complain about "delete" carrying any meaning other than "delete." I also find it hard to take such people seriously, given the existence of a Trash folder as a first stop for deleted messages, and All Mail as a second stop (a…

> a Trash folder as a first stop for deleted messages, and All Mail as a second stop I was just trying this, I moved something to trash and then did a 'Delete Forever'. Nothing appeared in trash or all mail again.

The problem is that the default behavior for people who use an IMAP client is for "delete" to actually mean "keep a copy in All Mail." The server will also give a false OK status to the client following the EXPUNGE command (see the IMAP4 RFC for details), so the user is not alerted to the fact that messages are not being deleted.

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

#67

Post by mayanksinghal » Sun, Jun 23, 2013, 10:59 PM UTC

betterunix wrote: post #59

mayanksinghal wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow this stream of logic. If you have to build technical systems, the sole purpose of which is to sidestep laws, in order to be good then aren't the laws at fault here? I find the acceptance that governments will do whatever this wants, we will just use end to end encryption , TOR and Bitcoin defeats the purpose we have regulated currencies, governments and democracies. If there is an action item on the li…

"If you have to build technical systems, the sole purpose of which is to sidestep laws" Nobody is talking about sidestepping laws. You are not breaking laws, nor breaking the spirit of the law, if your users cannot store many years of their personal communications on your server. Encouraging people to delete mail would have the effect of limiting the government's surveillance power, in an entirely legal fashion. "are…

> You are not breaking laws, nor breaking the spirit of the law

I wasn't suggesting that either. Sidestepping is avoidance not evasion.

> The laws have not been updated in light of these new privacy implications. ... the deliberately slow wheels of government to turn?

So change the law. And speed up your justice system. Don't elect individuals who slow down progress deliberately.

> you can both circumvent unjust laws and work to take those laws off the books.

And fight the laws and its usage, which is what Google does. It was also the entity that disclosed the original order in this particular case, so that the person in question can also take some action if possible. It also publishes transparency reports and it was the first one to do that, which gives you an idea about how frequent usage of the unjust laws are so that you, as a community, has more information about what your government is doing. If I am not wrong, there have been 2 elections since the FISA was passed and the voting population of US was aware of the broad surveillance since the first election (Obama based some of his campaign on it). If he hadn't acted on it, then it should have become a point of debate in the reelection. But it was celebrated on Hacker News as much as anywhere else, without a single mention of his inability of reducing the scope of such laws. So guess what? Overboard surveillance didn't seem to be a priority for most of the people here and Google has been more transparent and more vigilant about it since longer than the PRISM episode. The gist is that it is easy to transfer blame in this case, but the root cause it solely the astoundingly broad laws and the undoubted trust that voters put in the current government that used them instead of removing them as it had promised.

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

#68

Post by betterunix » Sun, Jun 23, 2013, 11:02 PM UTC

magicalist wrote: post #64

betterunix wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you have to build technical systems, the sole purpose of which is to sidestep laws" Nobody is talking about sidestepping laws. You are not breaking laws, nor breaking the spirit of the law, if your users cannot store many years of their personal communications on your server. Encouraging people to delete mail would have the effect of limiting the government's surveillance power, in an entirely legal fashion. "are…

> "Nobody is talking about sidestepping laws" > "you can both circumvent unjust laws..." and > "aren't the laws at fault here?" > list of reasons why the laws are at fault... you have a point in there (work to fix laws while protecting yourself), but you're being weirdly (and ineffectually) contrarian in this thread.

It is not contrarian, I was replying to two separate points. The first was the claim that I was saying that Google should have set up its system to circumvent the law; the is not what I was saying. The second was the claim that we must either circumvent laws or change them; my point was that the choice is not exclusive.

As for the point of the laws being faulty, what I was saying was that the laws were designed with a particular communications model in mind. Google's system is designed very differently from that model, but despite Google's popularity and despite other services adopting a model similar to Google's the law has not changed. Just saying that the law is at fault is too simplistic; the laws may have good reasons behind them and may have made sense at the time they were passed (and had technology not changed, the laws might still make sense now).

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

#69

Post by betterunix » Sun, Jun 23, 2013, 11:16 PM UTC

chaz wrote: post #65

betterunix wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"the outcry from users from not being able to undelete an email would be much louder than those wanting instant deletion." [citation needed] Seriously, I have trouble believing that anyone would complain about "delete" carrying any meaning other than "delete." I also find it hard to take such people seriously, given the existence of a Trash folder as a first stop for deleted messages, and All Mail as a second stop (a…

Using the default Gmail settings of (a) Enable IMAP and (b) Auto Expunge on, I just deleted an email via Sparrow (IMAP). The email instantly went straight into the Trash folder and is not visible in All Mail. I expect the email to be auto-deleted in about 30 days. I agree that the behavior you're describing would be weird, but I'm not seeing it. Can you please double check? No, I don't have a citation, but is it so h…

I just confirmed the behavior: I deleted a message from my Inbox, and my mail client put it in my Trash folder. I deleted the message from Trash, and it was still in All Mail. I deleted from All Mail, and when I refresh the folder it is still there. I checked the network log, and the correct EXPUNGE commands are being sent.

As for "undelete," I believe the purpose of the Trash folder is to support that. I have yet to find the email client that does not, as a default, store deleted messages in the Trash folder. I am not disputing that people want that functionality, what I am saying is that I do not think people want the behavior that I am seeing.

The fact that GMail treats "delete" as "remove labels" is very problematic. IMAP supports labels, including client-defined labels. Treating folders as "labels" only breaks the abstraction IMAP presents. I suppose this was part of Mark Crispin's gripes with GMail.

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

#70

Post by betterunix » Sun, Jun 23, 2013, 11:24 PM UTC

superuser2 wrote: post #49

cinquemb wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think it might be hard to prove the evidence tampering charge. It is not at all unreasonable to claim that you were trying to protect important secrets from criminals who might break into your home or office.

To put it another way, this is not an illegal device:

http://www.ironkey.com/en-US/secure-portable-storage/250-per...