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

How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

firstlook.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 27 posts

Re: How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

#11

Post by grossvogel »

csense wrote: post #8

Presumably a number of people at Google had access to the orders, if only to implement the government's surveillance. What's always baffling to me is how seldom stuff like this is leaked -- all it takes is one person with the right access, conscience and the technical skills to work out how to siphon off their own unofficial copy, then put that unofficial copy anonymously on the internet when the appeals to do it leg…

I was thinking along similar lines. Does anybody know more about the penalties for violating a gag order, like this?

Is there some trick that could be built-into sensitive services like email, maybe some kind of per-account warrant canary?

Re: How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

#12

Post by how_about_no »

junto wrote: post #5
zzleeper wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was the bad guys I would definitely do that. In fact, it's not enough to have a risk factor because there are many types of risk (terrorism risk, standard crime risk, political risk, and even whistle-blower risk, for those with access to classified information).

Someone with a bit of UI design skills should make a mocknup of this. A visual idea conveys so much more to the general public than words.

Please clarify. Is it your position that the general public would be better informed of the actual state of the world if someone created a non-functional prototype of something you imagine to exist? Or is your intent not to inform them of the actual state of the world, but to convince them of your beliefs about it?

Re: How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

#13

Post by panarky »

timothya wrote: post #7

Here's Appelbaum's reaction to the disclosure from Google: https://storify.com/bbhorne/jacob-appelbaum-s-legal-disclosu... It's interesting to get a glimpse into the lengths that Google goes to push back against government requests.

Google's an easy target, and their competition has hyped concerns about privacy and surveillance.

But this story just confirms years of reports that Google really does behave more honorably than many multinational corporations.

Google pushed back forcefully and repeatedly against these court orders. I don't know how they've managed to build this culture, but it shows it can be done.

Re: How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

#14

Post by caseysoftware »

timothya wrote: post #7

Here's Appelbaum's reaction to the disclosure from Google: https://storify.com/bbhorne/jacob-appelbaum-s-legal-disclosu... It's interesting to get a glimpse into the lengths that Google goes to push back against government requests.

> push back against government requests

should be rephrased to:

> push back against this government request

We don't know if Google fights these by default or if this was the exception. Until we know further, we shouldn't assume either way.

Re: How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

#15

Post by themartorana »

panarky wrote: post #13
timothya wrote: post #7

Here's Appelbaum's reaction to the disclosure from Google: https://storify.com/bbhorne/jacob-appelbaum-s-legal-disclosu... It's interesting to get a glimpse into the lengths that Google goes to push back against government requests.

Google's an easy target, and their competition has hyped concerns about privacy and surveillance. But this story just confirms years of reports that Google really does behave more honorably than many multinational corporations. Google pushed back forcefully and repeatedly against these court orders. I don't know how they've managed to build this culture, but it shows it can be done.

You're right. I ignore most peoples' concerns about a Google boogeyman - but I also understand that for free email, calendar, docs, photo storage, etc., there is a price. I'm comfortable helping Google improve their algorithms and seeing text ads - the value in return is incredible.

But knowing that while Google mines my life, they'll even stand up against the U.S. government to protect that data... It makes me feel even better about the choice I made.

Re: How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

#16

Post by themartorana »

junto wrote: post #6
themartorana wrote: post #3

More often than not I look to the judiciary to reign in overreaching by the executive, but more and more the judiciary seems entirely complicit in what I personally consider to be affronts to the basic ideas on which the Constitution was written. It seems to me that secrecy is the default state of the federal government now, not the exception, and between the NSA and gag orders keeping me (or you) from knowing you're…

Whilst the rights of Americans is important and the 4th amendment a key continent those rights, we should not forget that the privacy invasions are not limited to those in the US. More importantly, those outside the US have NO rights under the US constitution. To the contrary we have about as much rights as a chimpanzee, unless we are at war with the US and if we are lucky we won't be declared non-combatants, impriso…

Absolutely. I don't mean to minimize what US agencies do to non-citizens. But if we don't stand a chance, it's laughable to assume anyone else does.

Re: How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

#17

Post by deelowe »

caseysoftware wrote: post #14
timothya wrote: post #7

Here's Appelbaum's reaction to the disclosure from Google: https://storify.com/bbhorne/jacob-appelbaum-s-legal-disclosu... It's interesting to get a glimpse into the lengths that Google goes to push back against government requests.

> push back against government requests should be rephrased to: > push back against this government request We don't know if Google fights these by default or if this was the exception. Until we know further, we shouldn't assume either way.

There's more than one instance where examples have come up: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/google...

Re: How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

#18

Post by WalterGR »

deelowe wrote: post #17
caseysoftware wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> push back against government requests should be rephrased to: > push back against this government request We don't know if Google fights these by default or if this was the exception. Until we know further, we shouldn't assume either way.

There's more than one instance where examples have come up: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/google...

His point is still correct. "The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data.'"

Re: How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

#19

Post by nullc »

csense wrote: post #8

Presumably a number of people at Google had access to the orders, if only to implement the government's surveillance. What's always baffling to me is how seldom stuff like this is leaked -- all it takes is one person with the right access, conscience and the technical skills to work out how to siphon off their own unofficial copy, then put that unofficial copy anonymously on the internet when the appeals to do it leg…

Knowing something of many secrets that aren't even protected by an order and how little they often spread... it's no surprise to me.

Consider how often it happens that someone will collapse in public and many people will pass before someone renders aid. It's easy to feel like you're not responsible for preventing harm, especially when you're part of a big organization and the harm is being caused by a government.

Re: How DOJ Gagged Google Over Surveillance of Wikileaks Volunteer

#20

Post by notduncansmith »

WalterGR wrote: post #18
deelowe wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's more than one instance where examples have come up: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/google...

His point is still correct. "The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data.'"

Do you have a source for this quote? Google didn't turn up anything meaningful but I'd like to give proper attribution when I hang it on my wall.
Post reply on HN