On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea • Hacker News Board

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#11

Post by smokeyj » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 8:45 PM UTC

__hudson__ wrote: post #2

I wonder if donating to wikileaks or even sending an email to wikileaks offering to volunteer would be enough to interest someone in government in getting all your 1's & 0's.

Yes, along with picking your nose and tying your shoes -- but that should only matter to a coward.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#12

Post by betterunix » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 8:46 PM UTC

rasterizer wrote: post #9

Abit harsh on Google. I mean what are they to do?

Maybe engineer a service that is harder to wiretap? It is not easy, but they have some of the best computer scientists on this planet working for them. If I were them, I would start somewhere around here:

http://crypto.stanford.edu/adnostic/adnostic.pdf

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#13

Post by mtgx » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 8:47 PM UTC

They keep the deleted e-mails too? So even if you want to escape that 180 days law that says after 180 days it's free for all for authorities to get your e-mails, then deleting them before that time passes won't do you much good.

So basically the authorities will have access to your e-mails anyway. It's just that they won't get them in the first 180 days. And of course this just applies to police/FBI, as NSA can get them from the day you sent them.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#14

Post by betterunix » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 8:47 PM UTC

daviddoran wrote: post #10

tantalor wrote: post #6

Presumably the same justification/reasoning could be used to serve a home/business search warrant.

Would a judge approve the warrant though? Just because this person communicated with Assange?

Gee, it sure would be nice to know what happens at a FISC hearing...

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#15

Post by walls » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 8:48 PM UTC

betterunix wrote: post #12

rasterizer wrote: post #9

Abit harsh on Google. I mean what are they to do?

Maybe engineer a service that is harder to wiretap? It is not easy, but they have some of the best computer scientists on this planet working for them. If I were them, I would start somewhere around here: http://crypto.stanford.edu/adnostic/adnostic.pdf

Wire tapping is completely irrelevant to the question.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#16

Post by rayiner » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 8:49 PM UTC

betterunix wrote: post #14

daviddoran wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would a judge approve the warrant though? Just because this person communicated with Assange?

Gee, it sure would be nice to know what happens at a FISC hearing...

Can the FISC grant Article III warrants?

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#17

Post by burntsushi » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 8:51 PM UTC

tantalor wrote: post #6

Presumably the same justification/reasoning could be used to serve a home/business search warrant.

That might be the case. But you'd know about it. And why.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#18

Post by digitalengineer » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 8:54 PM UTC

"Google is, however, allowed to tell me what account is involved, and I can do whatever I want with the information Google gave me"

So Google was allowed, not required. Looks like they did the right thing by at least telling OP what they were forced to do. Shouldn't the title be "Not trusting your Government"?

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#19

Post by andrewljohnson » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 8:54 PM UTC

Google should invent a distributed, encrypted email protocol and make that network an option in GMail for storage and message sending. That would be a great PR move - if there is no central server, and no central message pipe, it's a little hard for anyone to think Google wants to be complicit in spying.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#20

Post by betterunix » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 8:55 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #16

betterunix wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gee, it sure would be nice to know what happens at a FISC hearing...

Can the FISC grant Article III warrants?

Can information gathered under a FISA warrant be used to get another court to grant an Article III warrant, and can such information be critical to getting an Article III warrant? If a rubber stamp like FISC enables the government to get Article III warrants that it would not otherwise get, then FISC might as well just hand out Article III warrants.