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

U.S. Cloud Act is raising concern about extraterritoriality

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–148 of 148 posts

Re: U.S. Cloud Act is raising concern about extraterritoriality

#141

Post by mrep »

mcv wrote: post #60
pergadad wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't the cloud act also apply to subsidiaries? It's be surprised if the giants can at the same time split (for the purposes of the cloud act) and stay one coherent entity with central steering.

I suppose that's going to be the big challenge. You'd want a structure where neither company controls the other, yet they still have every incentive to cooperate closely. Maybe they should each own 49% of the other's stock?

But someone's gotta own the other 51%. However, you could split it into 3 companies spread across 3 countries each owning 33% of each other. Thus, no company has a majority share.

Re: U.S. Cloud Act is raising concern about extraterritoriality

#142

Post by _khau »

Mirioron wrote: post #135
cabalamat wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Here lies humanity, they tried to do the same things 15 different ways and squandered their resources doing so. Polities that don't retain control over their computing infrastructure will in the future have effectively ceded independence to others. Because controlling the full stack from silicon to cloud services is expensive (fabs can cost c. $20 billion), this has geo-political implications: namely that in the fu…

The EU won't be content with it, but they still won't do anything about it.

Why not?

Safe Harbour was shot down after the Schrems case.

Google and Facebook are being taken to task currently.

The huge fines for GDPR violations will come if the companies cited as in breach of the regulations fail to do what the EU asks.

The EU is doing a lot. Just because it can't act with immediacy it doesn't mean nothing is happening.

Re: U.S. Cloud Act is raising concern about extraterritoriality

#143

Post by ionised »

Tsubasachan wrote: post #109
zepearl wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>If the EU comany is a subsiduary of the US company, then it will have to follow its orders and won't really be separate. Maybe the US company could be a holding which would "only" own 100% of its independent EU subsidiary (which would be its own legal entity, reporting in EU)?

The question is: does America care about international law and treaties or will they just do whatever they want? Ten years ago I knew the answer to this question. Today not so much. This is why the EU should hedge its bets and keep the door open for Chinese companies.

The USA is by all accounts a 'rogue' state by its own definition of the term (China is too).

It doesn't abide by international conventions or laws, it engages in wars of aggression, it bullies smaller nations into accepting laws and trade agreements favourable to itself. It pushes crap like the DMCA globally.

Of course it doesn't care about international law.

Superpowers get away with this for a time, until everybody else wises up to the fact that nobody is following the rules.

Re: U.S. Cloud Act is raising concern about extraterritoriality

#144

Post by ionised »

Dahoon wrote: post #71
ionised wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> believes conspiracy theories about spy microchips in mainboards. You mean not everyone believes the cold, hard truth? That's unfortunate, because most of us here saw the evidence of this taking place.

No one outside of Bloomberg has seen any evidence of mainboard spy chips. You must be thinking about CPUs.

No, I'm thinking about what we read in the Snowden leaks (if you bothered reading them).

Re: U.S. Cloud Act is raising concern about extraterritoriality

#145

Post by ionised »

noir_lord wrote: post #69
jdietrich wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transfers of personal data to non-EU countries are specifically regulated by Chapter 5 of GDPR. After Brexit, Britain is "foreign" as far as the EU is concerned. It's also worth noting that a lot of Brexiters consider closer political ties and a strong trade deal with the US as an essential element of their ideal Brexit scenario, by weakening Britain's ties to (and dependency on) the EU. In a no deal/hard Brexit scen…

Agreed and that's a terrible outcome as far as I'm concerned. Politically I'm far more in favour of the EU than the US, the idea that we move further towards the US is horrifying. If that happens I'm out the door.

Same.

A free trade agreement with the US will mean watering down (or 'harmonising' as the spin doctors like to put it) UK regulations to match the US.

Re: U.S. Cloud Act is raising concern about extraterritoriality

#146

Post by ionised »

DuskStar wrote: post #126
cesarb wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your example, the US court is ordering you to request the documents. There's no question that the US court has jurisdiction over you. What about this variation over your example: instead of contacting you, the US court bypasses you and asks directly the European storage company. This is much more questionable, since a US court shouldn't have jurisdiction over an European company.

Funnily enough, in the GDPR equivalent (you, a EU resident, hire a company in the US to store a box for you) the EU bypasses you and requires the storage company to have an effective security guard and fire suppression system...

The difference is that in this case the US considers itself the owner of all data on US and Eu citizens alike.

The EU merely says that you cannot store Eu citizens data without the necessary safeguards in place and permissions asked.

This is a very different issue in my view. The US has an inflated sense of entitlement, whereas the EU is being protective and inhibiting of data collection on its citizens by foreign organisations.

Re: U.S. Cloud Act is raising concern about extraterritoriality

#147

Post by loxs »

dang wrote: post #99
loxs wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not before you vote me to reputation that will prevent me from posting. Before that, I have the same rights and privileges as you, with regards of posting.

I'm afraid that's not the case. HN moderators (of which I'm one—sorry if that wasn't clear) ban accounts that keep posting unsubstantive comments. It's just one of the things we have to do in the attempt to keep this site from degenerating too quickly. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Is there a guide on what comment is "substantive"?

Re: U.S. Cloud Act is raising concern about extraterritoriality

#148

Post by Dahoon »

ionised wrote: post #144
Dahoon wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one outside of Bloomberg has seen any evidence of mainboard spy chips. You must be thinking about CPUs.

No, I'm thinking about what we read in the Snowden leaks (if you bothered reading them).

I did read them. Which part are you referring to? If it is GODSURGE then it is malware in the BIOS used by the NSA. I have seen nothing about China spying via motherboards, outside the propaganda hit piece Bloomberg wrote which everyone (even FBI and Amazon, etc) dismissed as total bullcrap.
Post reply on HN