5 ms·
Semi-unrelated. I don't understand how the FBI can require companies to say "0-499" when companies could previously have said "0". It's already obvious that it
by Sephr 10y ago
Semi-unrelated. I don't understand how the FBI can require companies to say "0-499" when companies could previously have said "0". It's already obvious that it means that they have received 1-499 (otherwise it wouldn't be an NSL-limited range in the first place), but what happens if you were to do something like the following?
All you have to do in your initial transparency report (before receiving any NSLs) is to just straight-up say "We have received zero NSLs. If in the future we only indicate that we have received a possible range of NSLs, that means we have recieved at least one NSL".
It's already obvious to most people, but would explicitly stating that to your users (before actually receiving any NSLs) be "pre-contempt"?
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoAnother issue: once you've received an NSL, can you, in future, report that you've received no NSLs for certain periods, or must you still use the 0-499 thing?
- dublinben 10y agoIANAL, but I believe you are allowed to offer either quarterly or semiannual updates to your NSL amounts. Anything more specific than that would not be allowed.
- dragonwriter 10y agoNo, because if you say zero and say that you will use a range if you have recurved an then disclosing a range itself violates the nondisclosure order of there particular NSL received. Explicitly arranging a coded signal to disclosure specific information in advance and then sending that signal doesn't evade laws that prohibit disclosing the information. There's no problem with the proper statement though, the problem is when you follow through with it.
- pdq 10y agoThis is called a warrant canary. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_canary https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_canary
- Sephr 10y agoThis is a little more explicit than that, since they would be specifically informing their users that they received an NSL.