4 ms·

I wonder how this writing of a NSL letter would affect an organisation's warrant canary (if they have one).

by secfirstmd 10y ago

kakarot 10y ago
There's always blackmail, too. Plenty of ways to force a warrant canary to continue as normal
- indolering 10y ago
  That's what an NSL is ... if you don't comply they throw you in jail. If you challenge a charge, the prosecutor will often add new ones.
  - jonlucc 10y ago
    Who do they jail? You can't jail a corporation, so do they jail the CEO? The lawyer who sends the letter saying they won't comply? Either way, isn't that just begging for that information to be made public? Suddenly, Sundar Pichai is missing, and someone finds out he's in jail. That's going to be a story that gets reported (and probably leaked widely).
    - kabdib 10y ago
      The IRS suddenly starts audits of company officials. Srsly.
      - komali2 10y ago
        I was under the impression the FBI and CIA are separate agencies from the IRS, i.e., they can't just secretly tell the IRS to audit someone.
        kabdib 10y ago
        Trying to dredge up the articles; I believe that the CEO of a high-tech company was heavily investigated by the IRS after he threatened to make an NSL public. In the past, the IRS has definitely been used as a tool to apply pressure. It's not supposed to happen, but it does.
        asquabventured 10y ago
        > Trying to dredge up the articles; I believe that the CEO of a high-tech company was heavily investigated by the IRS after he threatened to make an NSL public. Joseph Nacchio[1], CEO of Quest? His case[2] is a clear warning shot that if you don't play ball with the spooks, the government has no problem throwing the hammer at you. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio#Career https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio#Career [2] http://www.businessinsider.com/the-story-of-joseph-nacchio-and-the-nsa-2013-6 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-story-of-joseph-nacchio-a...
        kabdib 10y ago
        Yup, that's the guy.
        indolering 10y ago
        They will use whatever powers they have to coerce companies (or individuals) into cooperating, including with holding contracts or causing regulatory headaches.
    - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
      I know of an instance of corporate executives being walked out the door in handcuffs by the US Marshalls. That was for flagrantly disobeying the FDA. I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be a lesser response for flagrantly disobeying a National Security Letter.
      - jonlucc 10y ago
        My point is that the NSL is supposed to be secret, not just for its contents, but the existence of the letter. So, dragging a CEO off publicly would almost certainly expose the existence of the NSL.
        AnimalMuppet 10y ago
        It might expose the existence of an NSL, but not of that NSL. That is: I'm Joe Terrorist. I use, say, GMail. Google gets a thousand NSLs. On at least one of them, they tell the NSA/FBI/CIA/whoever to get lost. Five Google execs get arrested. I, Joe Terrorist, may guess that the arrest is over NSLs. I have no idea whether I am named on one of the NSLs in question, or whether I was on one of the NSLs that Google complied with, or whether I'm still completely under the radar. It might serve to remind me "oh, yeah, that's right, any of those companies can get an NSL and report everything they know about me", but if I'm at all a competent terrorist, that's something I already knew and should be continually remembering.
- secfirstmd 10y ago
  But how does that work with a distributed canary? An NSL may affect someone in the USA who is part of a canary but what if it has to be signed by someone in the UK, then Hong Kong, then Kenya, then Venezuela etc? Those people can't be compelled to sign it....
  - kakarot 10y ago
    What canaries for sure operate this way? That definitely makes things a little harder for the boys in black.
indolering 10y ago
The US courts haven't decided on whether warrant canaries are constitutionally protected speech. At best, they help ward off an NSL as it would lead to a challenge that the EFF would love to take to the Supreme Court. The powers-that-be would much prefer to have some money laundering operation challenge a warrant canary.
- cookiecaper 10y ago
  I'm not a lawyer, but every time I've talked to one about this type of subject, they've informed me that these "clever" loopholes like warrant canaries are not viewed favorably by prosecutors or judges. They'll happily slap you with conspiracy/accessory/obstruction/contempt/whatever charges if they think you're being cute and trying to short-circuit a legal order with loopholes. Apparently the law, at least in most areas, has anticipated the existence of smartasses and provided mechanisms to deal with them. I can't imagine that warrant canaries would be much different in practice. The judge would probably say that removing the canary is tantamount to revealing the existence of the letter, is thus a violation of the gag order, and that doing it will land you in contempt. Again, pure speculation, and not a lawyer.

I wonder how this writing of a NSL letter would affect an organisation's warrant canary (if they have one).

kakarot 10y ago

There's always blackmail, too. Plenty of ways to force a warrant canary to continue as normal

indolering 10y ago
That's what an NSL is ... if you don't comply they throw you in jail. If you challenge a charge, the prosecutor will often add new ones.
- jonlucc 10y ago
  Who do they jail? You can't jail a corporation, so do they jail the CEO? The lawyer who sends the letter saying they won't comply? Either way, isn't that just begging for that information to be made public? Suddenly, Sundar Pichai is missing, and someone finds out he's in jail. That's going to be a story that gets reported (and probably leaked widely).
  - kabdib 10y ago
    The IRS suddenly starts audits of company officials. Srsly.
    - komali2 10y ago
      I was under the impression the FBI and CIA are separate agencies from the IRS, i.e., they can't just secretly tell the IRS to audit someone.
      - kabdib 10y ago
        Trying to dredge up the articles; I believe that the CEO of a high-tech company was heavily investigated by the IRS after he threatened to make an NSL public. In the past, the IRS has definitely been used as a tool to apply pressure. It's not supposed to happen, but it does.
        asquabventured 10y ago
        > Trying to dredge up the articles; I believe that the CEO of a high-tech company was heavily investigated by the IRS after he threatened to make an NSL public. Joseph Nacchio[1], CEO of Quest? His case[2] is a clear warning shot that if you don't play ball with the spooks, the government has no problem throwing the hammer at you. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio#Career https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio#Career [2] http://www.businessinsider.com/the-story-of-joseph-nacchio-and-the-nsa-2013-6 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-story-of-joseph-nacchio-a...
        kabdib 10y ago
        Yup, that's the guy.
      - indolering 10y ago
        They will use whatever powers they have to coerce companies (or individuals) into cooperating, including with holding contracts or causing regulatory headaches.
  - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
    I know of an instance of corporate executives being walked out the door in handcuffs by the US Marshalls. That was for flagrantly disobeying the FDA. I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be a lesser response for flagrantly disobeying a National Security Letter.
    - jonlucc 10y ago
      My point is that the NSL is supposed to be secret, not just for its contents, but the existence of the letter. So, dragging a CEO off publicly would almost certainly expose the existence of the NSL.
      - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
        It might expose the existence of an NSL, but not of that NSL. That is: I'm Joe Terrorist. I use, say, GMail. Google gets a thousand NSLs. On at least one of them, they tell the NSA/FBI/CIA/whoever to get lost. Five Google execs get arrested. I, Joe Terrorist, may guess that the arrest is over NSLs. I have no idea whether I am named on one of the NSLs in question, or whether I was on one of the NSLs that Google complied with, or whether I'm still completely under the radar. It might serve to remind me "oh, yeah, that's right, any of those companies can get an NSL and report everything they know about me", but if I'm at all a competent terrorist, that's something I already knew and should be continually remembering.
secfirstmd 10y ago
But how does that work with a distributed canary? An NSL may affect someone in the USA who is part of a canary but what if it has to be signed by someone in the UK, then Hong Kong, then Kenya, then Venezuela etc? Those people can't be compelled to sign it....
- kakarot 10y ago
  What canaries for sure operate this way? That definitely makes things a little harder for the boys in black.

indolering 10y ago

The US courts haven't decided on whether warrant canaries are constitutionally protected speech. At best, they help ward off an NSL as it would lead to a challenge that the EFF would love to take to the Supreme Court. The powers-that-be would much prefer to have some money laundering operation challenge a warrant canary.

cookiecaper 10y ago
I'm not a lawyer, but every time I've talked to one about this type of subject, they've informed me that these "clever" loopholes like warrant canaries are not viewed favorably by prosecutors or judges. They'll happily slap you with conspiracy/accessory/obstruction/contempt/whatever charges if they think you're being cute and trying to short-circuit a legal order with loopholes. Apparently the law, at least in most areas, has anticipated the existence of smartasses and provided mechanisms to deal with them. I can't imagine that warrant canaries would be much different in practice. The judge would probably say that removing the canary is tantamount to revealing the existence of the letter, is thus a violation of the gag order, and that doing it will land you in contempt. Again, pure speculation, and not a lawyer.