4 ms·

I’m pretty sure that isn’t true. They can be used to compel you to build interception capabilities.

• gruez 8y ago
  source?
  • eli 8y ago
    It's complicated, but that's kinda what happened to the Lavabit "secure" webmail service. When the owner wouldn't install a backdoor, the FBI sought the private encryption keys so they could MITM the whole site. https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/how-lavabit-melted-down https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/how-lavabit-melted-d...
    • angry_octet 8y ago
      That isn't building an interception mechanism, it's revealing some private information Lavabit held.
  • Nasrudith 8y ago
    The big Apple vs FBI high profile lawsuit for one. Granted that was a telegraphed precedent seeking exercise by "accidentally" losing access to the work phone after the terrorists destroyed their personal phones before the attack.
    • drb91 8y ago
      That was not an NSL.
      • Nasrudith 8y ago
        True - they are less publicly tested but it is suggestive in its own way. If they could just NSL their way to access why bother with precedents? It is wild speculation but that is what lack of transparency has wrought.
  • lawnchair_larry 8y ago
    I really can’t say. Take for what it’s worth. Edit: I may be thinking of a FISA order as opposed to an NSL. Doesn’t matter though, obviously the concern is that they would be served with whichever does allow that.