5 ms·
My National Security Letter Gag Order (2007)
- nbpoole 15y agoSince that editorial was published (back in 2007), the person who wrote it, Nicholas Merrill, has been "partially un-gagged": he is now able to talk publicly about portions of the case. A followup Washington Post article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/09/AR2010080906252.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08... He also did an IAmA post on reddit, which has a lot of information: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/fjfby/iama_director_of_an_isp_who_was_the_first_person/ http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/fjfby/iama_director_of... (Since reddit is down right now, here's the cached Google version: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FIAmA%2Fcomments%2Ffjfby%2Fiama_director_of_an_isp_who_was_the_first_person%2F#siteTable http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%...) --- Edit: Wanted to add a link to a later followup post he made on Reddit, talking about his plans to start a "Non-profit ISP and Teleco": http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/fkndx/update_national_security_letter_challenge_why_we/ http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/fkndx/update_nat... (And the Google cached version: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Freddit.com%2Fcomments%2Ffkndx%2Fupdate_national_security_letter_challenge_why_we%2F http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%...) --- Edit: And in case people are curious about the actual court case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doe_v._Ashcroft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doe_v._Ashcroft
- tejmin 15y agoHe did also do an AMA on reddit. Edit: I see you added the link. This article, for everyone else's info, was done Mar 23, 07 d:D
- boredguy8 15y agoSorry for the old link. I usually check dates more carefully, but this was sent to me by a newsie so I didn't pay as close attention. Thanks for the additional info, though: having the follow-up links makes me less sad I posted it.
- DanielRibeiro 15y agoOld, but the aftermath is really relevant. I am really glad of this post, and the amazing comments it ensued.
- uxp 15y agoHe also did a fairly decent talk at the most recent Chaos Conf, 23c3: http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2010/27c3-4263-en-resisting_excessive_government_surveillance.html http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2010/27c3-4263-en-resist...
- zacharypinter 15y agoHere's a video of a talk Nicholas Merril gave about the gag order: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6xsv4azzpc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6xsv4azzpc
- Zak 15y agoI have to wonder whether a person is legally obligated under such an order to actively hide the existence of the NSL request. Does he really have to lie to his clients, friends and family when asked directly about it, or would "I can't answer that" satisfy the letter of the law while giving the asker a strong clue as to the answer to their question?
- eli 15y agoMy understanding is that he was not allowed to communicate its existence to anyone else through any means. Saying "I can't answer that" is effectively disclosing that you are gagged, which is not allowed. It's a totally insane prospect.
- Zak 15y agoYou have a point there, but "I won't answer that" doesn't actually communicate anything and seems like a viable alternative.
- ceejayoz 15y agoIt does communicate something. If you weren't under a gag order, you'd likely answer "no", not "I won't answer that".
- Zak 15y agoFrom the reddit AMA: We had been meticulous in our care to not violate the gag in any way shape or form. We didn't want to jeopardize the case, and obviously didn't want to run into any legal trouble. I read this as him saying he didn't want any issues raised that might distract from his lawsuit. That doesn't necessarily mean that the approach I proposed wouldn't be legal. A law that compels a person to lie is a bit more absurd than one that compels a person not to talk about something. It's pretty common to hear "I can neither confirm nor deny..." from government officials who work with secret stuff. I think chances are pretty good that would work for civilians under gag orders as well.
- 15y ago
- viggity 15y agothis is not hacker news.
- Anechoic 15y agoAs noted by another post, the guy who received the NSL ran an ISP and the NSL was a request to turn over electronic records regarding the ISP. If that is of no concern to hackers, I don't know what is.
- ascendant 15y agoThe US government trampling all over your rights, digital and RL is very much a concern for everyone, hackers included.
- wtn 15y agoWhile I think the government policy is questionable, I am also concerned by the willingness of communications companies to respond to requests without warrants.
- omouse 15y agoGovernment and business are in bed together. This is how the capitalist system works.
- mc32 15y agoI'd place a good bet it's not endemic of capitalist economic systems. Put another way, government and business (private or state or otherwise) necessarily operate with one another (co-operate). So implying that it's a trait solely of capitalism is not genuine.
- billswift 15y agoBusinesses don't have any choices - they cooperate or are shut down; they are even more vulnerable to state coercion than individuals are, both legal and sub-rosa actions.
- jeffreyg 15y ago(2007)
- imrehg 15y agoAs a non-lawyer, what would be the situation of this person is asked in the court about some of their actions that is explained by the existence of the gag order? Would "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" override that gag order, or they had to somehow withhold that information?
- mdaniel 15y agoI don't know if you were asking a rhetorical question, but my opinion is that if you were in court under those circumstances, it's likely you are going to jail. If the FBI finds out you talked, you will be jailed [as I presume that's the threat]; if the court finds out you lied, you will be jailed for perjury. Only if you perjure yourself but don't get caught will you escape.
- msg 15y agoYou would take the Fifth Amendment and invoke your right against self incrimination.
- aplusbi 15y agoWhile I suppose in practice this is true, I don't think the 5th amendment would technically apply. By mentioning the gag order you are not incriminating yourself but rather committing a crime.
- JoachimSchipper 15y agoThe argument goes "whether or not you are under a gag order, you can plead the fifth without incriminating yourself, so this is not actually a lose-lose situation". In theory.
- aplusbi 15y agoI understand your argument. My point was that revealing the gag order is not self-incrimination - it is committing a crime. Technically speaking, you are only allowed to refuse to answer a question if you believe that answering will incriminate yourself.
- jdp23 15y agoRemember that the several clauses of PATRIOT Act will sunset unless they're renewed by the end of May. Once Congress returns (the week of May 2) expect floor fights in both the House and Senate. It's a great opportunity to introduce reforms -- including NSL's and gag orders. EFF has more at https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=468 https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=Us...
- megamark16 15y agoI must be getting old. After reading this article I wrote an email to my representative. I'm pretty sure that's a checkbox on the form I fill out when I get a physical: Have you ever sent a strongly worded letter to an elected official? []Yes []No
- ck2 15y agoFun fact: under Obama the rate of "national security letters" has only increased as well as the number of whistleblowers prosecuted. Not saying he personally directed the FBI to increase, just saying it has and nothing has stopped it. But he has personally sought to expand NSL powers. some background: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/obama-sides-republicans-patriot-act-renewal-bill-p http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/obama-sides-republicans... http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/us/politics/12leak.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&hp http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/us/politics/12leak.html?_r... http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/16/prosecutions http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/16... http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=135889 http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=135889 http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=11011&catid=155:nonprofit-newswire&Itemid=986 http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/index.php?option=com_conte... And Manning is in serious, serious trouble under Obama, I will be amazed if he gets only life, because they purposely just added an "aiding the enemy" charge which carries a death sentence: http://www.salon.com/news/wikileaks/?story=/opinion/greenwald/2011/04/20/manning http://www.salon.com/news/wikileaks/?story=/opinion/greenwal... http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/21/obama.interruption/ http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/21/obama.interruption/
- enko 15y agoNot to sound disrespectful, but it's been obvious for some time that these issues are systemic and have very little to do with who is democrat or republican, labor or liberal, tory or whig.
- ck2 15y agoOh I agree. It comes down to law enforcement on every level always abusing every power they are ever given, far beyond the original purpose - doesn't matter if they are left or right thinking, federal, state or local. It's just always surprising to see the left do it because it seems counterintuitive. I also think Senator Obama would be completely freaking out at President Obama.
- anamax 15y ago> Not to sound disrespectful, but it's been obvious for some time that these issues are systemic and have very little to do with who is democrat or republican, labor or liberal, tory or whig. While that may be true, you don't hear it nearly as much when a Repub or Tory is in the executive office.
- binarymax 15y agoA sign similar to this was proposed by librarians: "The FBI has not served this library a national security letter. Please watch for removal of this sign."
- Volscio 15y agoPlease date old articles in the subject line. i.e. "My National Security Letter Gag Order (2007)"
- Cushman 15y agoOutrageous proposal time: NSL DDoS. Let's say I own a business. Every week, I get two dozen letters purporting to be from the FBI requesting information on my customers. Some of the requests are clearly ridiculous; others might be genuine. If they are genuine, I'm forbidden from discussing them over the phone; the requests aren't a matter of public record, so I can't look them up; I don't have a secure fax, I run an internet company. I could tell my lawyer about it, but he'd be subject to the same restrictions as me. My only options are either to submit an individual request for verification for each letter by delivery service, or comply with every request I receive, deluging the FBI with frivolous documents. Either way, thousands of companies attempting to comply with dozens of such requests every week and the secret police system would quickly grind to a halt. To be followed shortly by a lengthy prison sentence — if they're lucky — for anyone participating in the fabrication of government documents, of course. Still, it's a fascinating prospect.
- bobds 15y agoYour proposal has some interesting implications. There's a bunch of services offering web-to-snail-mail facilities. Some of them even offer an API, so this could in theory be automated.
- bradleyland 15y agoSomeone has to pay the bill, which means someone will go to jail. The only reason online DDoS attacks are perpetrated successfully is because of the relative ease of execution and the anonymity provided by an internet connection. Still, even with the loosely connected identifying information available about your internet connection, the FBI is issuing warrants [1] for participants in recent DDoS attacks. A paper campaign's only chance for success would be if individuals physically printed and mailed the letters anonymously by posting them in a public mailbox. Investigators would have to rely on traditional investigatory methods like finger prints and mysterious printer identification dots [2], which work much slower. 1 - http://www.google.com/search?q=fbi+ddos+anonymous+warrant http://www.google.com/search?q=fbi+ddos+anonymous+warrant 2 - http://boingboing.net/2008/10/23/howto-read-the-secre.html http://boingboing.net/2008/10/23/howto-read-the-secre.html
- shareme 15y agoa comparison..a person entering the US military and getting a the lowest level of clearance has less punishment if caught disclosing than these NCLs..
- __david__ 15y agoHaving never seen the contents of a national security letter, I wonder what the ramifications would be if you opened it and read it aloud for the first time in front of a large (or small) group of people. Or perhaps have it read aloud to you in front of a large group of people. Certainly you can't be expected to know that is going to gag you until you've read it once and by that time it would be too late. Is it worded such that the whole group of people would be gagged? There's got to be some interesting way to circumvent it.