3 ms·

Funny how GH gets shit for what the US has as laws. I'd focus my outrage on the law, the lawmaker, and those who uphold it. GH is merely trying to go by the boo

by cies 6y ago

Funny how GH gets shit for what the US has as laws. I'd focus my outrage on the law, the lawmaker, and those who uphold it. GH is merely trying to go by the book/ avoid penalties, as expected.

matsemann 6y ago
A single person has no way of influencing this. Twisting Github's and others' arms is a great proxy. If they get flak for their handling of this, they can go argue with law makers.
- imposterr 6y ago
  Does that not just speak to a larger problem with the current political system that twisting the arm of a large company is the only way to affect change?
  - jfrunyon 6y ago
    Does that mean that we shouldn't address any of the smaller problems?
brmgb 6y ago
The US embargo prevents doing business with Iran. Providing service in Iran would be a violation of the embargo. Blocking a whole European company not conducting business with Iran because one of its employee tried to login while there is not respecting the embargo, it's just overreach. GitHub should get flak for that in the same way Paypal regularly get flak for randomly freezing accounts.
- quietbritishjim 6y ago
  > GitHub should get flak for that in the same way Paypal regularly get flak for randomly freezing accounts. If GitHub freezes your account, this is obviously serious and can impact your business to a greater or lesser extent depending on what your business does. But the data is not lost, and you'll likely have a copy of at least some of it (the actual repos) and maybe all of it if you were being careful. If Paypal freeze your account then any money in it is simply lost (and your loss is Paypal's gain!). There's no way you could keep a "backup" of that money even if you were being careful. It's completely incomparable.
  - brmgb 6y ago
    > If Paypal freeze your account then any money in it is simply lost (and your loss is Paypal's gain!). While this is completely tangential to the current discussion, I feel compelled to inform you that that's not how it works. When Paypal freeze your account, your account is not deleted, you just can't do anything with it. The money on it obviously remains yours. You just have to convince them that your account should be unfrozen or wait the maximum duration you agreed to in Paypal ToS - 180 days - after which they have to hand it back to you.
- cies 6y ago
  > GitHub should get flak for that in the same way Paypal regularly get flak for randomly freezing accounts. Random? I think the problem with Paypal was that they do not warn or provide reasons for freezing. GH's reasons are clear. > Blocking a whole European company not conducting business with Iran because one of its employee tried to login while there is not respecting the embargo, it's just overreach. Says who? There is a law, the law is unclear and IHMO a bad law. The law is overreach. Blaming GH for shitty US laws is akin to killing the messenger.
  - astura 6y ago
    > I think the problem with Paypal was that they do not warn or provide reasons for freezing Which is par for the course for financial companies.
  - another-dave 6y ago
    > Says who? There is a law, the law is unclear and IHMO a bad law. Says the US Department of the Treasury, as mentioned in the Twitter thread further down: > 118. I have a client that is in Iran to visit a relative. Do I need to restrict the account? > No. As long as you are satisfied that the client is not ordinarily resident in Iran, then the account does not need to be restricted. from their "FAQs: Iran sanctions" page — https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/faqs/topic/1551 https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/...
    - darkwater 6y ago
      And now is when GP should reply saying "oh gee, you are right and I was wrong. thanks for pointing that out."
      - jimmydorry 6y ago
        Github shoulders all the responsibility if they get it wrong. They appear to be doing the reasonable thing, up until this could not be resolved through customer support (as the company bears the burden of satisfying github that they are not violating the embargo).
- jfrunyon 6y ago
  > not conducting business with Iran > its employee tried to login while there Those two statements are incompatible with each other.
  - rurban 6y ago
    Nope. There is an explicit exception for non-citizen's. Only Iranian citizens need to be blocked. And blocking on the first login attempt is overreach. The system doesn't know if you are tourist, visitor or resident. So wait two weeks at least.
    - jfrunyon 6y ago
      Nope. There is an explicit exception for people who you know are not an Iranian national.
tpoacher 6y ago
Well, it's kinda like the whole "if a misbehaving app crashes the whole OS, whose fault is it? The app's? Or the OS?"
x3c 6y ago
Not as per the letter of the law. https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/faqs/118 https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/...
- justin66 6y ago
  It's so peculiar that you - and some guy on twitter, apparently - are quoting a footnote to a FAQ on Treasury's OFAC information page as if that captures the entirety of an American company's obligations under the law. This is really obviously crazy, right? In any other, less political, context involving business law and liability the advice would be "talk to a lawyer."
  - x3c 6y ago
    I doubt GitHub or any org is changing their SOP based on my comment. But the mere existence of a scenario equivalent to the one in question in the operating guidelines suggest there is room fur sanity to prevail in the interpretation of the law.

by cies 6y ago

Funny how GH gets shit for what the US has as laws. I'd focus my outrage on the law, the lawmaker, and those who uphold it. GH is merely trying to go by the book/ avoid penalties, as expected.

matsemann 6y ago

A single person has no way of influencing this. Twisting Github's and others' arms is a great proxy. If they get flak for their handling of this, they can go argue with law makers.

imposterr 6y ago
Does that not just speak to a larger problem with the current political system that twisting the arm of a large company is the only way to affect change?
- jfrunyon 6y ago
  Does that mean that we shouldn't address any of the smaller problems?

brmgb 6y ago

The US embargo prevents doing business with Iran. Providing service in Iran would be a violation of the embargo. Blocking a whole European company not conducting business with Iran because one of its employee tried to login while there is not respecting the embargo, it's just overreach. GitHub should get flak for that in the same way Paypal regularly get flak for randomly freezing accounts.

quietbritishjim 6y ago
> GitHub should get flak for that in the same way Paypal regularly get flak for randomly freezing accounts. If GitHub freezes your account, this is obviously serious and can impact your business to a greater or lesser extent depending on what your business does. But the data is not lost, and you'll likely have a copy of at least some of it (the actual repos) and maybe all of it if you were being careful. If Paypal freeze your account then any money in it is simply lost (and your loss is Paypal's gain!). There's no way you could keep a "backup" of that money even if you were being careful. It's completely incomparable.
- brmgb 6y ago
  > If Paypal freeze your account then any money in it is simply lost (and your loss is Paypal's gain!). While this is completely tangential to the current discussion, I feel compelled to inform you that that's not how it works. When Paypal freeze your account, your account is not deleted, you just can't do anything with it. The money on it obviously remains yours. You just have to convince them that your account should be unfrozen or wait the maximum duration you agreed to in Paypal ToS - 180 days - after which they have to hand it back to you.
cies 6y ago
> GitHub should get flak for that in the same way Paypal regularly get flak for randomly freezing accounts. Random? I think the problem with Paypal was that they do not warn or provide reasons for freezing. GH's reasons are clear. > Blocking a whole European company not conducting business with Iran because one of its employee tried to login while there is not respecting the embargo, it's just overreach. Says who? There is a law, the law is unclear and IHMO a bad law. The law is overreach. Blaming GH for shitty US laws is akin to killing the messenger.
- astura 6y ago
  > I think the problem with Paypal was that they do not warn or provide reasons for freezing Which is par for the course for financial companies.
- another-dave 6y ago
  > Says who? There is a law, the law is unclear and IHMO a bad law. Says the US Department of the Treasury, as mentioned in the Twitter thread further down: > 118. I have a client that is in Iran to visit a relative. Do I need to restrict the account? > No. As long as you are satisfied that the client is not ordinarily resident in Iran, then the account does not need to be restricted. from their "FAQs: Iran sanctions" page — https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/faqs/topic/1551 https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/...
  - darkwater 6y ago
    And now is when GP should reply saying "oh gee, you are right and I was wrong. thanks for pointing that out."
    - jimmydorry 6y ago
      Github shoulders all the responsibility if they get it wrong. They appear to be doing the reasonable thing, up until this could not be resolved through customer support (as the company bears the burden of satisfying github that they are not violating the embargo).
jfrunyon 6y ago
> not conducting business with Iran > its employee tried to login while there Those two statements are incompatible with each other.
- rurban 6y ago
  Nope. There is an explicit exception for non-citizen's. Only Iranian citizens need to be blocked. And blocking on the first login attempt is overreach. The system doesn't know if you are tourist, visitor or resident. So wait two weeks at least.
  - jfrunyon 6y ago
    Nope. There is an explicit exception for people who you know are not an Iranian national.

tpoacher 6y ago

Well, it's kinda like the whole "if a misbehaving app crashes the whole OS, whose fault is it? The app's? Or the OS?"

x3c 6y ago

Not as per the letter of the law. https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/faqs/118 https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/...

justin66 6y ago
It's so peculiar that you - and some guy on twitter, apparently - are quoting a footnote to a FAQ on Treasury's OFAC information page as if that captures the entirety of an American company's obligations under the law. This is really obviously crazy, right? In any other, less political, context involving business law and liability the advice would be "talk to a lawyer."
- x3c 6y ago
  I doubt GitHub or any org is changing their SOP based on my comment. But the mere existence of a scenario equivalent to the one in question in the operating guidelines suggest there is room fur sanity to prevail in the interpretation of the law.