4 ms·

It is not clear it was done with a warrant. It may have merely been a subpoena for the account details but not really contents. Since FBI refuses to respond to

by rdl 5y ago

It is not clear it was done with a warrant. It may have merely been a subpoena for the account details but not really contents. Since FBI refuses to respond to me or my attorney (Jennifer Granick of ACLU, one of the top in this field), we don't know.

ianhawes 5y ago
How many “Law Enforcement Notice” emails did you receive from Facebook? 1 or multiple? Did Facebook release the case ID associated with the legal action? Have you tried a Privacy Act request with the FBI? They may deny it based on “current or prospective law enforcement” but if you were scooped up in a dragnet, they may give you something.
- rdl 5y ago
  1 (I also emailed them and was told "we can't give you legal advice"). I have the case IDs but my lawyer (Jennifer Granick; she is basically among the best in the world for this) has been unable to get a response from FBI -- they blew her off 5 times. I did FOIA myself and got "no information since last time you requested" (~10 years ago, which was also basically null) A Senator's office is involved now. (This is all complicated even more because I currently live in a US Territory where we don't have Congressional representation.)
bifrost 5y ago
Might be time for a class action suit!
sneak 5y ago
I meant the general practice of government snoops getting non-e2e customer data from FAANG et al. People get upset or outraged about warrantless stuff, and they should, but it's important to remember that even search warrants in the USA are essentially rubber stamp (unless they specify like "every photo posted to instagram on x date" or some other obviously overbroad thing). The companies' own transparency reports show the scale of warrants/etc versus NSLs, FISA orders, and the other warrantless stuff people take issue with. Even without FISA 702 (aka PRISM), National Security Letters, et c, providers having huge, long term, comprehensive non-e2e troves of our data (ie gmail, instagram) is a hazard due to search warrants and of course the insane third party doctrine.

by rdl 5y ago

ianhawes 5y ago

How many “Law Enforcement Notice” emails did you receive from Facebook? 1 or multiple? Did Facebook release the case ID associated with the legal action? Have you tried a Privacy Act request with the FBI? They may deny it based on “current or prospective law enforcement” but if you were scooped up in a dragnet, they may give you something.

rdl 5y ago
1 (I also emailed them and was told "we can't give you legal advice"). I have the case IDs but my lawyer (Jennifer Granick; she is basically among the best in the world for this) has been unable to get a response from FBI -- they blew her off 5 times. I did FOIA myself and got "no information since last time you requested" (~10 years ago, which was also basically null) A Senator's office is involved now. (This is all complicated even more because I currently live in a US Territory where we don't have Congressional representation.)

bifrost 5y ago

Might be time for a class action suit!

sneak 5y ago

I meant the general practice of government snoops getting non-e2e customer data from FAANG et al. People get upset or outraged about warrantless stuff, and they should, but it's important to remember that even search warrants in the USA are essentially rubber stamp (unless they specify like "every photo posted to instagram on x date" or some other obviously overbroad thing). The companies' own transparency reports show the scale of warrants/etc versus NSLs, FISA orders, and the other warrantless stuff people take issue with. Even without FISA 702 (aka PRISM), National Security Letters, et c, providers having huge, long term, comprehensive non-e2e troves of our data (ie gmail, instagram) is a hazard due to search warrants and of course the insane third party doctrine.