3 ms·
That's ridiculous. There's no NDA in the world that prevents you from disclosing the true financials of your company. You don't need to specify who you're servi
by spywaregorilla 5y ago
That's ridiculous. There's no NDA in the world that prevents you from disclosing the true financials of your company. You don't need to specify who you're serving. His charge of insider trading is because he blatantly lied about the company doing well to inflate the price while selling his shares knowing it was not.
- r00fus 5y agoThat's exactly the kind of wording that NSLs require. It's why the idea of a "warrant canary" [1] came into existence. As to the selling of shares - prima facie, that's likely criminal (insider selling) but I don't know the details of his case. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_canary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_canary
- spywaregorilla 5y agoNo, it absolutely is not. Not even close. Love for clever little hacker things does not carry any weight here. How could you possibly believe that it would have been illegal for this company to correctly state the amount of revenue it received? You do not need to acknowledge that you received an NSL in order to acknowledge you are no longer providing services to the NSA. You do not need to reference the NSA or NSL at all in order to correctly state revenue, because you are not required to show all of the entities with which you're doing business. It is fully possible to pretend you simply lost the NSA contract for non-NSL related reasons. His fraud is his own doing