Sure. My assumption was that the "routine" warrants wouldn't have gag orders, but I might be wrong on that. But yeah, if it doesn't, the transparency report mig

Sure. My assumption was that the "routine" warrants wouldn't have gag orders, but I might be wrong on that. But yeah, if it doesn't, the transparency report might be a better place to put it, and then it might make sense to make the warrant canary specific to warrants that aren't / can't be in there for one reason or another (gag orders or milder forms of coercion / negotiations). If they are gagging, multiple warrant canaries might work, but I think it becomes harder to argue that you aren't communicating anything if you stop publishing one but still publish the others. Taken to the extreme, you could have many canaries, for example one for every user ("there has been no warrant for your information"), and users might even appreciate that, but stopping with publishing a specific subset of them can communicate a lot of information. It also removes some of the plausible deniability ("maybe they just forgot to update the warrant canary") that comes with having only one, I think.