4 ms·

This is a poor headline that does not accurately reflect the situation. Microsoft and Facebook made deals with the government to include NSLs and FISA warrants

This is a poor headline that does not accurately reflect the situation. Microsoft and Facebook made deals with the government to include NSLs and FISA warrants in their total disclosure numbers as long as they kept them grouped together, but Google had already made a deal in the past to disclose NSLs separately from regular law enforcement warrant numbers and accepting the new deal would've forced them to lump the NSLs in with the rest, reducing the usefulness of the overall numbers. Instead they seem to be pushing to be allowed to disclose regular warrants, FISA warrants and NSLs all separately. This is a good thing.

anologwintermut 13y ago
I believe that data covered only NSLs and explicitly didn't cover FISA requests. In fact, Google's spokes person makes this clear in the article: " a Google spokesman said the company has 'always believed that it’s important to differentiate between different types of government requests,' referring to requests for data in criminal cases, and data requests stemming from national security-related, classified orders. 'Lumping the two categories together would be a step back for users,' the Google spokesman added in the statement. 'Our request to the government is clear: to be able to publish aggregate numbers of national security requests, including FISA disclosures, separately.'"
- LoganCale 13y ago
  Facebook (and I presume Microsoft) are including regular warrants, FISA warrants, and NSLs. https://newsroom.fb.com/News/636/Facebook-Releases-Data-Including-All-National-Security-Requests https://newsroom.fb.com/News/636/Facebook-Releases-Data-Incl... Google is, and has been for some time, including regular warrants and NSLs but not FISA warrants. They could have gone along with the same agreement Facebook and Microsoft made, but that would've required them to group the NSLs and FISA warrants in with the regular warrants. Instead they kept doing what they currently do, which is to show NSLs separately but not include the still forbidden FISA warrants. https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/US/ https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/U...

anologwintermut 13y ago

I believe that data covered only NSLs and explicitly didn't cover FISA requests. In fact, Google's spokes person makes this clear in the article: " a Google spokesman said the company has 'always believed that it’s important to differentiate between different types of government requests,' referring to requests for data in criminal cases, and data requests stemming from national security-related, classified orders. 'Lumping the two categories together would be a step back for users,' the Google spokesman added in the statement. 'Our request to the government is clear: to be able to publish aggregate numbers of national security requests, including FISA disclosures, separately.'"

LoganCale 13y ago
Facebook (and I presume Microsoft) are including regular warrants, FISA warrants, and NSLs. https://newsroom.fb.com/News/636/Facebook-Releases-Data-Including-All-National-Security-Requests https://newsroom.fb.com/News/636/Facebook-Releases-Data-Incl... Google is, and has been for some time, including regular warrants and NSLs but not FISA warrants. They could have gone along with the same agreement Facebook and Microsoft made, but that would've required them to group the NSLs and FISA warrants in with the regular warrants. Instead they kept doing what they currently do, which is to show NSLs separately but not include the still forbidden FISA warrants. https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/US/ https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/U...