4 ms·
this is explained in the document they link to. quote: Had Dropbox received just one national-security request [... the report would] look like this: Jan-Dec
by andrewcooke 13y ago
this is explained in the document they link to. quote:
Had Dropbox received just one national-security request [... the report would] look like this:
Jan-Dec 2012 United States 1-1000
Reporting in this way decreases transparency. [...] It would also obfuscate the number of [...] requests [...] which were not sealed and are in the public record.
so they are arguing that you either get the numbers shown or 1-1000 and nothing else (which seems odd to me, as google seem to manage to show both - see my link below).
cut + paste from pdf not working so may be typos above. https://dt8kf6553cww8.cloudfront.net/static/docs/DropboxFISCBrief-vflkjalRT.pdf https://dt8kf6553cww8.cloudfront.net/static/docs/DropboxFISC...
- tekacs 13y agoAlso, it looks like they're trying their best: [Update - 9/23/2013] – Today we filed a legal brief asking the court to confirm that we have the right to report the number of national security requests we receive, if any. You can check out our brief here: Dropbox FISC Brief. We'll keep you updated about any developments.
- eterm 13y agoYou're falling for the assumption they want you to make. They've phrased their document to suggest they have 1-1000 requests without actually saying it. For all we know they could have served thousands of requests last year but are using this as an excuse not to show that.
- andrewcooke 13y agothat would exceed google, which seems unlikely to me. https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/US/ https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/U...