My favorite part right from the intro (and touched on elsewhere): Releasing information that could induce adversaries to shift communications platforms in orde

My favorite part right from the intro (and touched on elsewhere): Releasing information that could induce adversaries to shift communications platforms in order to avoid surveillance would cause serious harm to national security... So now I wonder a few of things: 1. The NSA will protect the companies who entered in a strong agreement with them by using the "they can't lose customers, we need to watch their customers" argument? If so, that means that companies may be encouraged to enter a strong agreement knowing it will remain secret and they don't have to spend time/resources validating requests. The only thing preventing the want to enter a strong agreement with the NSA now is morality. 2. If some companies are given the transparency and others aren't, isn't the omission alone enough to assume it has entered in a strong agreement? 3. Did these companies make the petition knowing there request for transparency would not be granted on the levels they want so they can save face to their customers saying "well, we tried"? Edit: Formatting