3 ms·

On page 100 of the actual documents [1], the refusal was not based on chain-of-evidence concerns, but that by using the solution proposed by Levison, the FBI wo

On page 100 of the actual documents [1], the refusal was not based on chain-of-evidence concerns, but that by using the solution proposed by Levison, the FBI would not have real-time access to the data: The e-mail again confirmed that Lavabit is capable of providing the means for the FBI to install the pen-trap device and obtain the requested information in an unencrypted form. AUSA[censored] replied to Mr. Levison's e-mail that same day, explaining that the proposal was inadequate because, among other things, it did not provide for real-time transmission of results... --- [1]: http://cryptome.org/2013/10/lavabit-orders.pdf http://cryptome.org/2013/10/lavabit-orders.pdf

scintill76 13y ago
Great point. On page 46 it says Levison "would be able to collect the data required by the pen register and provide that data to the government after 60 days (the period of the pen register order)." Then, "The prosecutors informed Mr. Levison that the pen register is a devise used to monitor ongoing email traffic on a realtime basis and providing the FBI with data after 60 days was not sufficient." So, I am not sure what to think. After some research I couldn't tell whether "pen register" data is required to be real-time. The original order on page 7 doesn't seem to say "real time", but there could be some legalese or other laws that imply it. Levison was clearly dragging his feet, but it seems sort of bizarre that they escalated their demands in response. Why not just get him charged with contempt and move from there? Since they played the "we can't trust him since he's been uncooperative" card, does this mean they would have trusted him if he complied immediately? What if he immediately turned over info and it didn't help their investigation or went counter to their preconceived notions -- would they have accused him of withholding some and demanded his private keys anyway? There's weird things on both sides here. It sounds like Levison's actions on the whole are not very defensible though. :/

scintill76 13y ago

Great point. On page 46 it says Levison "would be able to collect the data required by the pen register and provide that data to the government after 60 days (the period of the pen register order)." Then, "The prosecutors informed Mr. Levison that the pen register is a devise used to monitor ongoing email traffic on a realtime basis and providing the FBI with data after 60 days was not sufficient." So, I am not sure what to think. After some research I couldn't tell whether "pen register" data is required to be real-time. The original order on page 7 doesn't seem to say "real time", but there could be some legalese or other laws that imply it. Levison was clearly dragging his feet, but it seems sort of bizarre that they escalated their demands in response. Why not just get him charged with contempt and move from there? Since they played the "we can't trust him since he's been uncooperative" card, does this mean they would have trusted him if he complied immediately? What if he immediately turned over info and it didn't help their investigation or went counter to their preconceived notions -- would they have accused him of withholding some and demanded his private keys anyway? There's weird things on both sides here. It sounds like Levison's actions on the whole are not very defensible though. :/