7 ms·

Relevant excerpts: Microsoft believes you own emails stored in the cloud, and that they have the same privacy protection as paper letters sent by mail... The

by panarky 12y ago

Relevant excerpts: Microsoft believes you own emails stored in the cloud, and that they have the same privacy protection as paper letters sent by mail... The U.S. government can obtain emails only subject to the full legal protections of the Constitution's Fourth Amendment... A search warrant cannot reach beyond U.S. shores... [The US government] argues that your emails become the business records of a cloud provider. Because business records have a lower level of legal protection, the government claims that it can use its broader authority to reach emails stored anywhere in the world.

lisper 12y ago
> your emails become the business records of a cloud provider That is simply ridiculous. Email stored by a cloud provider isn't a business record of the provider any more than the contents of a physical letter stored in a rented mail box is a business record of the box provider.
- 616c 12y ago
  And soon they will argue that your mail is not your mail, and subject to legal protection, when it is in any USPS facility because it is government assets until it touches your mailbox. Granted, they already track all metadata without opening it (if you believe that). This is attrocious. I come from a family of attorneys and I have told them I lost all respect for the system in which they operate, and Jeffersonian calls to refresh the tree of liberty have started to seem very real and urgent these days. In short, fuck these animals. I hope they choke.
- rayiner 12y ago
  A physical letter in a rented mailbox is also generally not data-mined for the commercial purposes of the service provider. I think cloud companies essentially want the 4th amendment benefits of treating the cloud like real world private areas (e.g. bank lock boxes), without any of the obligations that come along with that. The "reasonable expectation of privacy" in things like safe deposit boxes or storage units is based on the actual fact that service providers generally do not and cannot access the contents of those rented spaces. To apply that same reasoning to data stored in the cloud, we have to indulge in the fiction that various bots and sysops cannot in fact access that data, and do not routinely do so. That said, I think the cloud folks are ultimately going to win, on the basis of Riley v. California (which is noted in Brad Smith's op-ed). I think Riley is technologically ignorant in glossing over technical distinctions between local and cloud storage that are relevant to privacy, but it all but says the cloud is protected under the 4th amendment. I don't know what's left to fight over.
  - niels_olson 12y ago
    Gmail is not the only cloud. Does Apple datamine icloud.com or me.com emails? The fact that the email may exist on multiple servers around the world (aka, cloud) doesn't per se mean the company is abusing the customer's trust.
  - 67726e 12y ago
    Are you telling me that a banker does not have the capabilities to access a rented lock-box? That only the renter has that key? What then happens if a renter dies and that key is missing?
    - lost_name 12y ago
      If you're referring to safe deposit boxes, I believe they drill the lock and replace it.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
  - lisper 12y ago
    > The "reasonable expectation of privacy" in things like safe deposit boxes or storage units is based on the actual fact that service providers generally do not and cannot access the contents of those rented spaces. And the "reasonable expectation of privacy" in cloud email is based on the fact that, while computers necessarily have access to the data (it is not possible to provide email service otherwise), humans generally don't.
    - harryh 12y ago
      If you don't think that humans have access to the contents of your cloud hosted email service then I've got a bridge to sell you.
      - eitland 12y ago
        They have access to it yes, they just risk being fired if they nose into data unrelated to their job. (That is, at least for employees at one of the big ones. ;-)
higherpurpose 12y ago
> Microsoft believes you own emails stored in the cloud, and that they have the same privacy protection as paper letters sent by mail But do they, really? http://www.bbc.com/news/business-26677607 http://www.bbc.com/news/business-26677607
rhino369 12y ago
>A search warrant cannot reach beyond U.S. shores... Well, that is also part of this case. The court is going to determine how to fit data into the current caselaw. There is good reason for why the US can't order searches in another country. But if Microsoft has servers in the United States that can routinely access their cloud servers, there is a good argument that data is really in the United States as well. The business records argument is a bad one. However, I don't see any good reason for why the government shouldn't be able to access American companies cloud data with valid warrant.
- rayiner 12y ago
  The government's case here isn't a ridiculous one. I can't think of any other situation where there is 4th amendment protection of property in custody of a third party where the custodian has essentially unregulated and unrestricted access to the property and no consequences for loss or damage to the property. Its a really novel argument on the part of Microsoft to claim that your emails on their service are still your property, when none of the usual protections that apply to property held by third parties applies to that email.
  - rhino369 12y ago
    I hadn't considered the impact of the fat that Microsoft is data mining. I haven't read the DOJ's brief, do they raise that argument? Northwestern lawyers per capita on this chat bort is out of control.
  - seanflyon 12y ago
    If I rent my house to you, you have unregulated and unrestricted access to it. That does not mean that the government can, without either of us giving permission, search that house.
    - rayiner 12y ago
      If you rent your house to me, you no longer have unregulated and unrestricted access to it. You can only access it in certain circumstances defined by landlord-tenant law. That's what creates the expectation of privacy: you know your landlord will only enter your unit for emergencies or with adequate notice to you. You can sue them if they violate these requirements. The difference with cloud hosting is that, unlike your landlord, your cloud host does have unregulated and unrestricted access to your cloud storage.
wahsd 12y ago
If people only realized how our government is the vampire squid that is hell-bent on world domination. Embrace your future state of slavery, it is invariable.
- krapp 12y ago
  I don't think there's any shortage of people who believe the US government is a bloodsucking, many-tentacled world-destroying monster. But hyperbole of this degree is neither insightful, nor is it helpful.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
count 12y ago
So, with the US Govt. move to use commercial cloud providers (including Microsoft Office365!), does that then make all of the USG communications stored on that system 'business records' of the provider? That would completely destroy the whole cloud market for anything other than public data...

by panarky 12y ago

lisper 12y ago

> your emails become the business records of a cloud provider That is simply ridiculous. Email stored by a cloud provider isn't a business record of the provider any more than the contents of a physical letter stored in a rented mail box is a business record of the box provider.

616c 12y ago
And soon they will argue that your mail is not your mail, and subject to legal protection, when it is in any USPS facility because it is government assets until it touches your mailbox. Granted, they already track all metadata without opening it (if you believe that). This is attrocious. I come from a family of attorneys and I have told them I lost all respect for the system in which they operate, and Jeffersonian calls to refresh the tree of liberty have started to seem very real and urgent these days. In short, fuck these animals. I hope they choke.
rayiner 12y ago
A physical letter in a rented mailbox is also generally not data-mined for the commercial purposes of the service provider. I think cloud companies essentially want the 4th amendment benefits of treating the cloud like real world private areas (e.g. bank lock boxes), without any of the obligations that come along with that. The "reasonable expectation of privacy" in things like safe deposit boxes or storage units is based on the actual fact that service providers generally do not and cannot access the contents of those rented spaces. To apply that same reasoning to data stored in the cloud, we have to indulge in the fiction that various bots and sysops cannot in fact access that data, and do not routinely do so. That said, I think the cloud folks are ultimately going to win, on the basis of Riley v. California (which is noted in Brad Smith's op-ed). I think Riley is technologically ignorant in glossing over technical distinctions between local and cloud storage that are relevant to privacy, but it all but says the cloud is protected under the 4th amendment. I don't know what's left to fight over.
- niels_olson 12y ago
  Gmail is not the only cloud. Does Apple datamine icloud.com or me.com emails? The fact that the email may exist on multiple servers around the world (aka, cloud) doesn't per se mean the company is abusing the customer's trust.
- 67726e 12y ago
  Are you telling me that a banker does not have the capabilities to access a rented lock-box? That only the renter has that key? What then happens if a renter dies and that key is missing?
  - lost_name 12y ago
    If you're referring to safe deposit boxes, I believe they drill the lock and replace it.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- lisper 12y ago
  > The "reasonable expectation of privacy" in things like safe deposit boxes or storage units is based on the actual fact that service providers generally do not and cannot access the contents of those rented spaces. And the "reasonable expectation of privacy" in cloud email is based on the fact that, while computers necessarily have access to the data (it is not possible to provide email service otherwise), humans generally don't.
  - harryh 12y ago
    If you don't think that humans have access to the contents of your cloud hosted email service then I've got a bridge to sell you.
    - eitland 12y ago
      They have access to it yes, they just risk being fired if they nose into data unrelated to their job. (That is, at least for employees at one of the big ones. ;-)

higherpurpose 12y ago

> Microsoft believes you own emails stored in the cloud, and that they have the same privacy protection as paper letters sent by mail But do they, really? http://www.bbc.com/news/business-26677607 http://www.bbc.com/news/business-26677607

rhino369 12y ago

>A search warrant cannot reach beyond U.S. shores... Well, that is also part of this case. The court is going to determine how to fit data into the current caselaw. There is good reason for why the US can't order searches in another country. But if Microsoft has servers in the United States that can routinely access their cloud servers, there is a good argument that data is really in the United States as well. The business records argument is a bad one. However, I don't see any good reason for why the government shouldn't be able to access American companies cloud data with valid warrant.

rayiner 12y ago
The government's case here isn't a ridiculous one. I can't think of any other situation where there is 4th amendment protection of property in custody of a third party where the custodian has essentially unregulated and unrestricted access to the property and no consequences for loss or damage to the property. Its a really novel argument on the part of Microsoft to claim that your emails on their service are still your property, when none of the usual protections that apply to property held by third parties applies to that email.
- rhino369 12y ago
  I hadn't considered the impact of the fat that Microsoft is data mining. I haven't read the DOJ's brief, do they raise that argument? Northwestern lawyers per capita on this chat bort is out of control.
- seanflyon 12y ago
  If I rent my house to you, you have unregulated and unrestricted access to it. That does not mean that the government can, without either of us giving permission, search that house.
  - rayiner 12y ago
    If you rent your house to me, you no longer have unregulated and unrestricted access to it. You can only access it in certain circumstances defined by landlord-tenant law. That's what creates the expectation of privacy: you know your landlord will only enter your unit for emergencies or with adequate notice to you. You can sue them if they violate these requirements. The difference with cloud hosting is that, unlike your landlord, your cloud host does have unregulated and unrestricted access to your cloud storage.

wahsd 12y ago

If people only realized how our government is the vampire squid that is hell-bent on world domination. Embrace your future state of slavery, it is invariable.

krapp 12y ago
I don't think there's any shortage of people who believe the US government is a bloodsucking, many-tentacled world-destroying monster. But hyperbole of this degree is neither insightful, nor is it helpful.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

count 12y ago

So, with the US Govt. move to use commercial cloud providers (including Microsoft Office365!), does that then make all of the USG communications stored on that system 'business records' of the provider? That would completely destroy the whole cloud market for anything other than public data...