Keep up with the news by installing RT’s extension for . Never miss a story with this clean and simple app that delivers the latest headlines to you.

 

Defiant Apple, Facebook, other firms to inform public of govt surveillance requests

Published time: May 02, 2014 01:07
Edited time: May 02, 2014 06:42
Reuters / Eric Thayer

Reuters / Eric Thayer

The same technology companies that the US intelligence community has relied upon to disclose email records are now refusing to keep surveillance requests secret and informing customers when they are the subject of such requests.

In the nearly ten months since former US National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden revealed extensive surveillance efforts on everyday Americans’ online activity, the companies that were forced to facilitate that surveillance have come under harsh public scrutiny.

The embarrassment ignited a series of comments from executives at Google and Facebook, among others, calling on the NSA and other agencies to either stop forcing them to provide the communications that customers trust them with, or allow them to be more transparent.

Now, according to a Thursday report in the Washington Post, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, and Google have updated their policies to routinely notify customers when law enforcement has requested information about them.

Yahoo enacted such a change in July, with the Post reporting Thursday that companies “have found that investigators often drop data demands to avoid having suspects learn of inquiries.”

With such influential companies announcing that they will essentially ignore the warning attached to subpoenas asking them to keep knowledge of the requests to themselves, experts say other companies that spend less time in the public eye will be more willing to do so.

It serves to chill the unbridled, cost-free collection,” Albert Gidari Jr., a partner at the firm Perkins Cole who represents multiple technology companies, told the Post. “And I think that’s a good thing.”

Not all requests will be made public. Orders from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has denied only one NSA request in five years, will still be kept classified, as will National Security Letters from the FBI.

Peter Carr, a spokesman for the US Department of Justice, warned that the companies’ divergence from the norm constitutes a massive security flaw. He told the Post there is at least one recent example in which an early disclosure put a cooperative witness in danger, though he refused to provide any further detail.

These risks of endangering life, risking destruction of evidence, or allowing suspects to flee or intimidate witnesses are not merely hypothetical, but unfortunately routine,” Carr said.

Law enforcement’s job is also complicated by the growing number of magistrate judges who are skeptical of the government’s requests. The judicial ideology has quietly spread to courts through the country, frustrating prosecutors as much as it has excited civil libertarians.

Perhaps the most outspoken opinion, though, came from Washington DC Magistrate Judge John M. Facciola, who ruled against government requests to access the Facebook page of Navy Yard gunman Aaron Alexis and a request to search the iPhone of a Georgetown University student accused of making ricin.

Facciola has consistently sought narrower, more specific requests from investigators, as evidenced by an April ruling in a case unrelated to the two aforementioned investigations.

“For the sixth time,” he wrote, as quoted by the Post, “this court must be clear: if the government seizes data it knows is outside the scope of the warrant, it must either destroy the data or return it. It cannot simply keep it.”

Comments (18)

 

Francesca del Greco 08.05.2014 03:05

We do not Give an apple cause we move in mysterious ways.

 

brian 02.05.2014 16:08

Cheap publicity stunt from collaborators!

 

Max21c 02.05.2014 13:23

These companies collaborated all along and they're only pretending to put up any resistance to the CIA, NSA, and Pentagon Gestapo.

No tice how they aren't releasing the info on prior or existing targets of the secret police and only pretending to have a policy to inform new targets. It's just a phony public relations ploy by the Washington Regime, their secret police, and their puppet companies and collaborators.

View all comments (18)
Add comment

Authorization required for adding comments

Register or

Name

Password

Show password

Register

or Register

Request a new password

Send

or Register

To complete a registration check
your Email:

OK

or Register

A password has been sent to your email address

Edit profile

X

Name

New password

Retype new password

Current password

Save

Cancel

Follow us

Follow us