Slashdot Mirror
Patriot Act Clouds Picture For Tech
Harperdog writes "Politico has a piece on how the Patriot Act is interfering with U.S. firms trying to do business overseas in the area of cloud computing. Here's a quote: 'The Sept. 11-era law was supposed to help the intelligence community gather data on suspected terrorists. But competitors overseas are using it as a way to discourage foreign countries from signing on with U.S. cloud computing providers like Google and Microsoft: Put your data on a U.S.-based cloud, they warn, and you may just put it in the hands of the U.S. government.'"
...you put it anywhere on the "cloud", and it's one mis-step away from being everywhere.
Doesn't matter if you comply with EU data protection rules, we still don't trust you.
No comment
No, this isn't new, it's an argument that's been used since the USAPATRIOT Act passed. Well, maybe they're saying 'cloud' instead of 'costing' or 'colocation'. The other good argument is 'the USA has no data protection laws so if you do business in the EU and host your data in the USA then you're opening yourself up to potential liability'.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Friends,
I don't understand these companies' hesitance when deciding to do business with US-based companies. Sure, the data may need to be seen by the government, but we aren't China; the data will be kept safe while our researchers are doing God's work by looking for pedophiles, rapists, and terrorists. Perhaps they could even insert biblical references into the cloud, in order to spread the Word to those who would not otherwise hear it.
Your Friend,
Jake
American companies are scared their data might land in china and copied. This is only news in that the US is turning into the same crazy police state that we've thought was limited to china and north korea.
do they even need to 'warn' ? previous incidents and documents that are in the open shows that u.s. govt, police, secret service, departments etc can wantonly request data from these services and get it. many of these, we discussed here.
Read radical news here
Four thoughts:
They may well be right in thinking their data will be more accessible to the US government.
If I were an overseas competitor, I'd certainly use this as a reason to not to use a US provider. In a heartbeat.
The law of unintended consequences bites the US yet again.
This wouldn't be an issue if the US government hadn't acted the way it has over the last 10 years. The US government has so little trust overseas that people have no trouble thinking the worst of it. Karma is a bitch.
If you put your data in the cloud, you put it in the hands of not just the US government, but every government the cloud company does business with. And also in the hands of every underpaid employee in the company; and while some companies may claim otherwise, their claims are unverifiable and unenforceable. "Cloud" services have their place - it is for data that is intrinsically public and ephemeral. Nobody should ever trust any cloud service with data that is proprietary or private or irreplaceable.
Most obviously, the "free" services are predicated on exploiting the value of their users as product to customers that are not the users. The model makes sense in some cases, for example a forum, where the shared public content is willing coproduced by users of the forum, exchanging their content creation efforts for use of the forum itself, the forum exploiting that content to attract eyeballs to advertisers that pay the bills.
While there are strong logical reasons why cloud services are intrinsically untrustable (ultimately, he who owns the hardware, owns the data), a simple thought experiment proves the folly: how hard is it to bribe an employee of a cloud service to give you inappropriate access to someone's data? Do you think you couldn't find one employee in one company somewhere? While one may be able to find companies that are currently resistant to easy attacks, cloud companies come and go like the .coms that they are are, and with inevitable waning economic optimism, so too wanes employee loyalty. In the eventual asset transactions that follow, acquiring companies of even trusted entities are unknowns and customers have no recourse and no authority.
At best, the loss of yet another fleeting cloud service means only the loss of the associated data and whatever codependent business line the cloud service customer bet on the serial risk of the success of the cloud company itself.
The premise of handing your proprietary data to another person for remote, invisible processing and care is fundamentally flawed. Your interests are not aligned and their interests will evolve and ultimately diverge or fail.
Foreign companies (and US as well) are well advised to be wary of cloud services.
But competitors overseas are using it as a way to discourage foreign countries from signing on with U.S. cloud computing providers like Google and Microsoft
It's not just competitors highlighting that important fact! As a European, I personally don't want my data to fall into the wrong hands, and the hands of the US corporation-state are most definitely wrong.
I don't see the issue. Unless your using the cloud to store kiddy porn, your terrorism plots, or other illegal shit why do you care? The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
Well, at least their fear mongering seems to be accurate. Is it really FUD if it's true, or maybe it's just a good reminder that we used to feel a little more secure in the privacy of our thoughts and data.
If people think their own government security/spy agencies aren't hacking (or coercing their way) into their own (non-US) infrastructure, then that's more a statement about their own gullibility than those mean, nasty Americans and their dastardly Patriot Act.
Signed, the Necrophiliac.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
If your data gets accessed without your knowledge or consent then it is your own fault.
The "cloud" analogy always seemed like "newspeak" to me, designed to get the customer to NOT think about where their data is "Don't worry we will take care of it" while their data is sitting on some cheesy server with questionable security practices and the usual disgruntled suspects.
Seriously what next? A service to wipe your ass because you can't be bothered? (note to self research iPhone controlled bidet)
Since it still has to sit on a server somewhere it might as well be your own server then deploy software that makes it accessible to you on the road, in addition how many jobs does this destroy for IT personal, some of the few decent paying jobs left in the USA.
To me the "cloud" is as ridiculous as Facebook, if you're stupid enough to put your data on FB you deserve what you get.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
USA! USA! USA!
Salesman: "That's right, since we don't operate within the borders of those capitalist pig Americans, we're way more trustworthy then them... We absolutely promise that we'll never give away your data to the US government, no matter how many times they ask us. ............... Wait... what just happened?
Customer: That's great... but what about your own government? Do you ever give data up to them?
Salesman: Huh? Well, of course not! At least, not without a court order, anyway... or a law which says we have to for some reason.
Customer: Ah... So how is that different from the US based companies again?
Salesman: Ummm... but... capitalist pigs... ummm...
Customer: I see. Well, this has been very illuminating indeed. I'll get back to you on my decision real soon.
Salesman:
Except that said US court orders can be executed by a secret court with no oversight. Pretty much like China's.
Check your premises.
th3re arE
Soft Kitty,
Warm Kitty,
Little ball of fur.
Happy Kitty,
Sleepy Kitty,
purr purr purr.
We deal with this on a daily basis. Our clients (large Fortune 500 corporations) are requesting that we do not store data in the US. I personally think it has more to do with the fact that they are up to shady financial maneuvers than terrorism, but the end result is the same. It is just another nail in the economic coffin of the United States. The oft claimed, "It is too expensive/risky to do business in the States" rears its ugly head again.
The article talks about "cloud" providers, which we are not. We are more of a SaaS shop, but the regulatory challenges are the same. It all comes down to the client wanting to feel like their data is safe, and that they will have some expectation of privacy. With the United States government declaring the right to come in and seize data (the life blood of any company in this day and age) without any form of real due process, corporations are deciding that they do not want to subject themselves to that unnecessary liability.
I work at a 2,000 person organization outside the US. The institution has formally adopted a policy that no sensitive data can be hosted in the US, precisely due to the Patriot Act.
Don't look for logic in this. They would rather we use a server sitting under some IT guy's desk than use, say, DropBox, which is based on encrypted S3 storage. But perceptions are everything.
Should be the "All Your Data Are Belong To Us" department.
This will show who's asleep at the wheel. All the services offering SaaS and Cloud-based services including anti-virus, mail storage, NAS, vulnerability management, the list grows - come at a cost. Namely who are the vendors and who are the customers? When a business had all their enterprise servers on-site there was no question who managed, maintained, and monitored the data at rest or in motion. Now, if a company (and what happens if the "company" is a hospital or retailer having to meet auditory compliance) used a cloud-based service offering they have no way of knowing who is managing, monitoring, maintaining or accessing their data. This is off-shore outsourcing gone awry. It may make sense briefly on the bottom-line, but the bean counters are not considering the extended costs of security and vulnerability. Put your trusted data in someone else's hands and you are assuming they are just as, if not more, safe as you would be.
Quick i need assistance, i step into this article today, use the stamina, right in the heart: "Cloud computing is a transformational model for delivering IT Services. Replacing the rigid boundaries of traditional IT infrastructure with the elasticity of the cloud give businesses the agility to quickly react to rapid changes in demand and better serve their customers. "
Put your data on a U.S.-based cloud, they warn, and you may just put it in the hands of the U.S. government.
Try "Put your data on a U.S.-based cloud, they warn, and you WILL put it in the hands of the U.S. government."
Will draft for food...
Re: "But competitors overseas are using it as a way to discourage foreign countries from signing on with U.S. cloud computing providers like Google and Microsoft"
:)
I'm sure Microsoft and Google are the innocent victims here... not guilty of any sorts of anti-competitive practices at all
We'll just amend the law so that our honored corporate personages are no longer subject to these ignominities while keeping our human scum personages subjugated to the full extent of our data-searching wrath! After all, corporations never support illegal activities, but humans? You can't trust them any farther than you can throw them (or bomb them, or lock them up, etc.).
That is all.
You miss the point. The point is the jurisdiction of the court. Both Europe(and Canada) have data protection laws that say that you cannot divulge certain classes of data without a court order. And it has to be a European (resp. Canadian) court that allows you to give up the information. If you store the data in another jurisdiction where another court can order the data to be divulged, then you have a problem. Because the moment that the cloud service obeys a court order from the other jurisdiction and discloses some of your data, you are in breach of the law in your jurisdiction. The sticking point in the case of the U.S. Patriot Act is that the US government can demand the data without any court oversight and in addition prevent the cloud service from notifying you that the data was disclosed. There have been several controversies here in Canada, specifically in the area of health and student information. One of the provincial governments wanted to outsource some of the government health plan data management to a U.S. company (the lowest bidder). It was effectively stopped because they could not guarantee that someone would not use a U.S. court to order the data management company to disclose the health information of a Canadian citizen in the US. As a result, the data had to remain in Canada, and the US company did not get the contract. Similarly, student information at Canadian Universities has been an issue. I am a professor, and I cannot legally put a spreadsheet with student marks or any other student information in dropbox or on any cloud service that stores the data in the U.S. Just this month, I was approached by a web based application provider that wanted me to use their web app in our classes. But the web app stored all of the data in Amazon EC2. I had to tell them that the best I could do is inform the students that the app existed and disclose the fact that their data would exist outside of Canadian jurisdiction, but under such circumstances, we could not formally adopt the software for the course. We can't require the student to student to store data outside of Canadian jurisdiction as a condition of getting the degree (i.e. completing assignments, and passing the course). Any European company is going to be in a similar bind. While the Data Safe Harbour is supposed to provide an out. But it depends on the extent to which the European governments want to make a stink if the US government goes after the European data held by US companies. Even if the government doesn't make a stink, the nightmare of a European company would be the PR disaster of client data being revealed because of court action in the US.
Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
This seems like trying to spin a general fact of life in terms of "the cloud" (a term I dislike) in to an anti-US thing.
Your data is subject to being looked at by whoever controls it. Doesn't matter if they are supposed to, they can. The idea that the US government is the only one that looks in on data in their country is quite silly.
Also to expand on your bribery note, this could well be done by the government too in any country, but not as direct bribery: Find an employee who is patriotic to your country at the service, recruit them, and use them to get access to data you want. Could be quite easy since even a very moral person might agree. The government sells them on the idea that they need this access for legit work and it is just much quicker and cheaper to do it back channel rather than via the courts.
Basically if you give up your data to someone else, you have to understand that means others can have access. That is going to include their government. Don't think this is unique to the US. Other countries participate in the intelligence game just as much. Look up some information on the British Security Service or Secret Intelligence Service, or the French DGSE.
Host it anywhere, http://cloudi.org
This has come up in the past. While dropbox uses S3 for the base encryption layer, the staff at dropbox have access to the encryption keys. In fact because of a FTC complaint dropbox had to change the terms of use as explained on their blog To clearly indicate that while the contents are encrypted, that dropbox staff still have access to be able to comply with the US justice system. And the US can order the dropbox to disclose the data without telling you that the data was disclosed. At least if the courts come after the data in the server sitting under some IT guy's desk, you will know about it.
Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
"But competitors overseas are using it as a way to discourage foreign countries from signing on with U.S. cloud computing providers like Google and Microsoft: Put your data on a U.S.-based cloud, they warn, and you may just put it in the hands of the U.S. government.'"" All while lying through their teeth when they say they won't provide legally requested info...much less that their own governments are doing the same as the US.
FUD
So why should we trust the US?
and Suggesting They learn from our or make loud noises OS. No3 BSDI is ink splashes across DOG THAT IT IS. IT
Pun Intended
Comparing the cloud security in both countries is like comparing... ummm?
Let's see, in China they shoot you in the back of the head, in America the poison you. In America the rich go Scott free, in China they still might shoot you. In China there really isn't any due process, in America the Gov can suspend it at will. In China there are low paying jobs, in America there are no jobs.
Spock said, "Only Nixon could go to China".
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
Hi,
First: I am working in sales and i am using this pitch (rarely, but it happens). I have no bad conscience about it, since i am doing the customer a service. If he uses a U.S. based cloud for personal data of German citizens without their consent, he would be breaking German law.
The main problem with the Patriot Act is, that it allows seizures of data without court approval and is therefor violating due process as it is defined here (e.g. those infamous "national security letters"). While the U.S. company cannot be sued for following such lettters, the German customer who stored data there can be held liable.
The problem for U.S. companies is even bigger: Even if they store the data in a subsidary (e.g. Ireland), the Patriot Act forces them to hand over data from those data centers as well.
So as long as the Patriot Act is at it is, i will use it as sales argument.
Yours, Martin
P.S. I am simplifying legal issues here, didn't want to post 10 pages of text. The gist is correct.
Salesman: Huh? Well, of course not! At least, not without a court order, anyway... or a law which says we have to for some reason.
Customer: Ah... So how is that different from the US based companies again?
Your government won't leak it to your American competitor. That is the danger of using US servers.
I'm a US citizen and I go out of my way to store my cloud data overseas where privacy protections are the default, not the exception.
The US government is so busy protecting us from everything, wasting money, that it is scary. I say this has a former government worker. They've gone too far and will continue to as long as "never again" means anything to current voters. Sadly, we have 50 yrs more of that.
When the Patriot act came out, our local government was getting criticized for outsourcing the medical services billing to Accenture in the US due to the Patriot Act. I don't recall the end result, but the medical services plan system is getting shredded and everyone has to re-enroll come next year with new cards due to widespread fraud.
But yeah, basically Patriot Act is a disincentive for foreign governments and businesses from outsourcing TO THE US. But it also works the other way around, it prevents foreign states from accepting outsourcing from the US since their residents employee data would be stored IN THE US.
For the most part it is overblown, but just to prove a point, would you dare to outsource the US Government's computer system to China? Would China outsource to the US? A bold NO. Likewise, substitute Russia, this is why I stopped using Livejournal (other than becoming rather crappy.)
The Patriot act is a cockup just like the upcoming Protect-IP/SOPA
Customer: So how is that different from the US based companies again?
Salesman: US companies don't need court order thanks to the "Patriot Act", a law created after 9-11 paranoia.
Customer: I understand.
Is it safe to assume that if you're an EU company, the majority of your end users/clients/customers are in the EU? Wouldn't you want to host your data in the closest cloud geographically to reduce latency anyway? Perhaps the issue only comes into play when you're considering multiple geographic CDN's around the world, and one of these regions is the US.
I have had clients decide against cloud solution providers solely on the Patriot Act basis, as having their data subject to the Patriot Act in turn breaches their own regulatory legislation and data control requirements.
Should be the "All Your Data Are Belong To the USA" department.
Fixed it for you
da da da dum indeed.
The Patriot Act comes down from our Commander and Chief.
In that there is NO ambiguity.
Every CEO, CFO, Board Members and ALL Management persons at ALL USA companies are subject to Presidental Executive Order.
That PO gives the President latitude to 1) Render 2) torture 3) kill ALL at the discression of the Commander and Chief the President of the United States of America PERIOD.
Therefore, the children of the CEO, CFO, Member of Board and EVERY Manager in ALL USA Companies can ENJOY the same SERVICE from the President of the United States of America.
How Wonderful.
How Beautiful.
How Clever.
AH .. a Clever man is worth far more than a successful man. That's our Obama by George.
"Put your data on a U.S.-based cloud, they warn, and you may just put it in the hands of the U.S. government."
As if there's any other way?
They (USA) even need our credit card transactions without sharing theirs.
(yes I am in the EU zone)
So in this war on terror that they cannot win what will be the next thing they need after our data?
The battlefield USA thing?
Do away with the constitution?
So it's truth w.r.t. the data.
LOL The head of the church is usually a sovereign person, ie. they claim to be above the law, and control a state because they are God's representative on Earth.
LOL That's pretty fundamentalist, and does not exist in the U.S.
When constructing a strawman, consider that you may just not know what you're talking about.
With respect that is missing the point entirely. If your local government does something objectionable with your supposedly confidential data there are legal mechanisms to do something about it. If a foreign power does something with the data there isn't much you can do about it.
In the case of the PATRIOT act it's an explicit warning that anything hosted in the USA is fair game and there is nothing you can do about it. While that's not much different to the possiblities anywhere offshore it's still a very clear warning.
Let's just say I'm astonished the accountants in my company have survived to adulthood. The service that does the payroll offsite even spoofs a company email address so of course payment notification gets blocked by any properly set up spam filter.
There's a lot of stuff in the "cloud" that shouldn't be there would never have got there without slick salesfolk completely bypassing anyone with a clue.
... you may just not know what you're talking about.
(Sigh...) It never fails: there's always at least one person in the crowd who simply has no sense of humor at all.
I am sorry, but you actually have a lot wrong in here.
Most of the independent mega churches are actually far left of the fundamentalist denominations. They are derided by many fundies who consider them to have a "watered down for mass consumption, commie Christianity". lol (ironic as the early "church" was very commie)