Slashdot Mirror
Tech Firms Planning Highly Irate Letter To Government Requesting Transparency
Nerval's Lobster writes "a 'broad alliance' of 63 technology companies and civil liberties organizations plan on demanding more transparency about U.S. government surveillance programs, according to a new report in AllThingsD. Those companies and organizations will reportedly ask the government to allow them to report more accurate information about user-data requests. At the moment, federal agencies forbid Google, Microsoft, and other tech vendors from reporting more than a broad numerical range; for example, Google might announce as part of its Transparency Report that it received between 0-999 National Security Letters (issued by agencies as part of national security investigations) in 2009. 'We seek permission for the same information to be made available regarding the government's national security–related authorities," reads a portion of a letter that will be reportedly published July 19 and signed by all those tech companies. "This information about how and how often the government is using these legal authorities is important to the American people, who are entitled to have an informed public debate about the appropriateness of those authorities and their use.' This is all continuing fallout from Edward Snowden's leaks of top-secret documents alleging that the NSA maintains a program called PRISM that allegedly siphons personal information from the databases of the world's largest tech companies. Ever since, those companies (which have all denied participation in PRISM) have been anxious to show the world that they only give the government as little user data as possible. This new push for more 'transparency' plays to that strategy, and the stakes couldn't be higher—if consumers and businesses lose faith in their IT providers' ability to preserve privacy, the latter's very existence could be at risk."
A highly irate letter only after they were publicly embarrassed. How self-serving. Fuck these companies.
A balanced consideration is in order: Should we warmly regard these oh. so. heroic. companies for their bold stance? Hardly, this is snivelling PR drivel of the highest order.
However, considering the relative number of important friends possessed by "The Constitution" and "Shareholder Value" respectively, is it not a convenient thing that NSA activity be perceived(and ideally actually be) bad for influential American corporations?
Isn't it extremely useful that all American 'cloud' and telecommunications companies now have a PR problem on their hands(and quite possibly a sales problem, EU privacy mandates aren't going to make moving EU customer data onto American servers any more legal if you do business on that side of the pond, and do enjoy selling foreign governments your products on a "Don't worry, it'll be just between you, us, and the American Clandestine Services..." basis)?
Outfits like the EFF and ACLU, not to mention people like Snowden and Manning who take great personal risk, have the moral high ground; but perhaps less so with the 'army of effective lobbyists and vast financial resources'. These companies, by contrast, are mere mercenaries; but may prove useful for so long as NSA spying harms their interests, rather than serves as a revenue stream(looking at you, telco wiretapping fees).
You assume too much. This "irate letter" seems a lot more like a negotiating tactic than anything else. Remember, these corporations signing the letter are among the most privileged of all corporations, in terms of how the government treats them. They have their own personal tax laws, that allow them to claim that their profits are all earned in Luxemburg, and they have private countries where they keep their intellectual property so they don't have to pay taxes here. They are given special treatment from the local level right on up to the federal government. They have enjoyed decades of protection from anti-trust legislation (and yes, that includes Microsoft, even with their successful prosecution). These companies are a part of the government as are the biggest banks and the biggest energy companies.
I believe that behind closed doors, Google, Microsoft, et al, are just fine with the surveillance state, because it plays to their strengths and they're already on the inside. I'm not sure NSA spying harms their interests in any way.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Maybe if they put some weight behind real change it would be worth it. I think they can see that most of their future revenue is going to come from services where they host user data. But if people understand that the Third Party Doctrine, or Business Records Exemption mean that that "their" data is totally and utterly insecure, then the market for those services will be severely damaged. America doesn't have much going for it businesswise any more -- we have a weapons industry and flush government contractors -- but if the government is broke because nobody has anything but a Walmart job, those industries are dead. Technology is the government's biggest potential cash cow -- it should probably NOT shoot it in the head.
I think the tech companies might actually have "good luck with that" perspective. But they have to be willing to make the point. And then support at minimum, legislative limitations on the both Third Party Doctrine and Business Records Exception. Even more preferable, would be a Constitutional amendment defining digital content (including metadata) whereever stored (drives, wire, airwaves) as "papers" and that government access to such data is not affected by where it is stored, i.e., it remains a person's private stuff and unreachable without a warrant supported by probable cause, even if stored offsite so to speak.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
"They are violating our rights, spying on everyone and forcing us to cooperate in all of that." - "I got it! Let's send them a really stern letter!"
This is PR damage-control, nothing else. They're trying to create the impression they were unwilling accomplices.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Putting weight behind a letter seems a bit fanciful.
On the other hand, they can simply present it as a demand, and state that the alternative is each of them will publish ALL the letters delivered to ANY of them and refuse to comply.
Let the DOJ or the DOD put ALL 69 Companies in jail or shut them down. Especially when the government is dependent on most of them and the citizens are customers of all of them.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
I believe that behind closed doors, Google, Microsoft, et al, are just fine with the surveillance state, because it plays to their strengths and they're already on the inside.
I don't think you have any evidentiary basis on which to base that judgment.
It wouldn't surprise me if Google and Microsoft have convinced themselves that whatever they did was right. Moreover, I find it easy to believe that the exact extent of their complicity (unlike, say, the extent of the complicity of telcos) was exaggerated in the leaked documents themselves, and they are genuinely pissed off that they can't set the record straight (as they see it).
Did they go further than you or I or any other civil liberties-minded person would? Almost certainly. But how far did they actually go? We don't know, and they're not allowed to say.
It's rich that the NSA gets to spin this as "people are talking crap about stuff they don't know anything about" (e.g. "the PRISM isn't a programme, just the name of a specific database" line) . What the hell did they expect? No, we don't have complete information first-hand from the people who truly understand it. That's exactly the problem.
So I applaud the tech companies for actually trying to disclose more. More information means we have a better basis on which to judge them, and judge them we shall.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Keep in mind, that data is useless. The real threat is that the NSA likely has equipment redirecting data out of these companies without their direct knowledge. They probably even have staff working there to help facilitate their data collection. The NSA could sink any of these companies at the flick of a switch. So the idea that they're going to threaten the NSA with anything is rather silly. Also, they are likely the recipients of a lot of corporate secrets the NSA pulls in from around the world.
My bet is these companies said something like "Um... NSA? Yea... we're looking pretty bad over here... would it be ok if... I mean... could we send a strongly worded letter.... and uh...."
NSA: "No problem... we'll even write it for you! Now put that dress back on, we want you to look pretty for this next part..."
You want some transparency? So do we. Dump it all. Dump fucking everything. Expose this piece of shit government utterly and completely for every last request, letter and shady program.
You spineless twits, you have utterly and completely shattered the trust you had. Fuck you and fuck your cloud; I hope this exposure of your complicity with the criminal organizations in D.C. costs you billions in lost business. I don't care how you do it; leak information, "oops we were hacked", whatever. Dump it all.
The fact that there is 1 person, 1 guy out of >300 million in this country who has the balls to stand up speaks volumes to who the true enemy and threat to the American people, hell the people of Earth FFS, are: the U.S. Federal government.
So either these spineless companies are trying to save face, or Snowden has still got some really juicy dirt left up his sleeve.
I really, really hope it's the latter.