Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Handed To FBI 3 Wikileaks Staffers' Emails, Digital Data

Posted by timothy on from the why-there-oughtta-be-a-constitution dept.

Ariastis writes Google took almost three years to disclose to the open information group WikiLeaks that it had handed over emails and other digital data belonging to three of its staffers to the FBI under a secret search warrant issued by a federal judge. WikiLeaks were told last month of warrants which were served in March 2012. The subjects of the warrants were the investigations editor of WikiLeaks, the British citizen Sarah Harrison; the spokesperson for the organisation, Kristinn Hrafnsson; and Joseph Farrell, one of its senior editors. When it notified the WikiLeaks employees last month, Google said it had been unable to say anything about the warrants earlier as a gag order had been imposed.

5 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. Encryption? by brian.stinar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I worked for Wikileaks, I think I'd be encrypting everything especially if it involved using a Google server.

    1. Re:Encryption? by grcumb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If I worked for Wikileaks, I think I'd be encrypting everything especially if it involved using a Google server.

      Or better yet...don't use an email provider with any US presence.

      Uh... that only means they don't bother with a warrant. They just go and get whatever they like.

      Perversely, you're actually better off dealing with these ridiculous, draconian, panopticonian laws, because at least in theory you have some kind of recourse - even if it consists of fighting retroactively to reduce the J. Edgar Hoovering up of your personal data. If you use an offshore email provider, the NSA will just grab whatever it wants, whenever it wants, without even the tiniest fig leaf of law to cover up strategic bits.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
  2. Lets blame google! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "We have a 'secret' warrant. Give us what we want or YOU goto jail."

    Damm google for not protecting users... It's all their fault!

  3. Re: What did you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google had no choice under US law. If you want to bash something, bash the US govt. Out of all the big names in tech, Google is still the least evil.

  4. Re:Anyone think it's about 'sex w/o a condom'? by close_wait · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They pretend it's about the Swedish "rape" case, by which I mean consenting sex without a condom.

    Sigh. First off, it's just as easy to extradite someone to the US from the UK as it is from Sweden. If the US wants him, there's no need for them to somehow persuade the Swedish authorities to extradite him first on their behalf.

    Second, sex without consent is rape. If someone agrees to have sex with you on condition that you use a condom, then they haven't consented to condom-less sex. And condom-less sex with a promiscuous stranger risks such nasties as HIV. Whether this happened, we don't know. But the Swedish authorities have the right to carry out an investigation.

    Overall, my feeling is that WikiLeaks is an important public service, but that Julian Assange is a bit of an arsehole.