Microsoft Can't Shield User Data From Government, Says Government (bloomberg.com)

Microsoft is now arguing in court that their customers have a right to know when the government is reading their e-mail. But "The U.S. said federal law allows it to obtain electronic communications without a warrant or without disclosure of a specific warrant if it would endanger an individual or an investigation," according to Bloomberg. An anonymous reader quotes their report: The software giant's lawsuit alleging that customers have a constitutional right to know if the government has searched or seized their property should be thrown out, the government said in a court filing... The U.S. says there's no legal basis for the government to be required to tell Microsoft customers when it intercepts their e-mail... The Justice Department's reply Friday underscores the government's willingness to fight back against tech companies it sees obstructing national security and law enforcement investigations...

Secrecy orders on government warrants for access to private e-mail accounts generally prohibit Microsoft from telling customers about the requests for lengthy or even unlimited periods, the company said when it sued. At the time, federal courts had issued almost 2,600 secrecy orders to Microsoft alone, and more than two-thirds had no fixed end date, cases the company can never tell customers about, even after an investigation is completed.

Comments

Thanks Obama

[Anonymous Coward]

used to be before Obama that government was held to higher standards in this regard. I'd hear more about how citizens had a constitutional right to privacy . How government needed search warrants before it could listen in. Now a days under Obama, favored elites are above the law while Snowden and Manning are labeled traitors. The establishment rigs the primaries and then reframes the news in terms of Russians bedding with the outsider. Forget that the establishment elites break the laws , lie under oath, are funded by foreign powers. Forget that Americans are supposed to have constitutional rights and that elected politicians are supposed to uphold those rights. How otherwise will Americans be "safe"??

the real question: legal basis of secrecy

[ooloorie]

The software giant's lawsuit alleging that customers have a constitutional right to know if the government has searched or seized their property should be thrown out, the government said in a court filing... The U.S. says there's no legal basis for the government to be required to tell Microsoft customers when it intercepts their e-mail...

The US Constitution is one of limited government and enumerated powers. I don't see a constitutional basis for the government to tell companies what they can and cannot tell their customers; which of the enumerated powers is that supposed to be?

So, while customers don't necessarily "have a constitutional right to know if the government has searched or seized their property", the government certainly has no constitutional right to prohibit companies from telling customers anything they want.

Re:Next: All orders will be secrecy orders

[myowntrueself]

I'm pretty sure the government in going into the direction of using only secrecy orders ALL THE TIME. Easier, no complain, no report, no end date... why using the "normal" process anyway?

Whats going to end up happening is that all the tech companies that are currently headquartered in the USA will move offshore. They will move all management staff offshore as well; they may have some contractors still in the USA but no high level employee will be in the USA, so there will be no one to whom a national security letter can be delivered. This would render this method of demanding secret access effectively neutered.