Yahoo Offers Non-Denial Denial of Bombshell Spy Report (theintercept.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Yahoo Offers Non-Denial Denial of Bombshell Spy Report (theintercept.com)

Posted by msmash on Wednesday October 5, 2016 @03:50AM from the caught-off-guard dept.

Reuters reported on Tuesday that Yahoo last year secretly built a custom software program to search all of its customers' incoming emails for specific information provided by U.S. intelligence officials. When The Intercept reached out to Yahoo for an official comment and explanation, the company offered a non-denial response after 20 hours since Reuters's report, a report said. (If a report is inaccurate, the company says so explicitly. Non-denial is something you give when you are caught off guard and things reported are true.) From the report: From Yahoo's PR firm, "The article is misleading. We narrowly interpret every government request for user data to minimize disclosure. The mail scanning described in the article does not exist on our systems." This is an extremely carefully worded statement, arriving roughly 20 hours after the Reuters story first broke. That's a long time to craft 29 words. It's unclear as well why Yahoo wouldn't have put this statement out on Tuesday, rather than responding, cryptically, that they are "a law abiding company, [that] complies with the laws of the United States." But this day-after denial isn't even really a denial: The statement says only that the article is misleading, not false. It denies only that such an email scanning program "does not" exist -- perhaps it did exist at some point between its reported inception in 2015 and today. It also pins quite a bit on the word "described" -- perhaps the Reuters report was overall accurate, but missed a few details. And it would mean a lot more for this denial to come straight from the keyboard of a named executive at Yahoo -- perhaps Ron Bell, the company's general counsel -- rather than a "strategic communications firm."Reuters reported that Yahoo's decision has prompted questions in Europe whether EU citizens' data had been compromised, and this could result in derailing a new trans-Atlantic data sharing deal.

15 of 103 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Weasel Words by Anonymous Coward · 2016-10-05 03:54 · Score: 5, Insightful

I think the more weaselly part of the statement is that they system does not exist "on our systems." So it could exist, but maybe it's on a computer technically owner by the US government.
1. Re:Weasel Words by Anubis+IV · 2016-10-05 04:12 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Precisely what I was thinking. For all we know, they have a black box from a three-letter agency that filters every piece of mail before it hits their system. It's not theirs, so they can hold up their hands and go, "not on our systems!"
  Hell, just toss some emphasis into different parts of that last sentence alone and you can see how weaselly it really is and what it could really mean:
  
  The mail scanning described in the article does not exist on our systems.
  ...but we definitely filter stuff and send it to the government. We just don't like to say that we're scanning it.
  
  The mail scanning described in the article does not exist on our systems.
  ...but something remarkably close is definitely on our systems.
  
  The mail scanning described in the article does not exist on our systems.
  ...but it did up until a few minutes ago when we finished the 20-hour process of removing it, which explains why our response was delayed. Also, we plan to restore it again in just a minute here.
  
  The mail scanning described in the article does not exist on our systems.
  ...but we suspect it does on the government's black box attached to our system.
Marissa Mayer's legacy is at stake by JoeyRox · 2016-10-05 03:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

Her legacy of declining revenue, disgruntled employees, negative ROI, executive departures, strategic blunders, and oh, designer short-skirts.
National Security Letter? by Luthair · 2016-10-05 04:00 · Score: 2

If they were subject to an NSL they wouldn't really be able to talk about it no?
1. Re:National Security Letter? by HBI · 2016-10-05 05:00 · Score: 2
  
  True statement. However, their statement now needs to be true because otherwise they can be sued for it. So their statement now is precisely true. Parse each word carefully.
  If anyone is idiot enough to think NSA would have their own processing system located in someone else's data center...think again. Imagine how you could structure a NSL to permit access to data...perhaps you would put in fiber taps and have the traffic redirected to your own data center? Yahoo would be unable to talk about that due to the terms of the NSL probably issued close to 15 years ago. And that would make their statement now indisputably true.
  
  --
  HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Surprising? by jenningsthecat · 2016-10-05 04:05 · Score: 4, Insightful

Is anyone surprised? Nope, not a bit. Except maybe by the fact that it took so many hours to get a PR firm to put together a few weasel-words and slimy phrases. I'd have thought they already had lots of in-house expertise in that area, by way of spinning the bad news they've repeatedly delivered to their shareholders.

--
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
1. Re:Surprising? by Nidi62 · 2016-10-05 04:34 · Score: 2
  
  Is anyone surprised? Nope, not a bit. Except maybe by the fact that it took so many hours to get a PR firm to put together a few weasel-words and slimy phrases. I'd have thought they already had lots of in-house expertise in that area, by way of spinning the bad news they've repeatedly delivered to their shareholders.
  It probably took so long because they had to have lawyers keep going over proposed statements to make sure that they weren't running afoul of any agreements made with the government regarding exposure or release a statement that would imply an admission of guilt and open them up to possible lawsuits.
  
  --
  The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
translation by JustNiz · 2016-10-05 04:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

>> "The mail scanning described in the article does not exist on our systems"
Translation:
Its actually running on a box that is physically located in our server farm and hardwired right into our backbone, but the NSA owns the hardware.
Re:Yahoo? lol by danbuter · 2016-10-05 04:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

The sad part is, Yahoo used to be good. They had cool cooking shows, a fantastic sports section, and the email was actually one of the best available. Almost all of that is gone, taken away by this cost-cutting CEO who trashed what was left of the company.
Not Accurate: Re:Weasel Words by ripvlan · 2016-10-05 04:22 · Score: 4, Interesting

You missed part of the statement. it states in part "scanning described in the article does not exist on our systems"
Which could mean - a scanning system does exist - but as described does not.
nice work if ya can get it by Thud457 · 2016-10-05 04:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

I wouldn't mind being a failure for a $219 million dollar retirement.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1. Re:nice work if ya can get it by Quirkz · 2016-10-05 07:34 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Heck, I'd be a scapegoat failure for a tenth of that.
  
  --
  The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
Re:Yahoo? lol by bfpierce · 2016-10-05 06:10 · Score: 2

If you're somehow convinced that only Marissa Mayer was bound by Federal Law to implement this type of 'service' for the government, there's something seriously wrong with your brain.
Re:Yahoo? lol by sinij · 2016-10-05 07:16 · Score: 2

Pfft, and they said the geek community was sexist.
They probably said that the geek community was sexy and you simply overheard.

Don't get trolled by obvious trolls.
Re:Yahoo? lol by unixisc · 2016-10-05 08:06 · Score: 2

The sad part is, Yahoo used to be good. They had cool cooking shows, a fantastic sports section, and the email was actually one of the best available. Almost all of that is gone, taken away by this cost-cutting CEO who trashed what was left of the company.
My favorite site of theirs was geocities