Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo Wants To Know If FBI Ordered Yahoo To Scan Emails (onthewire.io)
Reader Trailrunner7 writes: In an odd twist to an already odd story, Yahoo officials have asked the Director of National Intelligence to confirm whether the federal government ordered the company to scan users' emails for specific terms last year and if so, to declassify the order. The letter is the result of news reports earlier this month that detailed an order that the FBI allegedly served on Yahoo in 2015 in an apparent effort to find messages with a specific set of terms. The stories allege that Yahoo complied with the order and installed custom software to accomplish the task. Yahoo officials said at the time the Reuters story came out that there is no such scanning system on its network, but did not say that the scanning software never existed on the network at all. "Yahoo was mentioned specifically in these reports and we find ourselves unable to respond in detail. Your office, however, is well positioned to clarify this matter of public interest. Accordingly, we urge your office to consider the following actions to provide clarity on the matter: (i) confirm whether an order, as described in these media reports, was issued; (ii) declassify in whole or in part such order, if it exists; and (iii) make a sufficiently detailed public and contextual comment to clarify the alleged facts and circumstances," the letter says.
"And, while you're at it, could you tell Marissa where she left her car keys? She's been searching for days without any luck. "
#DeleteChrome
All of this shit with secret judges signing secret warrants in secret courts, sending National Security Letters with gag orders attached, to the point where confidence in American business is being continually undermined and no one is even allowed to speak about it HAS GOT TO FUCKING STOP.
So Yahoo, a company that made its name as a search engine, can't search through its own corporate records.
Now we know why Yahoo is no longer relevant to anyone.
And now the snooping device is probably on the last step before their network.
I lost it around 2002, the last time I used Yahoo! I'd love to see what's accumulated in that old address since then.
"What did we do? When did we do it? What's this Web thing all about anyway? Who's in charge around here? Is an FBI like a Private Eye?"
If I were Yahoo, and my reputation was damaged from this, and I had received a government FISA order that I couldn't talk about, then I would do exactly this same thing. I see this as similar to a canary - Yahoo can't divulge what the government ordered, so instead, *publicly*, ask the FBA if "a, b, c" happened and to provide details. But I'd make sure I'd word "a, b, c" as what I actually know DID happen. So in fact I've hinted to the world the actual true story without actually providing the information that I'm not legally allowed to make public.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
At least I do if it's responding to the typical unwanted e-mail sitting in my old Yahoo account...
This request is almost certainly being driven by the legal mechanics in Verizon's acquisition of Yahoo. The deal is in rough shape because of the security breach revelation, and Yahoo's bankers and lawyers likely want to go back to VZ with tangible evidence of nothing-to-see-here-folks.
The title is misleading. What Yahoo is asking for is that the Director of National Intelligence address some questions to clarify the matter, since Yahoo is hampered in its ability to do so. Someone at Yahoo would already know that they received an order, if one was issued. They just wouldn't be able to share that information with anybody not directly involved.
It sure sounds to me like they are prohibited from talking about, so to get any information out they have to ask the FBI to do so.
ALSO this suggests they WANT information released. They could just say "we can't discuss that article". Instead, they are trying to get a copy of the order published. That strongly suggests that they believe once people see what's actually in the order, it'll be better than the speculation. Further, they calculate it'll be better *even though it'll renew interest, creating another round of news stories*.
MAGA
* Why didn't we accept Microsoft's $45B offer in 2008
* Whose erection lead to the hiring of Marissa Mayer?
* What will we do when Verizon cancels its acquisition agreement?
Not necessarily so.
We don't know what the compelling paper was, whether it could be appealed, whether it was and Yahoo lost.
Yahoo could have said that they would do it, at such a cost, or perhaps gov. would prefer an appeal instead.
but she is a terrible CEO
It's possible that the FBI served some middle managers with the NSL and forbade them from informing their superiors. Happens all the time with investigations. When I worked for Boeing, they were absolutely paranoid about employees being 'turned' by the feds to rat out unethical/illegal company practices. They had a corporate policy requiring any contact by gov't officials to be reported to management. But if the FBI letter says 'tell no one', the consequences could be a jail term vs just getting fired.
It's also possible that a fake NSL was served by agents working for some foreign security service posing as FBI*. A couple of fake badges and guns and I doubt many data center admins would question the order, let alone check on it's validity.
*Or actual FBI moonlighting for someone else. Everyone thinks Snowden was an anomaly. He was in that he went to the press with what he had. The revolving door between private company security and gov't TLAs is pretty busy. Its not unknown for some official to do a little 'research' for a future employer.
Have gnu, will travel.
Donald? Is that you?
If it were me, I would be a fucking dick about it.
Dear FBI, we may or may not be allow to discuss a letter we may or may not have received from you. Could you please confirm whether or not you have sent us a letter after November 2 2014 and before November 4 2014 where the first sentence of the letter was "Dear Yahoo, we are writing to you to demand your"?
Dear FBI, we may or may not be allow to discuss a letter we may or may not have received from you. Could you please confirm whether or not you have sent us a letter after November 2 2014 and before November 4 2014 where the second sentence of the letter was "complete cooperation on maters of national security"? ...
And all of these letters would be sent from the Yahoo Japan office.
The long term solution is to ensure that matters of security require, by design, cooperation of multiple corporate executives in different jurisdictions. Oh you want to compel me to sign a custom operating system that breaks into one iPhone? No problem, I will cooperate, and as soon as you get our other executive in Russia to cooperate then the binary will be signed.
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
"And, while you're at it, could you tell Marissa where she left her car keys? She's been searching for days without any luck. "
No this is more like the federal government orders you not to tell Marissa or anyone else where the car keys are, but you can write a very public letter asking them to do so without admitting that you haven't been told not to.
Real lawyers write in C++
Finally, one of the prime problems with the secret orders authorized under the Patriot Act is beginning to come out: "We'd like to reassure our rapidly shrinking customer base that we no longer do this, but under the law, we are subject to arrest for saying ANYTHING about it!" Clumsy attempt to avoid legal sanctions by asking the FBI to come clean about it so they don't have to won't work because the FBI has no incentive to say anything.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I mean, isn't this already-caught-lying-to-Congress Director of National Intelligence James Clapper that Yahoo has asked to verify something?
And if he denies this, why would I believe the denial?
And if he admits it, why should I believe that, either?