Gag Orders Lifted, Twitter discloses National Security letters.

[zacRupnow]

Source

Friday, January 27, 2017 | By Elizabeth Banker (@elizabethbanker), Associate General Counsel, Global Law Enforcement [21:48 UTC]

 https://blog.twitter.com/2017/transparency-update-twitter-discloses-national-security-letters

Quote

Today, we’re able to speak openly about two national security requests for the first time, specifically two national security letters (NSLs). These NSLs were accompanied by gag orders when they were served (one in 2015, one in 2016), preventing us from notifying the impacted account holders or publicly disclosing their existence. The FBI recently informed us that the gag orders have been lifted and that we may notify the account holders.

 

We have provided each of the account holders with copies of the relevant NSLs (certain information redacted to protect privacy) as well as the account data we were compelled to produce. While the actual NSLs request a large amount of data, Twitter provides a very limited set of data in response to NSLs consistent with federal law and interpretive guidance from the U.S. Department of Justice.

 

We’re encouraged by the lifting of these two gag orders and those recently disclosed by Cloudflare, Google, the Internet Archive, and Yahoo!. However, Twitter remains unsatisfied with restrictions on our right to speak more freely about national security requests we may receive. We continue to push for the legal ability to speak more openly on this topic in our lawsuit against the U.S. government, Twitter v. Lynch.

 

We continue to believe that reporting in government-mandated bands does not provide meaningful transparency to the public or those using our service. However, the government argues that any numerical reporting more detailed than the bands in the USA Freedom Act would be classified and as such not protected by the First Amendment. They further argue that Twitter is not entitled to obtain information from the government about the processes followed in classifying a version Twitter’s 2013 Transparency Report or in classifying/declassifying decisions associated with the allowed bands. We would like a meaningful opportunity to challenge government restrictions when “classification” prevents speech on issues of public importance.

 

Our next hearing in the Lynch case is scheduled for February 14, 2017. Concurrently, Twitter is using the statutory means provided in the USA Freedom Act to seek more transparency into similar NSL requests, and will provide updates as they become available. You can read more information about our commitment to protecting free expression in our Help Center.

 

Transparency is important, this is too little too late. It's important to keep in mind these are just gag orders were lifted on expiration, not by new administration.

[ARikozuM]

There are times when needing certain information discreet for the protection of the public is necessary. I can't say if this was one such time, but do keep in mind that secrets protect private citizens from being tortured for info they are not privy to.

[imreloadin]

3 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

There are times when needing certain information discreet for the protection of the public is necessary. I can't say if this was one such time, but do keep in mind that secrets protect private citizens from being tortured for info they are not privy to.

I guess I'm a little confused by your last sentence. Care to elaborate a little?

[ARikozuM]

19 minutes ago, imreloadin said:

I guess I'm a little confused by your last sentence. Care to elaborate a little?

 

23 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I can't say if this was one such time

I don't know what info was requested of Twitter, so I can't comment on that.

Quote

, but do keep in mind that secrets protect private citizens from being tortured for info they are not privy to.

Imagine if EVERYONE knew the military ops that take place on foreign soil. Why take a high-value target from the Pentagon when Joe Shmoe lives in a two-room house and knows the same info?

[imreloadin]

4 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Imagine if EVERYONE knew the nuclear launch codes. Why take a high-value target from the Pentagon when Joe Shmoe lives in a two-room house and knows the same info?

Someone's Twitter account info and nuclear launch codes are vastly different things How could Twitter be something that is torture worthy?

[dalekphalm]

9 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

 

I don't know what info was requested of Twitter, so I can't comment on that.

Imagine if EVERYONE knew the nuclear launch codes. Why take a high-value target from the Pentagon when Joe Shmoe lives in a two-room house and knows the same info?

Err... your argument makes no sense at all. It has no relevance to the context of this news post.

 

Twitter never had and never will have access to launch codes. What twitter is arguing, is that if the Government requests detailed and personal info on you @ARikozuM, that Twitter be given the legal ability to inform you that this info has been requested (and delivered), and also pass on the official request (letter, whatever) to you.

 

You might be a terrorist. Or maybe not. But you should have rights. You should know if the government is accessing personal info from your accounts, because you deserve the opportunity to seek legal advice and defense.

[vanished]

11 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Imagine if EVERYONE knew the nuclear launch codes. Why take a high-value target from the Pentagon when Joe Shmoe lives in a two-room house and knows the same info?

That would defeat the point of having a code.  Then you're just relying on having a button only certain people can get to to push.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

Err... your argument makes no sense at all. It has no relevance to the context of this news post.

I'm still reading the report. I was just addressing the OP's "transparency" line. I don't mind if Twitter gives my info out to those who legally obtain the right to access it.

[dalekphalm]

6 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I'm still reading the report. I was just addressing the OP's "transparency" line. I don't mind if Twitter gives my info out to those who legally obtain the right to access it.

You don't want to know that they're giving your info out? You actually trust the US government fully? In some cases, they don't even need a warrant, issued by a court judge, to get this information. Where's the oversight?

 

You might trust them that much, but I sure don't.

[ARikozuM]

8 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

You don't want to know that they're giving your info out? You actually trust the US government fully? In some cases, they don't even need a warrant, issued by a court judge, to get this information. Where's the oversight?

 

You might trust them that much, but I sure don't.

I'm done typing since that is not what I am saying. 

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, ARikozuM said:

I'm done typing since that is not what I am saying. 

So then elaborate. Your first post was clearly not well stated. If you think I'm misunderstanding what you mean, then correct me.

 

You're saying you have no problem that Twitter gives out your personal info to "those who have the legal right" to obtain it. That's fine. I have no problem with that too. What I have a problem with, is them doing it in secret, and Twitter being prohibited from telling you that it's happening.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

and Twitter being prohibited from telling you that it's happening.

This is what I have a problem with. The gag order denies them the right to tell their users that the info was asked for, that's not okay. To ask for info, when they obtain the legal right to it, is fine by me. 

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, ARikozuM said:

This is what I have a problem with. The gag order denies them the right to tell their users that the info was asked for, that's not okay. To ask for info, when they obtain the legal right to it, is fine by me. 

I see. Fair enough, I understand your position now. Your first few posts did not make this clear.

 

Indeed, I also disagree with the Gag order. I also think the information should legally require a warrant from a judge, but that's a different conversation.

[Guest Kloaked]

6 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

Err... your argument makes no sense at all. It has no relevance to the context of this news post.

Yeah whatever. You know good and well nuclear launch codes are hidden in Twitter's source code by the NSA (aka Illuminati (aka aliens (aka gods))). How would you like it if IZIZ got their hands on the codes? I bet the launch codes are written in C# (pronounced C Hashtag fyi) which was made by Microsoft (aka NSA (aka Illuminati (aka aliens (aka gods)))). If you don't think this is real, let me tell you something, pal, friend, buddy...I've been further even more decided to use even go need to do look more as anyone can. Can you really be far even as decided half as much to use go wish for that? My guess is that when one really been far even as decided once to use even go want, it is then that he has really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like. It's just common sense.

[Trik'Stari]

Now if only they would extend the same courtesy of transparency and freedom of speech to their users. Fucking hypocrites.

[PlayStation 2]

9 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

Now if only they would extend the same courtesy of transparency and freedom of speech to their users. Fucking hypocrites.

They do*

*only if your political stance matches theirs

[Mr.Meerkat]

UK's data protection act will save us! 

 

Well...that's assuming US companies obeys our laws  

[SSL]

On 1/28/2017 at 0:25 PM, ARikozuM said:

Imagine if EVERYONE knew the military ops that take place on foreign soil. Why take a high-value target from the Pentagon when Joe Shmoe lives in a two-room house and knows the same info?

 

I imagine if military intelligence were so widely known, torturing anyone for such information would be completely unnecessary.

 

Why don't they teach children logic in these schools.

[TidaLWaveZ]

DTA

[zacRupnow]

On 1/28/2017 at 0:25 PM, ARikozuM said:

Imagine if EVERYONE knew the military ops that take place on foreign soil. Why take a high-value target from the Pentagon when Joe Shmoe lives in a two-room house and knows the same info?

Point being that it should be publicly available knowledge that nuclear launch codes exist, not what the codes are.

 

When Snowden came forward revealing the unconstitutional actions of the NSA he showed what the NSA was doing when it was secret without compromising the operation.