Gigaom reports that Apple may have received an order under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act. The death of Apple's Patriot Act canary is a notable change since Apple's first Transparency Report back in 2013.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Apple’s “Warrant Canary” Disappears, Suggesting New Patriot Act Demands
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 22 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 19 2014, @03:10AM
A different take is here. [arstechnica.com]
(Score: 1) by hoeferbe on Friday September 19 2014, @04:29AM
I wish I could mod you up; that article has some good informative on how the the canary language was just replaced with reports of ranges.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 19 2014, @11:50PM
Yes, and the ranges begin with zero. That means that, as long as they received fewer than 250 reports, nothing is going to show up on the new range report. If the ranges began with one instead of zero, then you could still have a canary, but Apple's new reporting scheme (apparently mandated by the US government) precludes the possibility of a canary.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday September 19 2014, @02:52PM
Normally I trust Ars for analysis but I don't get the point of that article. "They might not have been compromised"--which is how I read the article, anyway--doesn't have any meaning when we're talking canaries. You NEVER know FOR SURE. It's all about reasonable doubt, which I find plenty of in this announcement.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Friday September 19 2014, @04:02AM
Somebody at the NSA wants those celebrity selfie butt shots.
- fractious political commentary goes here -
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Fnord666 on Friday September 19 2014, @04:10AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 19 2014, @04:25AM
So you are arguing it should be legal for the state to compel you to lie? How does that work when His Honor asks if it is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 19 2014, @04:49AM
How quaint that you think a judge would be involved in determining this sort of thing.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday September 19 2014, @02:46PM
I don't think "quaint" is the word you're looking for. The other option is a jury, which is a significantly less cynical setup.
Of course, the implication is that the judge Goes All Patent Office on their asses (finds anybody they put in front of him guilty as long as the government waggles its eyebrows at him), but they don't let random non-judge government guys decide court cases, at least in appearance.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday September 19 2014, @09:15PM
No, the other option is no involvement by the juridical branch of government at all. That why the notions of judges, juries, lawyers, defense, proof, and justice is indeed quaint [wiktionary.org]¹ and belonging to a past era, AC is right as far as I am concerned.
Four boxes but the two in the middle are only ghostly outlines of chalk and sawdust in the mud, the first box is upturned because it's rotten and can't hold any weight, and the fourth demonized box lies on its side empty inviting someone to close the open lid so people can go on pretending everything is a-okay until the next time someone kicks it over and the lid opens revealing nothing inside.
¹ interpretation 3 or interpretation 5 with a pinch or two of added sarcasm (a very common combination in my opinion).
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday September 22 2014, @02:54PM
That why the notions of judges, juries, lawyers, defense, proof, and justice is indeed quaint [wiktionary.org]¹ and belonging to a past era, AC is right as far as I am concerned.
I'd like to hear more about this. Are you saying that since the judicial system is rotten it should just be axed, or do you have specific reasons why it would be better to do without it? And then who handles what used to be court cases?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Yog-Yogguth on Tuesday September 23 2014, @04:43AM
That's a huge question and somewhat removed from the original context of a government which disregards any juridical system and outcome at will and which has plenty of options for ensuring something never gets that far in the first place, pointing that out as we might be speaking past each other.
However yes the juridical system is rotten since there is nothing close to equality before the law, a law of byzantine complexity ensuring that whoever has the most resources is far more likely to either win or get lenient sentencing or escape the sentencing being put into force. If one doesn't have money or influence then only pure luck remains, and $deity help anyone who tries to go up against authority, it might not make any difference even if you win the case.
The extreme complexity means most ordinary people should want to avoid the very expensive “justice” system no matter what since they can't have any actual confidence in their own stance no matter how sensible it might seem unless a specialized lawyer has gone through their case in advance. Even then the lawyer might be driven purely by the profit motive and deliberately mislead you into thinking you have a good case. Frivolous accusations become cheap while honest grievances and defense becomes expensive and if anyone is powerful enough all they have to do is stall (including after a verdict that goes against them). As far as I know this is already extremely commonplace in the US and Europe. I don't live in the US but in a country that's supposed to be “even better”, parts of my family have been destroyed by precisely this sort of thing and are stuck in limbo despite winning court cases against local authorities, what then? Nothing, just a few more lives destroyed as the whole thing drags out for however many decades it takes for people to die and go away.
Of course plenty of people will disagree that it has become this bad but they should be able to agree that if it was that bad it would no longer actually be a justice system. They should also be able to agree on a case by case basis that when justice has not been served the juridical system has usually made things a lot worse.
Like other parts of “society” it might make a large improvement for a majority of the citizens to have no justice system at all. As it is its primary function seems to be as an alibi for whoever has power.
I'm not sure how one can fix it (it's way beyond me), but I would think that one needs to greatly simplify the laws down to a level at which the average citizen can be aware of, understand, and support at least the logic and reasoning of all of the law without years of dedicated study, it has to be equal, and verdicts have to be enforced equally without having to repeat the whole process again and again. Maybe the simplest argument against the status quo would be that those things aren't currently the case and how is there supposed to be justice without them?
Anyway I don't think there's all that many years before this and other things sort themselves out for better or worse; it's just like unmaintained infrastructure, eventually it forces its own collapse.
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 5, Informative) by hoeferbe on Friday September 19 2014, @04:33AM
Quoting from a good Ars Technica story [arstechnica.com] about it:
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 19 2014, @04:38AM
Exactly. Add onto that the fact the TLAs don't give a rats ass about the law.
(Score: 2) by EvilJim on Friday September 19 2014, @04:15AM
and he says he had nothing to do with that canary's disappearance.
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Friday September 19 2014, @07:45AM
Is your cat black-and-white with a lisp? I'd check around his mouth for wittle yellow feathers.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday September 19 2014, @12:09PM
No, my cat is black-and-white with Haskell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 19 2014, @12:46PM
My cat just uses the colours of the terminal it runs on. Oh, and it lives in the /bin.
(Score: 2) by Jaruzel on Friday September 19 2014, @09:00AM
Is a Warrant Canary only useful for US based services?
If I hosted a service in a european datacentre, and I myself were also based in Europe/UK, what juristriction does the Patriot Act have over me (guessing, none?), or the NSA ?
-Jar
This is my opinion, there are many others, but this one is mine.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hoochiecoochieman on Friday September 19 2014, @11:11AM
Don't worry, the European authorities will do as usual. It means bend over and spread their cheeks wide open to anything the US asks them to. Even if it means breaking every law ever written in Europe.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday September 19 2014, @02:48PM
jurisdiction
AHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHA
This is the U.S. we're talking about. Honey badger doesn't give a shit about your jurisdiction or lack thereof.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 19 2014, @04:43PM
According to US judges, US courts have jurisdiction world wide. If you live in a country that has its mouth firmly wrapped around the shaft of America's penis (like Sweden, New Zealand, etc) don't expect the actual local law to have any meaning whatsoever. Expect to be raided by a full tactical team, and if you don't get shot on the premises you'd better play ball or you might just be a rapist. Seriously where have you been the past 5 years or so?