Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[liberationtech] Naive Question

Petter Ericson pettter at acc.umu.se
Mon Sep 9 14:01:07 PDT 2013


That, and civil disobedience á la Lavabit.

/P

On 09 September, 2013 - Matt Johnson wrote:

> All of the sneaky signs, email headers and web page badges assume the
> FBI, or whoever the adversary is are incompetent or inept.  That does
> not see like a safe assumption to me. The only prudent approach is to
> assume your adversary is intelligent and competent.
> 
> My guess is that the only defense against NSL's and the like is
> through policy. I realize that may be blasphemy on this list, but
> there it is.
> 
> --
> Matt Johnson
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 1:26 PM, LISTS <lists at robertwgehl.org> wrote:
> > What are the legal precedents in terms of "wink, wink, nudge, nudge,
> > djaknowhatimean?"
> >
> > - Rob Gehl
> >
> >
> > On 09/09/2013 02:24 PM, Shava Nerad wrote:
> >
> > You are awesome,clever, and full of tricks. :)  Should I credit you with
> > this?
> >
> > yrs,
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Case Black <caseblack at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> There's a more subtle variant to this idea...
> >>
> >> Regularly state ("put up a sign") that you HAVE in fact received an
> >> NSL...with the public understanding that it must be a lie (there's no law
> >> against falsely making such a claim...yet!).
> >>
> >> When actually served with an NSL, you would now be bound by law to remove
> >> any such notification...thereby signaling the event.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Case
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 1:24 PM, LISTS <lists at robertwgehl.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I wonder if there's a false analogy here. Hypothetically, the
> >>> librarian's sign could fall down (maybe the wind blew it over) whereas a
> >>> notice on a site would have to be removed via coding. There would be
> >>> little other explanation, even in the case where one does not
> >>> affirmatively renew the "dead man's notice" (the countdown that Doctorow
> >>> suggests in the article). Such an affirmative act might lead a court to
> >>> believe that one has indeed informed the public about an NSL.
> >>>
> >>> - Rob Gehl
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 09/09/2013 12:18 PM, Dan Staples wrote:
> >>> > Presumably, if this type of approach became widely adopted, it would be
> >>> > a useful service for an independent group to monitor the status of
> >>> > these
> >>> > notices and periodically publish a report of which companies had
> >>> > removed
> >>> > their notice.
> >>> >
> >>> > On 09/09/2013 12:52 PM, Scott Arciszewski wrote:
> >>> >> Forgot the URL:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/sep/09/nsa-sabotage-dead-mans-switch
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Scott Arciszewski
> >>> >> <kobrasrealm at gmail.com <mailto:kobrasrealm at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>     Hello,
> >>> >>
> >>> >>     I saw this article on The Guardian[1] and it mentioned a librarian
> >>> >>     who posted a sign that looked like this:
> >>> >>     http://www.librarian.net/pics/antipat4.gif and would remove it if
> >>> >>     visited by the FBI. So a naive question comes to mind: If I
> >>> >> operated
> >>> >>     an internet service, and I posted a thing that says "We have not
> >>> >>     received a request to spy on our users. Watch closely for the
> >>> >>     removal of this text," what legal risk would be incurred?
> >>> >>
> >>> >>     If the answer is "None" or "Very little", what's stopping people
> >>> >>     from doing this?
> >>> >>
> >>> >>     Thanks,
> >>> >>     Scott
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google.
> >>> Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
> >>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe,
> >>> change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
> >>> companys at stanford.edu.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google.
> >> Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
> >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe,
> >> change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
> >> companys at stanford.edu.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Shava Nerad
> > shava23 at gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google.
> > Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe,
> > change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
> > companys at stanford.edu.
> -- 
> Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at companys at stanford.edu.

-- 
Petter Ericson (pettter at acc.umu.se)
Telecomix Sleeper Jellyfish



More information about the liberationtech mailing list