Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #3738

Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Sylvia Else wrote:

> But it's a subpoena, not a court order. It can only seek information, 
> and indeed, there's a significant limit on the information that can be 
> sought. The gag order relates to subpoena, and prevents the recipient 
> from disclosing its existence, or content, but it does not, and cannot, 
> impose a wider restriction the recipient.

It's the Justice Department issuing the secret subpoena.  They don't
need a court.  They are a court.

  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/09/AR2010080906252.html

  The government has long argued, as it did in this case, that "secrecy 
  is often essential to the successful conduct of counterterrorism and 
  counterintelligence investigations" and that public disclosure of the 
  receipt of a letter "may pose serious risks to the investigation 
  itself and to other national security interests." FBI spokesman Mike 
  Kortan said, "The FBI needs the ability to protect investigations, 
  sources and methods." 

  The recent request by the Obama administration to amend the law 
  governing the letters has prompted debate in Congress over which types 
  of electronic records should require a judge's permission before the 
  FBI can seek them, and which types should not, as is the case with 
  national security letters. A letter may be issued by a FBI field 
  office supervisor if they think the data will be relevant to a 
  terrorism probe.

The US gov't is split into 3 branches: legislative, judicial, and
executive.  Where do you think the DOJ resides?  Look at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Justice#mediaviewer/File:US_Department_of_Justice_Organizational_Chart.png

See the FBI down the chart under the DOJ?  Although we've been bandying
"NSA" around as the "wicked one", they're under the Dept. of Defense
(DOD) which is under the executive branch.  I'm sure they appreciate our
disinformation.

The FBI is administered by the DOJ.  How hard do you think it is for the
DOJ to write their own judicial writs while also requiring them to be
kept secret?  Recipients are usually not allowed to disclose receipt of
the national security letter (NSL), its demands or scope or its effects.
The National Security Letter provision of the Patriot Act allows the FBI
forbid or gag anyone who receives an NSL.  "NSLs may contain a
nondisclosure provision—preventing the recipient of an NSL from
disclosing that the FBI had requested the information — only if the
Director of the FBI (or his designee) authorizes the nondisclosure
requirement."  Aren't the Patriot and Victory Acts (2 versions of each)
just wonderful?

The recipient can challenge the non-disclosure requirement in federal
count; however, all the proceedings remain secret until a decision is
made.  So how many years might that be?  We can't know how many
challenges there are because, well, they recipients have to remain mum
until the case is decided.  So far, there are only 3 known challenges
where the DOJ/FBI rescinded: Kahle (Internet Archive aka WayBackMachine;
Nicholas Merrill, of Calyx Internet Access; and the Connecticut
librarians George Christian, Barbara Bailey, Peter Chase, and Janet
Nocek.  The challenges are per NSL, not umbrella exclusion from further
NSLs.  Looks like Kahle (or someone else responsible at the Internet
Archive) got hit with another NSL this time regarding TrueCrypt: all the
archive pages at the WayBackMachine for the TrueCrypt site suddenly
disappeared.  Does that look like just data collection to you?

Google received 0 to 999 NSLs each year between 2009 and 2012
(http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/US/).  They
probably aren't allow to provide an exact count because the scope of
each subpoena required non-disclosure on each.  If you can't disclose
any, any count would imply disclosure.

Since the national security letter is secret and the defendents must
remain silent, we don't know what they say or demand.  It's a secret.

"Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have
to show you no stinkin' badges"
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsdZKCh6RsU, 0:09 timemark)

> In particular, it could not require someone to refrain from revealing 
> that some party, government, or otherwise, had compromised Truecrypt.
>
>> You might want to see what happened to Lavabit after getting served a
>> secret subpoena (e.g., en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavabit).  Read
>> http://threatpost.com/of-truecrypt-and-warrant-canaries/106355 on how
>> Apple applied a warrant canary.
> 
> Yes, but that was a different situation entirely.

How?  Lavabit got a subpoena (national security letter) and decided to
close shop rather than comply (for a writ declaring surrending data
records on ALL their customers' communications).  Looks like the
TrueCrypt authors got a NSL, too, so they also closed shop.  Rather than
fight with the advantage so heavily weighted to the DOJ, both chose to
leave.  If they chose the challenge to rescind non-disclosure, that's
all secret, too, so we'll only know if they win in federal count.

The Vogons showed up so the dolphins left saying, "So long, and thanks
for all the fish".
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Invb2vHPLLc, timemark 1:34:10)

Back to comp.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-06-17 11:13 +0000
  Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2014-06-17 23:09 +1000
    Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2014-06-17 11:13 -0300
      Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2014-06-18 11:07 +1000
    Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2014-06-17 15:24 -0500
      Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2014-06-18 14:19 +1000
        Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2014-06-18 01:25 -0500
          Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2014-06-18 16:40 +1000
    Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-17 13:59 -0700
    Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Mark Harvard <mark.harvard.909we3@gmail-.com> - 2014-06-17 14:03 -0700
      Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2014-06-18 14:28 +1000
  Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Anonymous <anonymous@foto.nl1.torservers.net> - 2014-06-17 13:15 -0400
  Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2014-06-17 15:50 -0500
    Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-06-18 00:22 +0300
  Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-17 14:01 -0700
  Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2014-06-17 21:38 +0000
    Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-06-17 21:50 +0000
  Re: Truecrypt infiltrated by NSA, as suspected "tdk" <forum.tdk@squte.com> - 2014-06-18 10:52 -0500

csiph-web