Hacker News Reader

Comment by aab0 | Hacker News Reader

I wouldn't bet a bent penny on it:

"Experts said it was likely that the NSA or FBI had approached other Internet companies with the same demand, since they evidently did not know what email accounts were being used by the target. The NSA usually makes requests for domestic surveillance through the FBI, so it is hard to know which agency is seeking the information.

Reuters was unable to confirm whether the 2015 demand went to other companies, or if any complied.

Alphabet Inc's Google and Microsoft Corp, two major U.S. email service providers, did not respond to requests for comment."

It's not a hard question to answer. You either are or are not searching all emails in realtime at the behest of the NSA.

View on HN

They later responded. Quoting from Arstechnica's 5:11 ET update:

A spokeswoman for Microsoft, Kim Kurseman, e-mailed Ars this statement, and also declined further questions: “We have never engaged in the secret scanning of email traffic like what has been reported today about Yahoo.”

For its part, Google was the most unequivocal. Spokesman Aaron Stein e-mailed: "We've never received such a request, but if we did, our response would be simple: 'no way.'"

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/10/fbi-demands-signa...

Don't the NSL's typically have a section saying that they have to deny they ever received one?

"It's not a hard question to answer. You either are or are not searching all emails in realtime at the behest of the NSA."

It's easy to answer if you're not. If you are, you can't answer (at least not truthfully).

How much trouble would someone like Google be in if they gave a "warrant canary" style answer? "I'm sorry, we are unable to answer your question" would speak volumes without actually saying anything.

But I suppose that the order forbids "disclosure", and that statement is arguably disclosure...

The article says:

"Alphabet Inc's Google and Microsoft Corp, two major U.S. email service providers, did not respond to requests for comment."

Isn't that pretty much saying "I'm sorry, we are unable to answer your question"? If they weren't doing the same thing as Yahoo, they could say so.

No, it means Microsoft and Alphabet are not commenting on evidence implicating Yahoo!'s surveillance with the NSA.

It's basic PR for big brands to avoid getting quoted in the messes their competitor gets into.

They might be doing something different, that they still can't speak about.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com