I think his response actually DID address the canary disappearing. By law he cannot say “Yes we have been issues a secret warrant” if they had been served, but if they had NOT been served he could legal say so.

He directly acknowledges that this post is about the canary disappearing and doesn’t immediately explain why. If the canary vanished due to a script failing or a person forgetting to update it he would have loudly and clearly stated that they have not been served and the reason why the canary was not updated.

Those facts, imo, HIGHLY suggest they have been served with a secret warrant.

Because by law it is forbidden to say if they are forced to give access by law. The removal of the canary together with that message without addressing that directly can be seen as strong hint that the where forced to give access.

Canaries exist, because you cannot talk about the reasons for their removal. You just remove them.

You must blow out the candles of other people's birthday cakes