Hacker News Reader

Comment by superkuh | Hacker News Reader

Technically even just removing a warrant canary immediately could put you at legal risk in the USA. The non-risky way is to update the canary $date every $timeperiod and then stop updating $date after an attack. That way nothing is changed to indicate but it still becomes obvious by lack of update after $timeperiod.

View on HN

Yeah, that kind of irked me with the commit. Currently (769b306) it says:

> this commit removes a section of the footer as we have received a voluntary enquiry from a state authority that included a requirement for confidentiality

Which... is just saying what happened? Point is to remove it without saying anything, as if you do, you'd break the "requirement for confidentiality" and put yourself at risk.

Imagine complying with a gag order. That's one of the most blatant abuses of human rights.

It is. But when you're on the receiving end and the federal agents bust down your door and point firearms at you you see things a bit differently in the moment.

Agreed, but that's all the more reason to be louder and more defiant.

Not everyone wants to be a hero.

An hero

somehow it is hard to believe that this statement is made .. confidentiality and "gag orders" have ruled the business world for more than twenty years in the USA. Any executive of any public company (stocks) must demonstrate iron-clad compliance with these orders, every week of their employment. Asvmuch as anyone might agree with the aspirational poetry of this statement, it is literally ABCs of US dollar business that this is no joke. surely that is clear?

This isn't business. This is the government using secret violent force to keep you from telling others you've been (legally) robbed. It does not involve a voluntary contract that one enters into willingly in the open. These are very different things. Surely that is clear?

Exactly. This isn't a voluntary contract

One extreme (no demand on me is fair) or the other (every action by government must be obeyed) .. neither of those..

I agree that it is not a contract between equals, it is an action of law in government; like it or not it is the price of civilization. In the USA the basis of law has been worked out very well, in some cases. Of course there are abuses and no one is defending an abuse of the law. Humans are social and difficult. The answer lies in a system of review and an ability to change over time.

A voluntary enquiry with a gag order? I mean, I suppose in principle there's no reason such a thing wouldn't be possible, but it feels like a bit of an edge case.

I'm trying to think to myself if I was running a project and had a canary, what would be the threshold to kill the canary on a voluntary enquiry.

If it was CIA and they sent me: "Please give us all information on XYZ so that we can organize an assassination on them. This is voluntary and you don't have to give us that information. This is just pretty please."

I think I would kill my canary even if the request is technically voluntary and I wasn't compelled to give out any information. But that was a joke scenario because I couldn't come up with more realistic scenarios.

And then I guess if your threshold is too low, you'll kill your canary on something that might be a nothingburger.

I don't think the CIA exactly sends you a note asking for data to be dropped off at their Google Drive. It is more likely you receive an offer to license data you have from a company that is relatively obscure with a financial incentive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com