Microsoft and Twitter join rivals in seeking to disclose NSA requests
Technology companies want government's permission to give public a more detailed list of demands for data from their servers
Microsoft, Twitter,
Google and Facebook all want to give greater disclosure of Fisa requests
as a result of the NSA revelations. Photograph: Pichi Chuang/Reuters
Microsoft and Twitter have joined calls by Google and Facebook
to be able to publish more detail about how many secret requests they
receive to hand over user data under the controversial Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act (Fisa).
"Permitting greater transparency on the aggregate volume and scope of national security requests, including Fisa orders, would help the community understand and debate these important issues," Microsoft said in an emailed statement to the Reuters news agency.
At Twitter the chief lawyer, Alex Macgillivray, tweeted: "We'd like more NSL [national security letter] transparency and Twitter supports efforts to make that happen."
A national security letter is used by US government agencies such as the FBI and NSA to demand access to data from companies – who are forbidden from revealing that they have been served such a request.
Earlier on Tuesday Google wrote to the US attorney general requesting permission to disclose how many NSL requests it had received under Fisa – a demand that Facebook joined.
The American Civil Liberties Union also said that it has filed a lawsuit over the collection of data from Verizon customers, as revealed by the Guardian last week.
Google, Microsoft and Twitter publish "transparency reports" detailing how many government requests they receive for user data in various countries, but those for the US do not include Fisa requests or other NSL demands. Facebook has not so far published a transparency report.
Microsoft said: "Our recent report went as far as we legally could and the government should take action to allow companies to provide additional transparency."
Microsoft and Twitter joined in as the PR fallout of the revelations by the Guardian over the past week about the extent of National Security Agency (NSA) access to user data continued to grow. Google's chief legal officer, David Drummond, reiterated the company's protests that it had not allowed the NSA "direct or indirect" access to its servers and had not allowed the NSA to install equipment on its premises.
The Guardian revealed last week that seven technology companies – Google, Facebook, Skype, PalTalk, Microsoft, Apple and Yahoo – were involved in the Prism surveillance scheme run by the NSA.
The Guardian understands that the NSA approached those companies and asked them to enable a "dropbox" system whereby legally requested data could be copied from their own server out to an NSA-owned system. That has allowed the companies to deny that there is "direct or indirect" NSA access, to deny that there is a "back door" to their systems, and that they only comply with "legal" requests – while not explaining the scope of that access.
Twitter was not mentioned in the Prism programme because it declined to comply with the NSA's dropbox proposal.
Technology companies are increasingly concerned about the effect on public confidence in their security as the revelations over Prism have widened. "If data isn't stored on your hard drive any more but instead in the cloud, and you can't trust a company with storing that, it becomes an existential crisis," one Silicon Valley source told the Guardian.
"But that's where the world is moving. The world isn't going back to having your data sitting on your computer. The law needs to come into confirmity with the cloud and the protection that people expect from that."
"Permitting greater transparency on the aggregate volume and scope of national security requests, including Fisa orders, would help the community understand and debate these important issues," Microsoft said in an emailed statement to the Reuters news agency.
At Twitter the chief lawyer, Alex Macgillivray, tweeted: "We'd like more NSL [national security letter] transparency and Twitter supports efforts to make that happen."
A national security letter is used by US government agencies such as the FBI and NSA to demand access to data from companies – who are forbidden from revealing that they have been served such a request.
Earlier on Tuesday Google wrote to the US attorney general requesting permission to disclose how many NSL requests it had received under Fisa – a demand that Facebook joined.
The American Civil Liberties Union also said that it has filed a lawsuit over the collection of data from Verizon customers, as revealed by the Guardian last week.
Google, Microsoft and Twitter publish "transparency reports" detailing how many government requests they receive for user data in various countries, but those for the US do not include Fisa requests or other NSL demands. Facebook has not so far published a transparency report.
Microsoft said: "Our recent report went as far as we legally could and the government should take action to allow companies to provide additional transparency."
Microsoft and Twitter joined in as the PR fallout of the revelations by the Guardian over the past week about the extent of National Security Agency (NSA) access to user data continued to grow. Google's chief legal officer, David Drummond, reiterated the company's protests that it had not allowed the NSA "direct or indirect" access to its servers and had not allowed the NSA to install equipment on its premises.
The Guardian revealed last week that seven technology companies – Google, Facebook, Skype, PalTalk, Microsoft, Apple and Yahoo – were involved in the Prism surveillance scheme run by the NSA.
The Guardian understands that the NSA approached those companies and asked them to enable a "dropbox" system whereby legally requested data could be copied from their own server out to an NSA-owned system. That has allowed the companies to deny that there is "direct or indirect" NSA access, to deny that there is a "back door" to their systems, and that they only comply with "legal" requests – while not explaining the scope of that access.
Twitter was not mentioned in the Prism programme because it declined to comply with the NSA's dropbox proposal.
Technology companies are increasingly concerned about the effect on public confidence in their security as the revelations over Prism have widened. "If data isn't stored on your hard drive any more but instead in the cloud, and you can't trust a company with storing that, it becomes an existential crisis," one Silicon Valley source told the Guardian.
"But that's where the world is moving. The world isn't going back to having your data sitting on your computer. The law needs to come into confirmity with the cloud and the protection that people expect from that."
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu