On Jan 4, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Cat Okita wrote: > It'll need to specify which pieces of information they're wanting (eg: John > Doe of 123 Main St, Sunnydale's connectivity records from Dec 25, 2010 - Jan > 01, 2011), rather than "all your dataz are belongs to us".
The National Security Letters (so beloved of the FBI) are precisely of the latter type. Moreover, they are classified, and you would be guilty of Treason if you divulged the fact that you had been served with an NSL. You would be guilty of Treason if you divulged the fact that someone from the FBI contacted you and claimed that they needed information from your systems which would be covered under an NSL -- to be delivered at some time in the future. NSLs are like that -- they get to be retroactive. And if the NSL in question is never actually delivered, well then that is not the problem of the FBI. There are similar laws in place in countries like Belgium when the police come knocking at your door -- their warrants don't even have to be approved by a judge. Of course, over there the Police are much more circumspect about knocking on your door and demanding that you hand over data and equipment, whereas here in the US law enforcement types seem to be much more cavalier about things like "privacy" and "ethics". -- Brad Knowles <[email protected]> LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu> _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
