Google: Building on Surveillance Reform

        Today, we've updated our Transparency Report on government
        requests for user data.  Globally, we received 44,943
        government requests for information regarding 76,713 accounts
        during the first half of 2016.  We provided user information
        in response to 64% of those requests, which remains unchanged
        from the previous reporting period (i.e. the second half of
        2015).  We also received our first ever requests from the
        following countries: Algeria, Belarus, Cayman Islands, El
        Salvador, Fiji, and Saudi Arabia. In addition, pursuant to the
        USA Freedom Act, the FBI lifted a gag restriction on an NSL
        issued in the second half of 2015.  To reflect this, we have
        updated the range of NSLs received in that period -- July to
        December 2015 -- from 0-499 to 1-499.  As we have noted in the
        past, when we receive a request for user information, we
        review it carefully and only provide information within the
        scope and authority of the request.  The privacy and security
        of the data that users store with Google is central to our
        approach.  Before producing data in response to a government
        request, we make sure it strictly follows the law, for example
        to compel us to disclose content in criminal cases we require
        the government use a search warrant, and that it complies with
        Google's strict policies (to prevent overreach that can
        compromise users' privacy).

 - - -

Care About Science and Tech? Our Job One: STOP TRUMP:
 - - -
Lauren Weinstein ( 
Lauren's Blog:
Founder: Network Neutrality Squad: 
         PRIVACY Forum:
Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility:
Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
I have consulted to Google, but I am not currently 
doing so -- my opinions expressed here are mine alone.
 - - -
The correct term is "Internet" NOT "internet" -- please don't 
fall into the trap of using the latter. It's just plain wrong!
pfir mailing list

Reply via email to