April 25, 2024

Bits Blog: Google Asks Secret Court for Permission to Publish National Security Request Data

Google's motion to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on Tuesday is the company's latest move to control the public relations crisis that has resulted from revelations of government Internet surveillance.Jeff Chiu/Associated Press Google’s motion to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on Tuesday is the company’s latest move to control the public relations crisis that has resulted from revelations of government Internet surveillance.

Google on Tuesday filed a motion with the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, asking permission to publish data on national security requests that were made to it and authorized by the court.

The motion is the company’s latest move to control the public relations crisis that has resulted from revelations of government Internet surveillance. It is an escalation of Google’s efforts to publish the data. Last week, it sent a letter to the director of the F.B.I. and the director of national intelligence, asking for the same thing.

By law, recipients of national security requests are not allowed to acknowledge their existence. But with the permission of the government, Facebook, Yahoo, Microsoft and Apple have in the last few days published aggregate numbers of national security and criminal requests, including those authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Google has not, because it said that would be less transparent than what it had already published. Its transparency report has since 2010 broken out requests by type, and if it agreed to the same terms the other companies did, it would not be able to publish the report that way in the future.

In the motion, Google argued that it had a First Amendment right to publish a range of the total number of requests and the number of users or accounts they cover.

Google said that its executives had responded to allegations — that it cooperated with the government in Internet surveillance — as best they could, given the government’s restraints on discussing them. But the company said that it wanted to do more for the sake of its reputation, business and users, and for the sake of public debate.

“Google’s reputation and business has been harmed by the false or misleading reports in the media, and Google’s users are concerned by the allegations,” the motion said. “Google must respond to such claims with more than generalities.”

The tech companies have been pressing to be able to publish the number of government requests largely to prove that the requests cover a tiny fraction of users. Though the other companies said they were also pushing the government for permission to publish more detailed data, they said the aggregate numbers were useful to control speculation by setting a ceiling on the number of requests.

Other tech companies affected by the government’s surveillance program, called Prism, have considered going to the secret court, an option that is still on the table, according to two people briefed on the discussions. So far, the companies have been individually negotiating with the government instead of acting in concert.

Still, even if they are allowed to publish more detailed numbers, it would leave many questions unanswered, including details of how Prism works. Also, the number of people affected by FISA requests could be much larger than the number of requests, because once the government makes a broad request, it can add individuals and additional search queries for a year.

Google’s motion also revealed that two of its top lawyers, Kent Walker and Richard Salgado, have security clearance, which FISA requires for handling classified legal orders and materials. It was filed on behalf of the company by Albert Gidari, a partner at the law firm Perkins Coie who has earned a reputation in tech and legal circles as an expert on surveillance law.

Article source: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/18/google-asks-secret-court-for-permission-to-publish-national-security-request-data/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Bits Blog: Google Offers Some Detail About How It Transfers Data to the Government

Google has offered a few more details about how it shares user data with the government, including in response to national security requests.

As The New York Times reported on Tuesday, when Google is legally required to hand over data about its users, it usually delivers it using a file-transferring technology called secure FTP, David Drummond, Google’s chief legal officer, said in an interview on British television.

FTP is a simple way to upload and download files sent between parties — like an online file folder. Either party can operate the secure FTP server that the files flow through. In an interview on PBS NewsHour, Mr. Drummond indicated that the secure FTP server is on the government’s machines and not on Google’s.

“We deliver it to them, we push it out to them,” said Mr. Drummond, who was speaking from Amsterdam. “They don’t come access it through any machines at Google.”

David Drummond, Google’s chief legal officer, in April. Mr. Drummond published a letter Tuesday asking the government for permission to reveal more information about the number and scope of national security requests.Daniel Rosenbaum for The New York Times David Drummond, Google’s chief legal officer, in April. Mr. Drummond published a letter Tuesday asking the government for permission to reveal more information about the number and scope of national security requests.

The New York Times reported on Friday that the National Security Agency‘s secret Internet surveillance program, Prism, involved electronically transmitting data — though not automatically or in bulk — in compliance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. While the government asked the companies to make a secure lockbox, the article said, the companies responded in different ways.

Mr. Drummond’s statement on Tuesday provides some clarity on how Google electronically transfers data in response to government requests, including national security requests.

Some lawyers who respond to national security requests for tech companies described the systems as nothing more than a 21st-century way to transfer files. Every government request is reviewed by a person, they said, but once it is time to hand over the data, it is more efficient to use the Internet than to print pages and mail them or burn a CD, for instance. (FTP, however, is hardly new, having existed in some form for about four decades.)

Mr. Drummond spoke publicly about the issue for the first time as part of a day of damage control to quell the criticisms after the Prism revelations.

Though Google and the other tech companies have repeatedly said they do not provide the government with direct access to their servers and only comply with lawful government requests, many questions remain about how the government surveillance program works.The companies have said they are restricted from saying more by government gag orders.

“There are a lot of misimpressions that are out there,” Mr. Drummond said on British television. “We feel very strongly that we’ve got to set the record straight.”

He also published a letter on Tuesday asking the government for permission to reveal more information about the number and scope of national security requests, and Microsoft and Facebook followed suit.

The delivery mechanism, people at tech companies have said, is not as important as the data that governments ask the companies to turn over, which is why they asked to reveal more information about the data requests.

Article source: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/google-offers-some-detail-about-how-it-transfers-data-to-the-government/?partner=rss&emc=rss

3 Tech Giants Want to Reveal Data Requests

They made the request after revelations about the National Security Agency’s secret Internet surveillance program, known as Prism, for collecting data from technology companies like e-mail messages, photos, stored documents, videos and online chats. The collection is legally authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which forbids companies from acknowledging the existence of requests or revealing any details about them.

Google for the first time publicly acknowledged it had received FISA requests and said it had complied with far fewer of the requests than it received. Facebook and Microsoft did not go as far as discussing requests they had received but, like Google, said they wanted to be able to publish information on the volume and scope of the government requests.

Christopher Soghoian, a senior policy analyst studying privacy, technology and surveillance at the American Civil Liberties Union, said that while he appreciated the statements from the companies, they were largely meant to save face with users and employees.

“If nothing else happens, this is a way of putting the government on the defensive and shifting the blame from the companies to the government,” he said.

Many questions remain unanswered after the leak of N.S.A. documents about Prism, including precisely how the tech companies and the government cooperate. Prism refers to an automated system for electronically exchanging information regarding FISA requests, according to people briefed on how it works. On Tuesday, David Drummond, Google’s chief legal officer, said in an interview on British television that Google hands over the information to the government in person or by using a file-transferring technology called secure FTP.

But the companies say they are frustrated that they are unable, because of a government gag order, to give more details of sharing user data with the government.

That gap in information has fed speculation that is untrue, Mr. Drummond wrote in a letter on Tuesday to Eric H. Holder Jr., the attorney general, and Robert S. Mueller, the director of the F.B.I. In the letter, Mr. Drummond asked for permission to publish both the number of national security requests, including FISA disclosures, that Google receives and their scope.

“Google’s numbers would clearly show that our compliance with these requests falls far short of the claims being made,” Mr. Drummond wrote. “Google has nothing to hide.” Mr. Drummond was unavailable for an interview.

In a statement, Leslie Miller, a Google spokeswoman, said “only a tiny fraction” of Google’s hundreds of millions of users worldwide were subject to government data requests each year.

Google has said it scrutinizes each government request and narrows the scope if it is overly broad. In 2010, it became the first major tech company to publish a transparency report detailing certain government requests for user information. In March, after long negotiations with law enforcement, it added national security letters, which the F.B.I. uses to ask for information and which companies are generally not permitted to disclose. Still, Google was allowed to report only that it received zero to 999 such letters.

Microsoft released its first transparency report in March. The company said on Thursday that the report went as far as it legally could and urged the government to allow it to publish more information.

Facebook has never published a transparency report, despite pressure to do so. On Thursday, it said it would start publishing one if the government gave it permission to release information on the size and scope of national security requests.

“We have questioned the value of releasing a transparency report that, because of exactly these types of government restrictions on disclosure, is necessarily incomplete and therefore potentially misleading to users,” Ted Ullyot, Facebook’s general counsel, said in a statement.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/technology/google-asks-to-reveal-details-about-classified-requests.html?partner=rss&emc=rss