On May 30, 2014, at 4:56 AM,
dan@geer.org wrote:
>> | Could this non-notice be a Lavabit/Silent Circle type announcement/warning?
>> We need, somehow, a safe word for such projects. Presumably one
>> that is triggered
by a failed keep-alive. This has been discussed
>> before variously, but it may be an idea whose time has come. Design
>> will require choices between false alarms and silent failure.
>> --dan
>A deadman switch for NSL alerts would make for an interesting case. Would a judge rule that you had “spoken” >about the NSL by failing to send the keep-alive messages, thus compelling you to continuously speak the lie >that you have not received one?
>Lance Cottrell
>
loki@obscura.com
It would be a very interesting test case. I would say it shouldn't
happen, but a lot of outrages occur.
Another version might be where an American company informs its foreign law firm of the status of the court order; the foreign law firm has a long-standing practice (contracted by the American company) of publishing the status of the NSL-status remotely. The (American) judge would not have any jurisdiction over the foreign law firm to order it to (falsely) claim that no NSL order had arrived at the American company. At that point, the question will be, "Can a judge order an American company to not inform its foreign law firm of
relevant information (an NSL order), solely because if it did, the foreign law firm will adjust its publication of an announcement?"