Legality of warrant canaries

[odinn]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I would add to that, even though it won't change the behavior of those
engaging in surveillance, it wouldn't hurt to post a notice somewhere
on the server stating that the managers of the server / service do not
consent to warrantless searches, or something to that effect. This is
similar to the "door notice" and "safe notice" that CALGUNS and Michel
& Associates (a law firm) published to counter APPS seizures in CA,
USA. (Not many people use them, but if you're prone to receiving
visits from LEOs, it's at the very least something you should discuss
with your lawyer.) Suppose you have a "door notice" up installed as a
file somewhere on your servers - basically saying "Go Away! We don't
consent to warrantless searches" or something like that... if it then
turns out that someone has been poking into your servers you will then
be able to say "There was a warning posted...You were warned that you
shouldn't do that," and proceed to either disclose what they've done
or even (if you really want to try to use the law as a blunt
instrument, not that I recommend that, I really don't, but here it is)
either issue cease and desist (what Mozilla did on at least one
occasion) or, _prosecute_ the agents (under the DoD's voluntary DIB,
the agents could be corporate or persons directly in governmental
employ) using civil legal actions:
https://storify.com/AnonyOdinn/using-legal-actions-against-finfisher-hackbacks-an

Please note:
1) Law isn't a solution to stop malware and surveillance, though I
have in the past suggested how people could use it.
2) Nothing I post here can be construed as legal advice.  If you are
contemplating doing anything that would involve the use of law in any
way shape or form, go get a lawyer.
3) Cryptoanarchy, I think, will have a much bigger impact than people
are currently willing to admit.  The influence of those who use law,
violence, and coercion altogether, will thus fade as time goes on, IMHO.

Cheers,

- -Odinn

On 10/17/2014 03:56 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> I believe the best policy would be to determine your own belief. 
> Assuming your belief is that gag orders are bullshit and canaries
> are stupid games, then: Inform council you will be taking such
> position, identify any legal basis/test such as first amandement /
> rights. Wait for warrant, order, NSL, FISA, exigence argument. 
> Publish it, with/without whatever redactions you see fit, to 
> whomever/all you see fit. See what happens. Nothing better than a
> stand up fight. (Never underestimate the power of the 1st).
> 

- -- 
http://abis.io ~
"a protocol concept to enable decentralization
and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
https://keybase.io/odinn
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUQbimAAoJEGxwq/inSG8C2TkIAL89H2aCzbK8k4qJpn32P2r1
5bi0mjTYInGIEUzRB6K1CHYEN0i4H0xaRWn0ccUe547rP8tHcZDy+QojKBELfTyc
Ch4iXxP/7Pt61jlEWLaX7g1k7j1tUr1g6f5wvZAelj/Qkba7kasyX3MaVN1lFrkp
WN6erZRcoCIi0Rfs/wZk26agJl6hwCq81Aqv2poxBFBxee9/Gq6+RiAunq9cFzlu
gMpqZe4q6kz6/52RsBS+oIndMOLhsabYPqy0cPQnuFurJHTtzVDrxm1BzYFnCEX2
iKmLHCxg5t8ekd0fr527GPR2VUmimUUfhvACZ492B0e1zfko6fSKbIvJlSIw69Y=
=Fr9F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----