Apple Publishes Report Outlining Government Information Requests

[mw360]

Subpoenas can be issued by any law enforcement agency and carry little if any legal authority. Generally, a subpoena should be tossed in the trash, considering the legal "weight" it carries. So if they are responding to subpoenas or "requests issued by a government agency", as they admit they are, then they are going beyond what is required by law and unnecessarily disclosing information.

There is no such admission. You should read what Apple have actually said, not the white space between the words...

Like many companies, Apple receives requests from law enforcement agencies to provide customer information. As we have explained, any government agency demanding customer content from Apple must get a court order. When we receive such a demand, our legal team carefully reviews the order. If there is any question about the legitimacy or scope of the court order, we challenge it. Only when we are satisfied that the court order is valid and appropriate do we deliver the narrowest possible set of information responsive to the request.

Total Number of Law Enforcement Account Requests Received
The total number of account-based requests issued by a government agency and/or a court that are received by Apple and seek customer data related to specific Apple IDs, email addresses, telephone numbers, credit card numbers, or other personal identifiers. Account-based law enforcement requests come in various forms such as subpoenas, court orders, and warrants.

Number of Account Requests Where Apple Objected
The number of law enforcement requests that resulted in Apple refusing to provide some data based on various grounds, such as jurisdiction, improper process, insufficient process, invalid process, or where the scope of the request was excessively broad. For example, Apple may object to a law enforcement request as “invalid” if it was not signed.

 

[mw360]

WT with all those US numbers!

What kind of Govt is that? More requests and more secrecy than Russia and China? Eye opener!

Russia and China would have no legal jurisdiction to prevent the numbers being published in the US.

 

[everything-i]

Its pretty shameful that Apple are unable to report an actual figure. Guaranteed this is a restriction put in place by the US government. The fact that the NSA think its ok to not only spy on their own citizens but on everyone else in the world is really disgusting. They are a disgrace to the memory of the people that founded their country.

 

[Eraserhead]

Russia and China would have no legal jurisdiction to prevent the numbers being published in the US.

Apple could publish the US figure in Europe (or Russia or China) then.

 

[MacDav]

Well, nobody is truly free. Financial, biological, and legal restraints abound even in the most permissive situations. The question is: does my government allow me more self-determination than other governments? And I guess the answer is 0-1000.

"I guess the answer is 0-1000"...Cute.
I can't flap my arms and soar into the heavens, but does that mean I'm not free? What is the definition of freedom? Is it forever expansive? Can it exist in a limited way? Just wondering.

 

[gnasher729]

Take a look at their Glossary, where they define Law Enforcement Requests as "requests issued by a government agency and/or a court..."
and further,
"Account-based law enforcement requests come in various forms such as subpoenas, court orders, and warrants."

That's the different requests that Apple could receive.

But they are clearly stating that they are only responding to court orders, and that they examine each court order closely and challenge it if they think there is anything wrong with it.

So Apple may very well receive subpoenas, but as they state, the only response would be "if you want that information, come back with a court order". I would assume that law enforcement would eventually figure this out, so they would stop sending subpoenas that won't get them anything.

And there is the possibility that Apple doesn't actually have much data about you that would be useful to law enforcement and that they can't get elsewhere.

 

[GoldenJoe]

Gotta love how the United States figures are a vague "0-1000". Maybe none, maybe 5. Maybe 1000. Can't really say.

I live in such a transparent place. Go go government.

Thanks, Obama!

 

[Eraserhead]

Thanks, Obama!

Bush did the same stuff...

 

[ouimetnick]

Meanwhile in English class, I'm reading 1984...

 

[Glassed Silver]

soooooooo.. what the hell does 0-1000 mean?

Sounds like a coverup. They may have given them nothing, or it all.

All the other countries have detailed information, then the US is just a range of data??? Come on now.

I have a nice counter on that BS.
If the govt doesn't want you to know the full details, just assume the worst.
In the end, you'll end up being much closer to the truth than with any other guessing method.

So, 0-1000 = 1000

Glassed Silver:mac

 

[MyMac1976]

The only was I see being able to stop this is stop use Apple/MS/Google

We've let these big three tech companies have all of our information and they've proven to not be good stewards of it.

 

[edk99]

The only was I see being able to stop this is stop use Apple/MS/Google

We've let these big three tech companies have all of our information and they've proven to not be good stewards of it.

Then you might as well disconnect yourself from the internet, throw your cell phone away, get rid of your toll transponder in your car and get a car without GPS built in. Also take your money out of the banks too.

You might as well add Yahoo, all the phone providers, all banks and any other large corporation you do business with to your list.

If you don't want the government tracking you buy a log cabin in Montana with its own generator and live off the earth and use cash.

Oh wait your now required to have health insurance so scratch all that above and carry on doing business with all those companies. LOL

 

[GoldenJoe]

Bush did the same stuff...

Breathtakingly thoughtless knee-jerk reaction of a response.

Obama is a nightmare, but it is people like you who enable him to get away with whatever "stuff" you assumed I was talking about.

 

[Porco]

I have a nice counter on that BS.
If the govt doesn't want you to know the full details, just assume the worst.
In the end, you'll end up being much closer to the truth than with any other guessing method.

So, 0-1000 = 1000

Glassed Silver:mac

Was just about to post the same thing. But I'm going to be kinder, and assume 999.

Of course these are the official requests through proper(ish) channels. There could be more that are so classified they are designated as another set of numbers. And we will never know, because the supposed constitutional right to free speech has apparently been completely disregarded.

I find the direction the world is going in in terms of privacy, freedom and liberty extremely sad. And I find it sad it is the American government* that seems to be leading the charge, when I grew up believing that whatever mistakes they might make, they did actually really mean all that stuff about freedom, on some fundamental level. I don't believe them any more. It just seems to be a never-ending quest for more control and more power, for its own sake.

*Important to note the difference between the government and the people. Which is why there is always some hope.

 

[MyMac1976]

Another take

https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/surveillance

 

[scoobydoo99]

Contrary to your belief in fascist conspiracy theories, it is in Apple best financial interests not to track or give out information on their customers. Apple knows this and is trying to minimize the damage to their image that all the "Spying B/S" inflicts. To suggest that they are part of some kind of fascist conspiracy is just Loony Tunes.

Most of the big tech companies have public statements saying just that - they only provide information when ORDERED to by a court with jurisdiction. And even then, they challenge them by default when possible, requiring not just the basic "here's a subpoena", but a follow up "no, we really mean it, a judge said so and everything." I haven't seen any such statements from Apple, but it certainly wouldn't surprise me.

There is no such admission. You should read what Apple have actually said, not the white space between the words...

And I suppose when Director of National Intelligence told a congressional hearing under oath that the NSA does NOT collect data on millions of Americans, you believed him?

And when Director of NSA Keith Alexander told congress, again under oath, that the NSA does not hold data on U.S. citizens, and, further, that "We're not authorized to do it, nor do we do it", you believed him as well?

Being gullible is one thing, but refusing to believe the reality of a government run amok is just ignorant.

----------

... And I find it sad it is the American government* that seems to be leading the charge, when I grew up believing that whatever mistakes they might make, they did actually really mean all that stuff about freedom, on some fundamental level. I don't believe them any more. It just seems to be a never-ending quest for more control and more power, for its own sake.

Now you're getting it. The American government will settle for nothing less than control of the entire world economy, population, and all natural resources - all in the service of making a very small number of people insanely wealthy.

 

[MacDav]

And I suppose when Director of National Intelligence told a congressional hearing under oath that the NSA does NOT collect data on millions of Americans, you believed him?

And when Director of NSA Keith Alexander told congress, again under oath, that the NSA does not hold data on U.S. citizens, and, further, that "We're not authorized to do it, nor do we do it", you believed him as well?

Being gullible is one thing, but refusing to believe the reality of a government run amok is just ignorant.

----------



Now you're getting it. The American government will settle for nothing less than control of the entire world economy, population, and all natural resources - all in the service of making a very small number of people insanely wealthy.

While I am certainly not fond of the NSA or any of the nefarious activities they seem to be up to, I know that Apple is not part of some kind of Fascist plot as you said in the post I replied to. You are a conspiracy advocate and I think you are in LA LA Land. However, if you're enjoying the drama playing in your head, by all means keep it running.

 

[Eraserhead]

Breathtakingly thoughtless knee-jerk reaction of a response.

Look you can either take it as an opportunity to bash Obama and turn off the roughly half of Americans who are liberal, or you can accept that both major parties in the US have behaved very similarly in this regard and keep the liberals on side.

There are plenty of ways of expressing dissatisfaction with the NSA spying in a bipartisan way, as it is a bipartisan problem.

The fact that both parties are guilty means you can't do anything as simple as voting for the other party to get rid of it, but you also have the advantage that people on both sides of the political spectrum support change.

 

[Tech198]

Lets not forget the NSA here...

Companies say anything to reasure their customers saftey and privacy, but pass it on behind your back anyway...

Google is doing that.... Microsoft is doing that, What makes Apple any different ?

I'm not saying they are definitely, but who knows right ?

I mean, Location Services was an issue, they say they fixed, but has anyone actually gone back in to make sure of this ? or we did just "hang up our gloves" and believe them ?

I'd be actually making sure...... Its what i always do, regardless of what anyone says.....

 

[kdarling]

In response, Apple published a statement of "Commitment to Customer Privacy" denying its participation in PRISM ...

Apple did not specifically deny its participation in PRISM. What they said was:

"We first heard of the government’s “Prism” program when news organizations asked us about it on June 6. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers..."

That could mean simply that they didn't know the name was "Prism". And nobody provides "direct access". (That was a mistake in the first news reports.)

Telling cherry-picked truths is the best way to hide info.

TechCrunch also notes that Apple has cleverly specified in the report that it has not "received an order under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act" and would "expect to challenge" such an order if served.

This is another example of misdirection by way of telling an unrelated true fact.

Section 215 of the Patriot Act is about the FBI getting access to written records. Prism is not authorized under that, and so yes, it's likely true that Apple has never gotten a Section 215 request.

Prism is authorized under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), instead. Apple carefully avoided talking about that part, either on its own or by coercion.

--

It's understandable that no company would refuse valid requests. Imagine if after a future terrorist attack, it was revealed that, say Apple, had refused a valid request about one of the participants, that might've prevented the attack. The public backlash would be huge.

 

[Tech198]

If apple has never denied. then there has to be a middle ground. aka. Apple's not said of providing info, nor have they said their denying any either.

Apple doesn't have to know what it means.... No company does... they just need to comply with the law.

aka Lavabit is a good example of this, except he knew about it.

 

[mw360]

And I suppose when Director of National Intelligence told a congressional hearing under oath that the NSA does NOT collect data on millions of Americans, you believed him?

And when Director of NSA Keith Alexander told congress, again under oath, that the NSA does not hold data on U.S. citizens, and, further, that "We're not authorized to do it, nor do we do it", you believed him as well?

Being gullible is one thing, but refusing to believe the reality of a government run amok is just ignorant.

Spoken like a true conspiracy theorist. Throw out a load of irrelevant statements to cover up your lies. You said Apple admitted to handing over data voluntarily. I pointed out to you that Apple's statement contains no such admission, and actually says the exact opposite of what you're claiming. Try addressing that point first.

 

[ElectronGuru]

It's understandable that no company would refuse valid requests. Imagine if after a future terrorist attack, it was revealed that, say Apple, had refused a valid request about one of the participants, that might've prevented the attack. The public backlash would be huge.

This is to the point. What are we willing, as a county and as individuals, to give up to be safe from such attacks? These data requests are to see what there is, so by definition the results (whether or not there is a threat) cannot be known until the information is examined.

Apple is caught in the middle, not wanting to give up their customer's privacy and not wanting to prevent discovery of a threat. The thing to keep in mind is they didn't have to make this public. They are hoping that additional transparency will help them and us decide where to draw the line - separating to far from not far enough.

And at the risk of sounding idealistic, as much as it's our asses on the line and our votes that decide policy, the decision is ours to make.

 

[GoldenJoe]

Look you can either take it as an opportunity to bash Obama and turn off the roughly half of Americans who are liberal, or you can accept that both major parties in the US have behaved very similarly in this regard and keep the liberals on side.

There are plenty of ways of expressing dissatisfaction with the NSA spying in a bipartisan way, as it is a bipartisan problem.

The fact that both parties are guilty means you can't do anything as simple as voting for the other party to get rid of it, but you also have the advantage that people on both sides of the political spectrum support change.

There's nothing I can say to reason with you. You see all issues through the lens of partisanship. The suggestion that I have to levy a criticism toward the republicans every time I say something against Obama is ludicrous, and a poor attempt to distract from the criticism I originally made. That attitude of "Well, look at this republican! He's just as bad!" is what enables the democrats and republicans alike to keep getting away with all the atrocities they commit. So thanks for towing the party line and perpetuating the problem.

 

[Eraserhead]

There's nothing I can say to reason with you. You see all issues through the lens of partisanship. The suggestion that I have to levy a criticism toward the republicans every time I say something against Obama is ludicrous, and a poor attempt to distract from the criticism I originally made. That attitude of "Well, look at this republican! He's just as bad!" is what enables the democrats and republicans alike to keep getting away with all the atrocities they commit. So thanks for towing the party line and perpetuating the problem.

This is a situation where both parties are equally bad - there is no significant difference between the two parties.

Additionally both have substantial numbers of members who don't agree with this stuff.