back to article Microsoft keeps Skype content safe from police data slurping - for now

Microsoft has not yet handed over the content of any Skype conversations to regular law enforcement requests in the last six months, Redmond has revealed. Redmond's stance was shown in its second transparency report, released on Friday. However, the report does not contain national security letter requests, so NSA and FISC and …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

    That's a relief then

    It's not like the NSA would share their access to the data with law enforcement without a warrant.

    1. Tom 35

      Re: That's a relief then

      But then law enforcement would have to lie about where they got the data, they would never do that!

      Would they?

  2. LarsG

    Really? I mean really?

    Do you think I'm stupid or what?

    1. Christian Berger

      Considering how Microsoft has treated their customers for the last decade...

      I'm sure they do.

  3. Big-nosed Pengie

    Nobody would ever doubt anything that Microsoft says!

  4. Quxy

    Nothing but weasel words

    When you parse their actual statement, it becomes clear that it's nothing more than meaningless noise:

    "not yet" (but they're just about to)

    "handed over" (because it's self-service)

    "the content" (but metadata is fine)

    "any Skype conversations" (what about video and text messages)

    "to regular" (of course, no one who asks is "regular" LEO)

    "law enforcement" (but the NSA isn't a LEO)

    "requests" (why make a request when you already have a back door)

    "in the last six months" (before that, well...)

  5. Captain DaFt

    Too bad

    That MS says this after the NSA said that:

    So the NSA is free to listen in on ALL phone calls, and MS can't legally mention it.

  6. WhoaWhoa

    >"As with the 2012 report this new data shows that across our services only a tiny fraction of accounts, less

    >that 0.01 percent are ever affected by law enforcement requests for customer data. Of the small number that

    >were affected, the overwhelming majority involved the disclosure of non-content data," Microsoft wrote.

    Weasel words.


    "Across our services just about everything you do is creamed off to the Agency that dare not speak its name. But if we tell you about it we'll be in serious trouble."

  7. codeusirae
    Big Brother

    Skype routing through super-nodes ..

    "Microsoft has not yet handed over the content of any Skype conversations to regular law enforcement requests in the last six months"

    Why is Microsoft routing all Skype communications through super-nodes in North America? And don't say it's for efficiency, in peer-to-peer communications, that doesn't make sense. As such all such assurances out of Microsoft and the rest, are totally bogus and false ...

    "In July last year, nine months after Microsoft bought Skype, the NSA boasted that a new capability had tripled the amount of Skype video calls being collected through Prism"

  8. This post has been deleted by its author

  9. rcorrect
    Big Brother

    less that 0.01 percent are ever affected by law enforcement requests for customer data.

    ...meaning that you have better chances of being spied on by the government than winning the lottery. Hopefully some attractive lady at the NSA finds my voice sexy and decides to stalkinvestigate me further.

  10. P. Lee

    Too late

    There was a time when people trusted companies to do only what the software said it would do. You bought a spreadsheet, it does spreadsheety things. Only viruses and dodgy Russian software sent your data across the internet.

    Now everyone is into advertising and tying you into online services. At one level, most people accept the risk, but I don't think many people really trust the big names and the government anymore.

    The issue over RC4 is representative - we don't need to hand over data because our random number generator is slightly badly coded.

    1. phil dude
      Black Helicopters

      Re: Too late

      Agreement. In addition to the confusion of "what can be trusted", that has been generated by recent events, it is all somewhat unwelcome.

      Fundamentally what is wrong with this article is that no percentage other than "0" is acceptable without a served warrant from an open court.

      It is *almost* amusing to hear the PR departments try and make an honest statement, when we have been "told" they are legally not allowed to tell the truth.

      Its a bit of a farce...


This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like