back to article US court kills FBI gag order slapped on ISP... 11 years later

A Federal Court in New York has struck down an FBI gagging order that has been in place for 11 years. Describing it as "extreme and overly broad," in a decision [PDF] published Tuesday, Judge Victor Marrero dismissed the order against Nicholas Merrill. Merrill had received a National Security Letter (NSL) from the FBI in 2004 …

  1. K
    Big Brother

    Incredible..

    Not a single thing in that list which warrants a gagging order, let alone a heavy handed one.. this was the FBI being underhanded and trying to hide their activity from joe-public - So they were obviously worried about backlash if this became public-knowledge.

    Then James Comey along with every law enforcement and politician wonder why nobody trusts them or has faith in the secret "oversight", provided courtesy of their fellow cronies.

    I hope Nicholas Merrill gets the recognition and compensation he deserves for having this shoved down his throat for over a decade!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      If you really want to see how bad the FBI is...

      Go see Blackmass.

      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1355683/?pf_rd_m=A2FGELUUNOQJNL&pf_rd_p=2074322302&pf_rd_r=1JRSYQJRVCFZA7G2EP81&pf_rd_s=right-3&pf_rd_t=15061&pf_rd_i=homepage&ref_=hm_otw_t2

      The basic story line of the FBI protecting a major criminal because he was an informant is true.

      The book "Paddywhacked- the story of the Irish mob in America" has better details

      1. phil dude
        Coat

        Re: If you really want to see how bad the FBI is...

        Currenty I would recommend "Blacklist" which is now on Netflix. James Spader plays a criminal that turns himself into the FBI, and becomes their informant.

        I will admit, I couldn't see James Spader without thinking "Robert California" at first....

        P.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: If you really want to see how bad the FBI is...

          I will admit, I couldn't see James Spader without thinking "Robert California" at first....???

          Daniel Jackson

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: If you really want to see how bad the FBI is...

        >If you really want to see how bad the FBI is...

        As bad as the FBI can be they are still a saint compared to the NSA and some other 3 letter organizations. J Edgar Hoover's shadow made sure the lawmakers put a significant leash on the department unlike some of the others. Now if they would only go after white collar criminals like they are supposed to.

    2. NoneSuch Silver badge
      Big Brother

      Re: Incredible..

      They did that to every ISP, phone company, Internet corporation and anyone else with data. Even if the gag order is judged illegal, that collected info is still out there and will never be deleted.

      The United States of Paranoia.

  2. Chairo

    So in a nutshell

    the FBI was asking for all available personal date of all customers + IP address. And if this went out to a relatively small ISP, it can be assumed that most other ISPs got the same request with the same gag order - and complied without a fight.

    They sure like collecting stuff, don't they? But for non-Americans that have to go there for business trips, this doesn't come as a surprise. The Feds are slurping our personal data all the time, directly form the airline company.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: So in a nutshell

      "...this went out to a relatively small ISP, it can be assumed that most other ISPs got the same request with the same gag order - and complied without a fight."

      I have little to add to this, I just wanted to repost it. Why would the FBI not send one of these requests to every ISP in the US and repeat that request on a regular basis? If there is no evidence of Verizon being involved in a similar case then it's a fair bet that they just hand this data over without complaint.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Cost is not a problem

    When you are spending someone else's (tax) money

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It gets worse...

    I'm sure that most computer literate folks are aware of the US Office of Personnel Management (US OPM) data base hack. As I write this comment for El Reg, CNN is proposing that somewhere between 15 and 20 million data sets (each data set containing detailed personal information regarding a specific gov't employee or applicant) were leaked. However, the majority of these data sets also contain/contained "Form SF86" information, which may or may not include equally detailed information on that employee/applicant's parents, siblings, superiors (military), managers (civilian), love interest, parents of the love interest, etc, etc. Thus the 15-20 million number may effectively be exponentially higher. At the moment, those who know are not talking.

    Why is this relevant?

    The US OPM collects this data in an open and above-board manner. Everyone knows that they collect it. Everyone knows they have it. Whether or not one agrees with the justifications for them gathering this massive amount of detailed personal info, the collection practice and processes are traditional and accepted.

    Other three & four letter agencies (TLAs & FLAs) are not open and above-board in their collection of personal data. Also, as this article well documents, not everyone knows which TLAs and FLAs are collecting data, what data they are collecting, where they are storing it, how they are storing it, and so on.

    Let's talk a bit about the gov't employees, and applicants. For these individuals, it's likely the TLAs and FLAs simply use US OPM data sets as a starting point, and then collect follow-on data related to a specific area of interest. After all, why expend resources to collect the same data twice? ISP data, as described in this article, would thus be only a small part of an individual's expanded data set, as archived by a TLA or FLA.

    Nightmarish problems arise when a TLA or FLA (or one of their contractors, or sub-contractors) is hacked, and leaks not only the copied US OPM data sets, but also any follow-on data that was subsequently collected by the agency itself. (There is reason to believe that such leaks have already happened. More than once.)

    Is a cloak & dagger TLA or FLA going to cop to losing tens of millions of US OPM data sets? I find it unlikely. In order to 'fess up to losing them, the TLA or FLA would have to admit to having made copies. In order to 'fess up to losing (as an example) ISP metadata collected as follow-on to copied US OPM data sets, a TLA or FLA would need to admit to secretly collecting the metadata.

    I could ramble on. But I should stop now, having verbosely expressed the opinion that police state entities have already collected and leaked significant personal info for nearly every one of us, at our expense, and will never tell us what was collected or when/how it was leaked.

    In closing: Nicholas Merrill is a patriot and a hero. And should be honored as such.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Black Helicopters

      Re: It gets worse...

      I agree, but the sheeple dont really care.

      Can I hear a helicopter in the ba................

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: It gets worse...

        surely the baahhhhhground - growl

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Meh

        Re: It gets worse...

        Sheeple do care, but they either dont know/understand or know that they (not you) cant do anything about, before the revolution

    2. I Am Spartacus
      Coat

      three & four letter agencies (TLAs & FLAs)

      You refer to " three & four letter agencies (TLAs & FLAs) ". You should note that FLA is a TLA. Talking about a four letter agency as TLA is confusing.

      The accepted term is that they are an Extended Three Letter Agency, ie an ETLA.

      Fixed that for you.

  5. Kane
    Black Helicopters

    Hah!

    "but not including message content and/or subject fields."

    "No, we'll leave that to our colleagues over in Fort Meade..."

  6. Christoph

    "That term appears in the law that allows for national security letters but has not been defined; the FBI uses its own definition of what that means, which it refuses to disclose."

    "any other information you consider to be an electronic communication transactional record."

    So he must hand over anything that might be an ECTR, but he is not allowed to know what the definition of an ECTR is?

    1. Nigel 11

      More likely he's been told what an ECTR is, and that he's not permitted to provide this information to any other person! Sort of like signing the official secrets act, but not voluntarily.

      (And what he's been told may extend way beyond what is legal, which may well be why he's not allowed to tell anyone else ....)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        The Official Secrets Act

        Doesn't need signing to be valid.

        But it's harder to claim that you didn't know that data might be subject to it if you have been told, and have recorded that event with a signature...

        1. Vic

          Re: The Official Secrets Act

          Doesn't need signing to be valid

          True, but many people who are likely to come under its auspices do so under Section 1(1), which requires those not from the security and intelligence services to have been "notified that he is subject to the provisions of this subsection" for any disclosure to be an offence. Proving that such notification has been delivered will inevitably take the form of a signature...

          Vic.

  7. Your alien overlord - fear me

    Well, this proves that ISPs shouldn't charge for their servcies. Therefore name, phone numbers, addresses etc aren't kept by them. Leave email services to others and hey presto, you have no logs whatsoever. Gag on that FBI.

  8. Trollslayer
    Mushroom

    The country of MCarthy

    Continues to ride high in the saddle.

    1. ItsNotMe
      Mushroom

      Re: The country of MCarthy

      Oh how right you are. And the current clown running the place...sad to admit I voted for him...but only the first time...ran his first campaign on a platform of "Change". Change? What fucking "change"?

      The only thing that has changed are the monograms on the Tea Towels in the White House. Other than that, very little has changed. As a matter of fact...it has gotten WORSE under the current Regime...not better.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    so much for separation of powers

    The national security state, even in "defeat", censors the judicial branch.

    What exactly did we fight the Cold War for anyway?

    Oh right, "to preserve freedom and democracy".

    Seems we lost both along the way, morphing along the way into the same kind of totalitarian capitalist paradise China exemplifies.

    Good job surrendering to dictators, guys!

    1. Preston Munchensonton

      Re: so much for separation of powers

      Separation of powers in the US hasn't existed since the 1930s. Look up administrative law and its own judiciary

    2. Kevin Johnston Silver badge

      Re: so much for separation of powers

      "I took oath to defend this country from all enemies, foreign & domestic" - Mark Wahlberg, Shooter movie 2007

      If it hadn't struck a nerve it would have been funny

      1. asdf

        Re: so much for separation of powers

        Ah Mark Wahlberg, true American patriot and racist violent felon. But I guess Marky Mark is a changed man.

  10. herman Silver badge

    Franz Kafka nailed most of the points about secret trials with secret charges in breach of secret laws in Der Process. The big problem that I see with the way things are done in the Fascist States of America is the increased likelihood of miss information ruining the lives of innocents.

  11. Triboolean
    Holmes

    Perfectly reasonable

    It makes sense to not say they are slurping all info including credit card info and passwords.

    Especially so. Because sooner or later someone will notice that human beings work for these agencies in every capacity. They are not any more or less ethical as a group than any other, being human. This means some, at some time, some of them are going to take that info and use it for profit (like buy stuff on your cc or loot your bank account, or sell that info).

    When any agency says your info is safe and secure and accessible only for security investigations, they are lying to you and to themselves. Wherever the two-leggers are involved, stuff eventually goes wrong. So best not to admit what info they take as there is a risk, I would say a large risk, of it heading out past the firewall one way or another. And making them look bad.

    By saying nothing - plausible deniability.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like