Common sense prevailed?
*Dies in surprise & shock*
Microsoft has won a landmark legal action against the US government over protecting the privacy of non-US citizens on non-US servers. The appeals court decision invalidates a key legal tool the US government uses to apply extraterritorially. The software company voluntarily put itself in contempt of court by challenging Uncle …
Fuck me, has an IQ regression beam hit the earth.
"Sure you might not like them but this would HAVE screwed over apple".
Fucking hell fire, If a CHILD did that on a SAT test, they would be dumped in the remedial English class.
As an English speaking adult, no doubt who received a free 11 year education, you should know fucking better.
/Rant over and yes, it gets right on my fucking man tits.
I see your rant and raise you a pedantic critique of your own text, because Muphry's law requires it.
"Fuck me, has an IQ regression beam hit the earth."
That sentence appears to be a question and, whether it is rhetorical or not, requires a question mark at the end. I would even accept an interrobang if you were feeling creative.
"Fucking hell fire, If a CHILD did that on a SAT test, they would be dumped in the remedial English class."
Capitalised first character of "if" after a comma, which should likely be a full stop.
Arguably the "a" before SAT should be "an", depending on whether you consider it to be pronounced the same way as the word sat or letter by letter "es ay te".
"As an English speaking adult, no doubt who received a free 11 year education, you should know fucking better."
Given that "no doubt" is really a clause added purely to the strengthen the intensity of the sentence, I would suggest that it should appear after the "who".
Otherwise your criticism of the OP is sound.
6/10 see me.
Whilst I will happily admit I make grammatical errors, transposing "have" and "of" is not strictly a error in grammar. It is purely a lack of intelligence. Just like people who say "axe him if that's right" as opposed to "ask".
Put it this way, candidate A and candidate B are absolutely matched for a job vacancy, one candidate, however, does not know the difference between "have" and "of". Which one would YOU give the job to.
"Put it this way, candidate A and candidate B are absolutely matched for a job vacancy, one candidate, however, does not know the difference between "have" and "of". Which one would YOU give the job to."
The one that didn't feel the need to point out someone else's single misuse of those two words in a tirade of expletives, when the conversation in question didn't call for it and didn't necessitate perfect syntax. More specifically, not you!
Forums and comment sections are tend to be written as we speak. It isn't a formal letter to a customer but a conversation. Get over it.
Especially as many people on the internet don't have English as their first language we've all learnt to get on and just look at what's written, what the context is and what people are likely saying. Moaning about grammar doesn't make you look smart it just makes you look grumpy.
Interesting rant that goes after the person but attempts to avoid the substance of the comment, probably because it was spot on.
If the DoJ would have won this, it would have created precedent that data is not safe anywhere in the world if held by a US company.
The brutal irony is that one Microsoft service would have been outright in breach of EU privacy laws even though it pretended to be in the EU, but I guess now Privacy Shield has been agreed we can go back to ignoring the reality in favour of what is a political fix.
In principle, it depends on what your needs are how you read this verdict (and the Privacy Shield thing). If you're looking for avoiding liability risk, you're now again golden. However, if you DO need proper privacy, be aware that a precedent does not make a law..
But, fear not, I found another Microsoft service that is still very much in breach. Flagrantly so, actually, and it has been for quite a few years, and they got rather cagey when I started asking questions. So I'll ask them again, but this time formally, with a copy to the relevant Data Protection offices. Just because I like being a pest when it comes to rights, and they're worth it..
"ommon sense naw. Follow the money. If they don't rule for MS this will certain sector of the US economy , Sure you might not like them but this would of screwed over apple,google,Face book and just about every tech company that wants to do business in Europe."
Could we have an English translation, please?
not by a long chalk.
Uncle Sam does not like to be told 'keep the feck off the data in the Emerald Isle'.
This ruling may apply to the whole of the EU so that includes us for the time being.
What's the betting that the new PM lets the US spooks have every bit of data stored on the UK as soon as we apply for article 50.
Did no one mention this during the referendum campaign?
I wonder why not eh?
What price BREXIT eh? Looking like it is gonna be expensive, very expensive.
This post has been deleted by a moderator
RE: "mountains of leprechaun shit."
And fucking* green, every fucking where.
* Don't forget to use the F word as much as possible when making offensive Irish stereotypes. The Irish swear a lot. "What a lovely fucking day it is, to be sure, to be sure."
I wonder what a landwar in Ireland looks like.....
Not sure whether by Brits who want to invade again - this time for good, Yanks who remember Vietnam, US Irish who don't want to drown their ancestors'' island in Agent Orange, Yanks who know nothing, Brits pining for the Empire on which the Sun Never Sets, Scots getting a sour feeling when somebody mentions an invasion, or just P.U.T.I.N. downvoting everthing to give everyone a hard time?
"I wonder what a landwar in Ireland looks like....."
Perhaps because there have been land wars in Ireland, most people know what they looked like, and we (for various more and less exclusive values of "we") are still living with the after-effects, over 300 years later.
Those who will not learn history are doomed to step in it, and all that.
... Agent Orange ...
... would, in this case, be a Protestant Unionist spy.
"Glad to see I'm not the only commentard from the occupied six counties."
It's as well to remember that if there hadn't been partition the consequence would undoubtedly have been a war of secession. I've often wondered whether that might have been the more stable long-term outcome but it would certainly have been bloody. I don't know enough about modern Irish history (as far as I'm concerned modern is anything later than, say, Early Iron Age) to work out whether this would have replaced the Irish civil war or whether it would have resulted in a 3-way war as it would have been in a similar time-frame.
"Not sure whether by Brits who want to invade again"
One of those downvotes was from someone who spent many years there during the IRA/UVF campaigns and has seen the consequences at close quarters. That's "seen" as in having helped dig up the occasional murder victim or help identify very badly burned remains (Google La Mon for details).
Some of us know very well what a land war is like in Ireland. It's not the land that gets hurt.
Did no one mention this during the referendum campaign?
Err, because Brexit doesn't make a blind bit of difference, perchance?
GCHQ and the UK Home Secretary <insert name of vacuous arts graduate here> gave no heed to international data protection before Brexit, and they won't afterwards. It therefore follows that if there's some unforeseen reversion event and we don't invoke article 50, the UK government will still use either straightforward lies, deception, or whatever get out clauses allow them to continue to channel all data passing through the UK to the NSA.
To believe that the federalist super-statists of Brussels have you best interests at heart is to rather ignore the misery those same people are joyously inflicting on southern europe in the name of the same goal of consolidation to a single euro-sludge mega nation.
Had they been / if they are ruled against after all the appeals are exhausted, or congress stupidly passes a law to "fix" this situation, all Microsoft needs to do is create an Irish subsidiary to own the datacenters and be responsible for the data. That subsidiary would have a contract with Microsoft USA that allows Microsoft USA access to the data for their business purposes.
Heck, they could even go so far as to IPO that subsidiary in Ireland so Microsoft itself doesn't own any part of it. How could the US enforce its laws on an Irish company? What's next, try to enforce their laws on Irish pubs? The Irish company could just toss the subpoenas in the trash because the US would have no way to enforce them unless they want to stage a military invasion of Ireland.
"Had they been / if they are ruled against after all the appeals are exhausted, or congress stupidly passes a law to "fix" this situation, all Microsoft needs to do is create an Irish subsidiary to own the datacenters and be responsible for the data. That subsidiary would have a contract with Microsoft USA that allows Microsoft USA access to the data for their business purposes."
It already is owned by a Microsoft subsidiary. That's what opening an office in another country means; setting up a local company there and registering it. You can't just go to another country, buy an office building and start doing business unregistered with the local government.
The US has a habit of using threatened penalties on a business trading in the US to force compliance by a subsidiary in another country. That would have been supremely distasteful had they been allowed to do this in this case.
However the same practise has been very successful in imposing a range of (recently relaxed) economic sanctions against Iran. The line was if you want to bank in the US, you'd better not be trading with Iran, or be trading with someone else who is trading with Iran. Most banks throughout the world weighed up the profit of trading with Iran vs the guaranteed enormous loss if caught out by the US, and decided to not trade with Iran. Including pretty much all of the Middle Eastern banks.
"The Irish company could just toss the subpoenas in the trash because the US would have no way to enforce them unless they want to stage a military invasion of Ireland."
Don't be giving our government any ideas. We're gearing up to install a female war monger.
But alas even though the judge is American and most of Microsoft management/legal team is American most people on here will once again blast 300+ million people because of our government of the 1%ers for the 1%ers with the peons having to pick between two different only in rhetoric 1%er clubs.
Care to provide some alternatives for places to live where the government does NOT oppress you? Between Canada, UK, Australia and New Zealand there's plenty of oppression to be had. The rest of the EU is no better. China's even worse. Russia is more "free" in the sense of more anarchy, but it is only free from oppression until you piss off one of Putin's favorites and then you simply disappear. The Middle East is even worse. I suppose a lot of Africa is free if you're in the right place and have enough money to afford a personal army to keep you safe.
most people on here will once again blast 300+ million people because of our government of the 1%ers for the 1%ers with the peons having to pick between two different only in rhetoric 1%er clubs.
Who keeps electing them? Tooth fairies? Good candidates run but they really never the votes because gay lover commienism!
Finally the USA realises the people outside the borders are not aliens, but foreigners, humans, with their own Governments and laws, even when the USA doesn't like them.
It's not like the USA is at war with Austria, Sweden, Ireland or Switzerland, all I think neutral countries in different ways.
Theresa May & Amber Rudd can make their own arrangements with CIA and FBI in a couple of years time.
Finally the USA realises the people outside the borders are not aliens, but foreigners, humans, with their own Governments and laws, even when the USA doesn't like them.
Not to be pendantic, but the United States of America might realize this, but there no chance in hell that the full force of the US government recognizes anything other than how they want it, when they want it. They still have a lot of coercive power available to get their way and it will cost MS and others a lot more in legal fees to rein that it.
Hurrah for Microsoft!
That being said, if the United States Government really wants that data they will get it. Ideally that will be through a formal request to the Irish Government where it will wind its way through the various courts. More likely it will be a formal request to GCHQ to obtain said data and then share it back under some sort of Five Eyes agreement.
Then of course if the data is to be used in a criminal prosecution someone has to take the time to fabricate and obfuscate how the data was actually obtained but that is just a minor detail if the desire is great.
"That being said, if the United States Government really wants that data they will get it. Ideally that will be through a formal request to the Irish Government where it will wind its way through the various courts."
The US government has always had this option, it simply tried to avoid using it because it would have had to produce evidence suitable for the Irish courts to grant a warrant. That level of evidence probably hasn't existed now, or previously.
Does Uncle Sam really care?
Is this really over yet?
Under amendments to rule 41, the US Supreme Court gave its blessing to judges handing out search warrants, not only for computers located in their jurisdiction but also outside their jurisdiction; the key being that the FBI has to plead that it is unsure of the geographical location of the target system.
Oooo - it's in the cloud - well your honour, that could be anywhere couldn't it. Can we hack it?
Sure thing Mr G-man - JFDI!
There's more left to play on this track before the fat lady sings.
Yes, it does matter.
First of all, it's unlikely to be overturned by SCOTUS, because it a 4-4 decision would mean the appeals court's decision stands. Secondly, it might seem like a tiny thing to you or me, but spooks hate having to apply for warrants. Not because it takes time, but because it creates a paper trail. The EU has always offered the US fast track, rubber stamp warrants but the US has repeatedly declined preferring to exercise extraterritoriality.
Sorry but I don't agree. There was a warrant in this case - It was served on MS and they were expected to pull the data from outside of the US and deliver it to the authorities. The issue about paper trails and warrants does not apply in this case - or in the precedent that they would have expected to set. In any case, I would imagine that the powers that be can list more than one judge who is suitably disposed to issuing warrants.
As I understand it Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the 1986 Stored Communication Act are two different beasties. This ruling doesn't need to be overturned - there is simply a different avenue of attack/investigation that remains open.
But hey! IANAL
BTW - The down vote wasn't me.
That word "exclusively" is somewhat troublesome.
I can imagine three scenarios where there could be problems:-
(1) Content where fragments of it are stored on servers in different parts of the world as a means to prevent them from being pieced together by unauthorised entities.
(2) Other copies of that email being stored e.,g., for backup purposes.
(3) Does a server manufactured/bought in the States and shipped to Ireland count as a "foreign server"?
If any part of those processes involve storage of all or part of the email on American servers then this proviso is not applicable.
This ruling will be challenged. Even if indirectly. MS have a lot of reputational damage to repair, so they were almost obliged to contest the original request to slurp. The key questions now are :-
How badly does the US Gov. want access to the data? and
How much are MS willing to spend to retain / rebuild their reputation?
Not to be cynical, but at the end of the day, Gov. has more money to spend than MS if it wants to. MS may fight for a bit and then concede, gaining the benefit of having tried without spending too much before backing off. I'll bet someone is doing some very careful calculations right now, both sides of the fence.
Even though I don't use anything made by MS any more, I still talk to people who do, so a lot of my communications will be out there. Still, full marks for pushing back and winning round one.
"How badly does the US Gov. want access to the data?"
Not badly enough to have gone through the proper legal route in the first place. That's the one where they prepare a case and present it to an Irish court to get an Irish warrant that can't be refused by an Irish business operating on Irish soil. Or could it have been that they never had enough of a case to present in the firs place?
well - maybe. I'm no expert but the Germans have a big say and they are very touchy on government overreach, illegal surveillance etc, (aftermath of Hitler) and European law generally assumes rights apply to everyone, whereas US law is more rights are for citizens only. So you might be better protected in Europe - though it's worth noting in this case (as others on this thread have) that the Irish government was offering to help the FBI get a warrant through the Irish courts.
"the Irish government was offering to help the FBI get a warrant through the Irish courts."
Were they? My impression was that they simply said that that's what the proper route should have been. It would have depended on there having been an adequate case to get a warrant. When a government offers to help get a case through the courts it's on very dangerous ground.
Depends on what you mean by 'safe'. The US has mutual assistance treaties with various European governments, and can request access through those proper channels. Which is what they should have done in this particular case.
And if the US can show a good reason for a proper request to be honoured, I don't think that anyone would really have a problem with that.
Anyone know what this means for US citizens? Is our data safer on European servers?
As safe as your life in in the hands of your own police officers? If I was a Yank, I'd be rather more worried about my health than my data, and that extends beyond the risk of being shot dead in a traffic stop to the risks in the emergent civil war that a small fraction of US police seem intent on sparking off.
Really saddens me to type those comments, but seems like your government and "law enforcement" have lost the plot, and don't care.
It's just as well you're not a yank. Yes, there's a small minority of of rank and file cops acting like thugs. However, there a lot more politicians, their moneyed backers, bosses, media, and "social justice warriors" playing the role of rabble-rousers and behind the scenes manipulators toying with their ofttimes violent "sheeple".
Tend to your problems at home. You're more familiar with the local situation and better placed to handle challenges nearby. The world is in for a rough time for a while. It would be nice if most good people in cognizant active agreement with more modern morals survive to preserve civil behavior, rights, and liberties. Many others who haven't been raised, are unwilling, or perhaps never had the opportunity, to appreciate them might have some semblance of a chance at a better life. Maybe then we can all be better able and willing to put forth the effort to achieve it.
A word of caution though. It's going to take more from you than acting the part of just another Anonymous Coward to achieve positive results. It will be necessary for you to take responsibility for your own actions... or lack thereof.
In the U.S. you can buy all the "justice that you can afford". Time and time again we see corporate criminals and murderer's manipulate the U.S. judicial system while perpetuating their evil. For those who have a short memory or lack knowledge of InHell's fine corporate behavior, they have been convicted on three continents for anti-violation laws where they intimidated, abused and used illegal and punitive actions against anyone trying to sell AMD products. The same fine folks at Intel have also been convicted multiple times in the U.S. for tax fraud by trying to shift income to Ireland to circumvent U.S. tax laws.
Anyone who thinks this judicial decision is "justice" is a naïve fool soon to learn to not to trust InHell or suffer the consequences.
This post has been deleted by its author
Oh no, now Government bureaucrats will have to complete paperwork in order to spy on us. This is terrible for them as they would much prefer that we complete paperwork instead of them. Having to do paperwork would bite into their smoking/coffee/jerking off/lunch/safe space/shopping time.
TLDR; making government workers have to work for a living is an infringement on their civil rights. This must be stopped.
Because at the same time, the NSA continues to hoover up whatever it wants anyway. Competing 200m contracts with US corps -> Snoop.. Opposing world leaders / political heads, UN, NATO, Diplomats -> Snoop! So this is all just lawyer games... A few drug dealers may escape prosecution, that's all
You know how some RAID drive arrays 'stripe' the data over several drives?
Next obvious step on this topic: a given CSP takes the customer's confidential data, hashes it up a bit, and then distributes the bits across dozen of separate disk drives in dozens of different national jurisdictions.
You want to read the file? You'll need court orders valid in dozens of different countries if you wish to put Humpty_Dumpty.doc back together again.
This is quite a huge problem (or opportunity).
It's the effective end of accessing 'any and all' data under a court order. Enabled by this simple and perfectly-trivially obvious concept.
The guys with the sunglasses in the states do not even care about european jurisdiction. The APIs to access the data were finished last week and will be part of the Win10 update. In Win server 2016 it will not be an API but a USF (undetectable secrect function).
The whole thing is nothing more than a cheap show to get more european customers.
It seems to be cheaper to keep your data in the cloud. Microsoft will give you another two years until all your data are cloud-based. Then the fees per gigabyte will rise dramatically. For some unexplainable technical reasons it will then be very hard to get your own data back onto local storage.
My father was a prophet and taught me to look 3 years into the future. If what I can see is true, i should buy MS shares within the next few weeks.
Within the next 4-6 weeks the US is due to publish a new law to enable a speeded up Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) process with the UK so that law enforcement agencies in both countries will, subject to certain provisions, be able to go direct to CSPs in the "other" country direct rather than through the current, diplomat-dominated MLAT route. What's the betting that the US authorities will write-in extra-jurisdictional powers? (For the UK the extra-jurisdictional powers are already in cl 50 of the Investigatory Powers Bill)
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020