{"id":336655,"date":"2017-03-24T08:11:05","date_gmt":"2017-03-24T00:11:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/techcrunch.com\/?p=1467782"},"modified":"2017-03-24T08:11:05","modified_gmt":"2017-03-24T00:11:05","slug":"credo-and-cloudflare-argue-against-national-security-letter-gag-orders","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/credo-and-cloudflare-argue-against-national-security-letter-gag-orders\/","title":{"rendered":"CREDO and Cloudflare argue against national security letter gag orders"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

Earlier this week, the FBI finally allowed Cloudflare and CREDO Mobile to identify themselves as recipients of national security letters, which allow the agency to secretly order tech companies to hand over customer data. (The FBI initially allowed Cloudflare and CREDO to disclose some but not all of their NSLs; TechCrunch reported in January the two companies had received additional NSLs and were\u00a0gagged from discussing them<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

This means CREDO and Cloudflare can admit for the first time that they are the companies behind one of the longest-running legal challenges against NSL gag orders. Their case, which was argued at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday, is officially renamed \u201cCREDO &\u00a0Cloudflare v. Jefferson Sessions\u201d rather than \u201cUnder Seal v. Jefferson Sessions\u201d and if Cloudflare and CREDO prevail, it could have a massive impact on the FBI\u2019s use of the secret orders and the gag orders that accompany them.<\/p>\n

But even though the companies can now admit they received these secret requests, Cloudflare and CREDO are still arguing in the 9th Circuit that the years-long gag orders preventing them from discussing the NSLs violate their right to free speech. The claim is a bit threadbare now that the gag orders are mostly lifted \u2014 Judge Sandra Ikuta opened yesterday\u2019s\u00a0hearing by asking if the entire case is now moot \u2014 but the two firms say the case must continue because they\u2019re still gagged from discussing some of the details of the NSLs, like the identity of the subscriber whose data was requested.<\/p>\n

The FBI, on the other hand, says that most companies are perfectly happy to keep the NSLs they receive secret. \u201cMost of the entities that receive NSLs do not have this interest in publicly speaking,\u201d Justice Department senior counsel Lewis Yelin said.<\/p>\n

This claim seems bananas to me. Set aside the ideological contortions that go into arguing\u00a0that someone doesn\u2019t enjoy free speech protections because other people don\u2019t want to\u00a0discuss the same topic, and you still have to confront the fact that every major tech company publishes a transparency report detailing the kinds of requests they receive from law enforcement. Even Slack put out a transparency report, although they only had one government request<\/a> to disclose.<\/p>\n

When the FBI does allow companies to discuss their NSLs, the companies often go back and add them in to previous transparency reports. All of this transparency reporting seems to indicate that companies very much want to talk about the NSLs they receive.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s some stuff that major tech firms have said about NSLs recently:<\/p>\n