PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

Twitter, Wikileaks and the Broken Market for Consumer Privacy

Posted on January 14, 2011July 3, 2025 by Dissent

Barton Gellman writes that Twitter deserves wider notice for its “remarkable display of backbone” when served with a sealed court order to produce records on users. I concur, as do a number of us in #privchat on Twitter who think everyone should #ThankTwitter.

But Gellman’s article goes further, and reports what happened when he contacted other companies to inquire about their policies:

It is beyond reasonable doubt that authorities asked other companies to supply the same kinds of information sought from Twitter, but none of them admit it. Soghoian notes that standard procedure in this kind of forensic work is to assemble data from many sources to “draw the graph” of Wikileaks and its leadership — who communicates with whom, and when, and who initiates the contact — even if the contents of the conversations are encrypted. Twitter lived up handsomely to a policy of providing no private information without a binding order, and of notifying users unless legally barred from doing so. The other companies, with a few partial exceptions, will not say what their policies are. I sent carefully framed questions to Verizon Wireless, Sprint, AT&T, T-Mobile, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Facebook, MySpace and Skype. None replied to most of them. Partial answers, when I got them, were mostly homilies about how seriously they take privacy and how carefully they review each request.

[…]

I asked the companies how many times in 2010 they were served with government demands for non-public information about their customers, and whether they (1) try to narrow those demands; (2) insist on compulsory legal orders before complying; (3) ask courts to allow them to notify their customers; (4) tell customers who inquire, if legally permitted, whether their private data has been obtained by authorities; (5) follow stronger or weaker interpretations of their customers’ rights in areas of disputed law, such as the pro-privacy holdings in the Sixth Circuit and Ninth Circuit that do not bind other jurisdictions. I further asked them, if they declined to answer these questions, why they believed their customers did not deserve to know.

Here is what I got back ….

Read the entire article and the companies’ responses on TechLand

No related posts.

Category: BusinessOnline

Post navigation

← Telcos raise concerns over EU breach notification laws
Banksy identity for sale on ebay? →

Search

Contact Me

Email: info[at]pogowasright.org
Security Issue: security[at]pogowasright.org
Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight
Signal: Dissent.73
DMCA Concern: dmca[at]pogowasright.org

Research Report of Note

A report by EPIC.org:

State Attorneys General & Privacy: Enforcement Trends, 2020-2024

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Tool allows stealthy tracking of Signal and WhatsApp users through delivery receipts
  • Oh Great, Smart Glasses That Record Everything You Say
  • CBP Agents Held This U.S. Citizen for Hours Until He Agreed To Let Them Search His Electronic Devices
  • U.S. Plans to Scrutinize Foreign Tourists’ Social Media History
  • ANNOUNCEMENT: EFF Launches Age Verification Hub as Resource Against Misguided Laws
  • FTC Denies Petition from SpyFone App CEO to Vacate 2021 Order
  • Privacy concerns raised as Grok AI found to be a stalker’s best friend

RSS Recent Posts at DataBreaches.net

  • Virginia Urology Silent on Possible Data Breach as Purported Patient Data Begins to Leak
  • Village of Golf Manor considering paying ransom amid cyberattack (1)
  • Teen who allegedly stole millions of personal data records arrested in Spain
  • Akira ransomware: FBI tallies 250 million in payouts
  • IE: HSE confirms second ransomware attack but ‘no evidence’ patient data was stolen
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.