• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Google Tells Cops to Get Warrants for User E-Mail, Cloud Data

Pilot

Banned
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
522
Reaction score
270
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Google Tells Cops to Get Warrants for User E-Mail, Cloud Data | Threat Level | Wired.com
Google demands probable-cause, court-issued warrants to divulge the contents of Gmail and other cloud-stored documents to authorities in the United States — a startling revelation Wednesday that runs counter to federal law that does not always demand warrants.

The development surfaced as Google publicly announced that more than two-thirds of the user data Google forwards to government agencies across the United States is handed over without a probable-cause warrant.

A Google spokesman told Wired that the media giant demands that government agencies — from the locals to the feds — get a probable-cause warrant for content on its e-mail, Google Drive cloud storage and other platforms — despite the Electronic Communications Privacy Act allowing the government to access such customer data without a warrant if it’s stored on Google’s servers for more than 180 days.

“Google requires an ECPA search warrant for contents of Gmail and other services based on the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which prevents unreasonable search and seizure,” Chris Gaither, a Google spokesman, said.

Some of the customer data doled out without a warrant include names listed when creating Gmail accounts, the IP address from where the account was created, and where and what time a user signs in and out of an account. What’s more, Google hands over without warrants the IP address associated with a particular e-mail sent from a Gmail account or used to change the account password, in addition to the non-content portion of e-mail headers such as the “from,” “to” and “date” fields.

It was not immediately known whether other ISPs are traveling Google’s path when it comes to demanding probable-cause warrants for all stored content. But Google can seemingly grant more privacy than the four corners of the law allows because there’s been a string of conflicting court opinions on whether warrants are required for data stored on third-party servers longer than 180 days. The Supreme Court has never weighed in on the topic — and the authorities are seemingly abiding by Google’s rules to avoid a high court showdown.

It's nice to see Google taking a stand for their users privacy.
 
They aren't really taking a stand. From your snippet.

"The development surfaced as Google publicly announced that more than two-thirds of the user data Google forwards to government agencies across the United States is handed over without a probable-cause warrant." and "Some of the customer data doled out without a warrant include names listed when creating Gmail accounts, the IP address from where the account was created, and where and what time a user signs in and out of an account. What’s more, Google hands over without warrants the IP address associated with a particular e-mail sent from a Gmail account or used to change the account password, in addition to the non-content portion of e-mail headers such as the 'from,' 'to' and 'date' fields."

Google isn't really being a Robin Hood here as by giving up IP addresses, you can go and find the physical location of that IP. (Ip address lookup. Find IP address exact location.)
 
They aren't really taking a stand. From your snippet.

"The development surfaced as Google publicly announced that more than two-thirds of the user data Google forwards to government agencies across the United States is handed over without a probable-cause warrant." and "Some of the customer data doled out without a warrant include names listed when creating Gmail accounts, the IP address from where the account was created, and where and what time a user signs in and out of an account. What’s more, Google hands over without warrants the IP address associated with a particular e-mail sent from a Gmail account or used to change the account password, in addition to the non-content portion of e-mail headers such as the 'from,' 'to' and 'date' fields."

Google isn't really being a Robin Hood here as by giving up IP addresses, you can go and find the physical location of that IP. (Ip address lookup. Find IP address exact location.)

Your link is misleading. You cannot find an address from a IP. You can get a general location that will at best indicate the city the IP is in, but may not even get the state right. The only way to get an exact address is go to the ISP and have them pull their records to see what customer had that IP at that time and have them hand over the customer's information. The government can do this rather easily, but no website can give you a "exact address" for a IP address.

While they should also protect this info, it is not nearly as confidential as the body of an email or Google Drive files. It could be better, but it's a step in the right direction.
 
Somewhere I saw the numbers for the actual subpoena's/warrants that Google got and it was really shockingly low for their market position.
 
They aren't protecting that data for your sake. It's worth money and they want to sell it.
 
They aren't protecting that data for your sake. It's worth money and they want to sell it.

Absolutely, it's all about the money
 
I agree with google on this one. email is modern mail, which would fall under "papers." if warrantless searches are necessary, amend the constitution.
 
They aren't protecting that data for your sake. It's worth money and they want to sell it.

I don't see how that would change anything. Are they afraid the government is going to sell it?
 
Good point. The government having some of it wouldn't affect any marketable value.

On the other hand, by looking like the great protector of data, users will probably trust Google with more information that they can then sell.
 
I have never heard a convincing argument for treating e-mail differently than other types of mail. Users definitely have a reasonable expectation of privacy when they use e-mail.
 
Google is totally in bed with the Federal government. ANY government agency can request Google to ban any product, ban any advertising and turn off listing any website either specific websites or all websites with certain search terms - and Google does so without any notice, warning or appeal.
 
I have never heard a convincing argument for treating e-mail differently than other types of mail. Users definitely have a reasonable expectation of privacy when they use e-mail.
I have not heard one, either. Just because a new way of doing something comes along does not mean the entire concept is different and thus inapplicable to existing protections.
 
there are better options for email privacy out there. I'm consider those options as a secondary email.
 
I have not heard one, either. Just because a new way of doing something comes along does not mean the entire concept is different and thus inapplicable to existing protections.

Yet every time there is a new form of media or communications technology some elements in the government try to separate it from protected forms of communication. It took many court battles and until the 1950s before movies were considered worthy of first amendment protection by the Supreme Court. Broadcast television still doesn't have full first amendment protection.
 
Back
Top Bottom