I guess that at a certain level of complexity being open source is not enough. There has to be someone willing to spend a huge amount of time and effort to audit the code throughly and maybe it had not happened yet. An article on The Economist offers two plausible explanations, big brother chasing them like with Lavabit or group implosion due to lack of incentives:I'm wondering how that could be possible. How could such thing happen to "open source" software?
The problem with a warrant canary is that it could be interpreted by some judges as action to disclose that they have been subpoenaed. For what I read, it has not been used extensively enough as to know how it can work out.At this point the only sensible explanation to me is a warrant canary.
The problem with a warrant canary is that it could be interpreted by some judges as action to disclose that they have been subpoenaed. For what I read, it has not been used extensively enough as to know how it can work out.
Yes, but it can get tricky in different jurisdictions. Maybe you could win it when appealing, but there can always be a judge that interprets inaction as action and get you in trouble. In certain circumstances not doing something can get you in trouble (not helping after a car crash). It is not the same because what it is usually punished is the failure to start do to do something, but big brother is really good at twisting things.Depends on the implementation. Almost every law in every country on this planet is pretty good and waterproof in forbidding to do things, but (at least all I know of) don't have rules to force someone to NOT stop doing things.
As long as I post here at least one posting per month I did NOT get a National Security Letter.