# Should Lavabit and Groklaw have shut down because of the NSA? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 21, 2013, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767 "2013-08-21T00:56:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2014, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767/41 "2014-05-21T01:32:22Z")
> [@OldOlds](#): > > But they do. > > The USPS doesn’t know what’s in the parcels/letters, nor do they try to find out. And, if anyone asks to see them they will refuse, barring a court order. And yet, here we are in a situation where the court order existed and was valid, and Lavabit refused to comply. > [@](#): > > Now, if such orders are given openly and subject to debate, then the courts could weigh in BEFORE any damage was done, and at least theoretically justice would be served. Once we gag the very presence of such a request we render the entire constitution moot. And what if openness and debate is what causes the damage, and that damage is greater than the potential damage that the surveillance would do? Isn’t there a moral obligation to consider that? > [@](#): > > Really think for a minute about the actual effect of these gag orders. With that principle in place, the government can literally do anything it wants, since the very act of debating them is illegal. We could apply that logic to activities of the police. We could arrest people with secret warrants and try them in secret courts, then make it illegal to discuss these as well. > > That anyone could support such unchecked power boggles my mind. Sure, the government could do anything it wants. But it doesn’t. I’m not comfortable with hamstringing the entire security apparatus for fear of what-ifs. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2014, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767/42 "2014-05-21T02:53:08Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > And what if openness and debate is what causes the damage, and that damage is greater than the potential damage that the surveillance would do? Isn’t there a moral obligation to consider that? No, because it’s a self-serving lie presented without evidence, as an excuse for never providing evidence for this claim. It’s the political Pascal’s Wager. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2014, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767/43 "2014-05-21T03:18:04Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > So he ran a service that was helping people break the law, obstructed a government probe into the criminal activities of his clients, and shut down the company because he couldn’t in good conscience allow criminals to be brought to justice. Three smears in one sentence. How very efficient of you. > [@Smapti](#): > > And yet, here we are in a situation where the court order existed and was valid, and Lavabit refused to comply. Identify the specific court order in question, or confess that you’re just making shit up. > [@](#): > > And what if openness and debate is what causes the damage, and that damage is greater than the potential damage that the surveillance would do? Openness and debate is certainly causing damage to you, as it is exposing the fact that your argument is nonsense piled on foolishness piled on falsehood. > [@](#): > > Isn’t there a moral obligation to consider that? A little chartreuse man with lime green polka dots just told me that he will disintegrate the Earth if you don’t fess up to aiding and abetting ignorance, in contravention to this site’s mission. As this statement has as much factual and logical foundation as your assertions, you have as much moral obligation to consider it as the rest of us do to accept your invitation. Actually, you have a greater moral obligation, as my argument, unlike yours, does not require abandoning all limitations on government power. > [@](#): > > I’m not comfortable with hamstringing the entire security apparatus for fear of what-ifs. Fortunately, the Constitution was written by people who were perfectly comfortable with limiting the power of the state for fear of the all-too-well known and verified results of failure to do so. > [@Grumman](#): > > No, because it’s a self-serving lie presented without evidence, as an excuse for never providing evidence for this claim. It’s the political Pascal’s Wager. Actually, **Smapti** ’s argument is much weaker than Pascal’s Wager. Pascal’s Wager posited the possibility of unlimited gain (salvation) in exchange for limited sacrifice (obeying the particular rules that had been set out by the Church); Smapti offers limited gain (safety… for the moment… maybe) in exchange for unlimited sacrifie (obeying any and all demands the security state might issue). ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2014, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767/44 "2014-05-21T03:24:57Z")
> [@OldOlds](#): > > Really think for a minute about the actual effect of these gag orders. With that principle in place, the government can literally do anything it wants, since the very act of debating them is illegal. We could apply that logic to activities of the police. We could arrest people with secret warrants and try them in secret courts, then make it illegal to discuss these as well. > > That anyone could support such unchecked power boggles my mind. It doesn’t boggle mine. Perhaps I’m just more cynical, or perhaps through some odd form of empathy I find it easier to understand that some people are doomed to spend their lives whimpering in fear. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2014, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767/45 "2014-05-21T05:59:03Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Identify the specific court order in question, or confess that you’re just making shit up. Did you not read the first sentence of the article that was linked above? > [@](#): > > My legal saga started last summer with a knock at the door, behind which stood two federal agents ready to to serve me with \*\*a court order \*\*requiring the installation of surveillance equipment on my company’s network. > [@](#): > > Fortunately, the Constitution was written by people who were perfectly comfortable with limiting the power of the state for fear of the all-too-well known and verified results of failure to do so. If the Founding Fathers had had to deal with the internet, maybe they’d have thought differently. > [@](#): > > Actually, **Smapti** ’s argument is much weaker than Pascal’s Wager. Pascal’s Wager posited the possibility of unlimited gain (salvation) in exchange for limited sacrifice (obeying the particular rules that had been set out by the Church); Smapti offers limited gain (safety… for the moment… maybe) in exchange for unlimited sacrifie (obeying any and all demands the security state might issue). I fear the people my government is protecting me from a lot more than I fear my government. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2014, 10:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767/46 "2014-05-21T10:22:00Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Did you not read the first sentence of the article that was linked above? Did you not read your own statement as you typed it? > [@Smapti](#): > > And yet, here we are in a situation where the court order existed and was valid, and Lavabit refused to comply. You need to cite a court order that _meets that description_, not any old court order. This one fails on both counts: _the court order existed and was valid_: Given the gag order, this is impossible to verify. What limited information we have indicates that the order was precisely the sort of [“general warrant”](https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/att/generalwarrantsmemo.pdf) [PDF] the Fourth Amendment was written to prohibit. _Lavabit refused to comply_: As clearly stated in the linked article, the shutdown of the company occurred because compliance with the order was incompatible with the company’s privacy services. Had it refused to comply, there would have been no occasion to shut down. > [@](#): > > If the Founding Fathers had had to deal with the internet, maybe they’d have thought differently. Speculation based on no factual foundation whatsoever? :dubious::rolleyes: Are you still wondering why you haven’t convinced a single person that there is any merit to your argument? > [@](#): > > I fear the people _my government is protecting me from_ a lot more than I fear my government. I suppose that a blatant attempt to smuggle your desired conclusion into the wording of your thesis is the next illogical step. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2014, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767/47 "2014-05-21T14:08:15Z")
Now that we have [another thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=723924) to address **Smapti** ’s complaints about whistleblowing and privacy, maybe we can get back to the actual question posed in the title of this one. The Key Points: 1. Several new technologies and a new technique (the dead-man switch notification message) have been proposed, improving upon the Lavabit arrangement. 2. The legal basis of these new techniques is most secure if they are implemented from scratch. For instance, it’s better to have always had a zero-knowledge system from Day One rather than implementing it later and erasing the no-longer-needed customer information, and it’s better to post a dead-man message the moment your system first comes online – that way, nobody can accuse you of taking those steps in response to an existing government inquiry, removing any rational basis for an accusation of “obstructionism”. The Conclusion: Yes, it was best for Lavabit to shut down, so that new and improved privacy systems could be built on a firmer foundation from the ground up. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2014, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767/48 "2014-06-02T13:12:19Z")
New Development: [The TrueCrypt project has suddenly shut down](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=724670) in a sudden and unusual manner, raising suspicions that it’s another case of shutdown to prevent government interference. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2014, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767/49 "2014-06-02T13:19:52Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > New Development: [The TrueCrypt project has suddenly shut down](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=724670) in a sudden and unusual manner, raising suspicions that it’s another case of shutdown to prevent government interference. Or a discovery of previous government interference. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2014, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767/50 "2014-06-02T15:16:16Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > New Development: [The TrueCrypt project has suddenly shut down](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=724670) in a sudden and unusual manner, raising suspicions that it’s another case of shutdown to prevent government interference. > [@Bricker](#): > > Or a discovery of previous government interference. That seems unlikely given that the source code has routinely been available and that [the first stage of a security audit revealed no major problems](http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/04/truecrypt-audit-finds-no-evidence-of-backdoors-or-malicious-code/). That said, it can’t be categorically ruled out. Another possibility is some sort of internal blowup on the development team led to an Eric Cartman “screw this I’m outta here” moment from someone with editing access to the project website. Since the team is anonymous, there’s no way to really gauge the likelihood of this scenario. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-lavabit-and-groklaw-have-shut-down-because-of-the-nsa/666767.md?page=2)