美国国家安全局不在这里:在斯诺登泄密事件之后,授权金丝雀作为透明度的工具

Naomi Gilens
{"title":"美国国家安全局不在这里:在斯诺登泄密事件之后,授权金丝雀作为透明度的工具","authors":"Naomi Gilens","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2498150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Technology companies are increasingly experimenting with “warrant canaries” as a means of increasing transparency around the national security orders they receive. A warrant canary is a statement that a company regularly publishes, declaring that the company has never received a national security order. Should the company stop publishing the statement, the public can infer that the company has received such an order. This paper explores the constitutional and practical implications raised by this practice. It examines the various types of canaries that companies have used thus far, and proposes best practices for companies going forward. It also argues that canaries are protected by the First Amendment, and that any order compelling a company to publish a false canary must survive strict scrutiny, if not an even more exacting standard of review. Ultimately, this paper advocates for a company committed to transparency to adopt and litigate a test canary to establish that canaries can be lawful tools.","PeriodicalId":81374,"journal":{"name":"Harvard journal of law & technology","volume":"60 1","pages":"525"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The NSA Has Not Been Here: Warrant Canaries as Tools for Transparency in the Wake of the Snowden Disclosures\",\"authors\":\"Naomi Gilens\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2498150\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Technology companies are increasingly experimenting with “warrant canaries” as a means of increasing transparency around the national security orders they receive. A warrant canary is a statement that a company regularly publishes, declaring that the company has never received a national security order. Should the company stop publishing the statement, the public can infer that the company has received such an order. This paper explores the constitutional and practical implications raised by this practice. It examines the various types of canaries that companies have used thus far, and proposes best practices for companies going forward. It also argues that canaries are protected by the First Amendment, and that any order compelling a company to publish a false canary must survive strict scrutiny, if not an even more exacting standard of review. Ultimately, this paper advocates for a company committed to transparency to adopt and litigate a test canary to establish that canaries can be lawful tools.\",\"PeriodicalId\":81374,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Harvard journal of law & technology\",\"volume\":\"60 1\",\"pages\":\"525\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Harvard journal of law & technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2498150\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard journal of law & technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2498150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

科技公司正越来越多地尝试使用“权证金丝雀”,作为提高它们收到的国家安全命令透明度的一种手段。权证金丝雀(warrant canary)是一家公司定期发布的声明,宣称该公司从未收到过国家安全命令。如果该公司停止发布声明,公众可以推断该公司已经收到了这样的命令。本文探讨了这一做法所带来的宪法和实践意义。它研究了公司迄今为止使用的各种类型的金丝雀,并为公司未来的发展提出了最佳实践。它还辩称,金丝雀受第一修正案的保护,任何强迫公司发布假金丝雀的命令都必须通过严格的审查,如果不是更严格的审查标准的话。最终,本文主张一家致力于透明度的公司采用并起诉测试金丝雀,以确定金丝雀可以是合法的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The NSA Has Not Been Here: Warrant Canaries as Tools for Transparency in the Wake of the Snowden Disclosures
Technology companies are increasingly experimenting with “warrant canaries” as a means of increasing transparency around the national security orders they receive. A warrant canary is a statement that a company regularly publishes, declaring that the company has never received a national security order. Should the company stop publishing the statement, the public can infer that the company has received such an order. This paper explores the constitutional and practical implications raised by this practice. It examines the various types of canaries that companies have used thus far, and proposes best practices for companies going forward. It also argues that canaries are protected by the First Amendment, and that any order compelling a company to publish a false canary must survive strict scrutiny, if not an even more exacting standard of review. Ultimately, this paper advocates for a company committed to transparency to adopt and litigate a test canary to establish that canaries can be lawful tools.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信