[Support-team] warrant canaries controversy?

[Nat Meysenburg]

Jamie McClelland <jm at mayfirst.org> writes:
> I definitely agree that we should investigate ways to get around a gag
> order and I also think that Riseup and others who have implemented
> canaries are acting with integrity.

I agree with this assessment. I think Riseup has done okay in this
situation; however, assuming a gag order or similar legal document is in
place, they should have had a clearer strategy for how to communicate in
this situation and avoided the cryptic tweets.

> However, this experience with Riseup *has* made me question whether a
> canary is the best strategy. 

Unfortunately, I'm not sure what other strategies would work—aside from
outright civil disobedience. Some form of a "we'll take this sign down
when it becomes a lie" message is the only way I see of positively
identifying when something has happened without saying it.

Riseup's is the only one I've seen (though I haven't looked much) that
is actually signed, which shows that in some ways they have been more
thoughtful about it.

> I personally fielded several calls and emails from people in a panic
> asking me if they need to abandon Riseup immediately and go somewhere
> else. Of course, I responded: no!! Stay on Riseup.

I have answered the same question in the same way multiple times.

> Since this kind of thing is new for all of us, perhaps the problem was
> that Riseup was not prepared with good communications once the word got
> out about their canary? Or, is a canary too blunt of an instrument for
> this purpose because it can sow a lot of panic and we should look for
> alternatives?

I think what this hints at for me, is that warrant canary updating might
need to happen on a tighter cycle than quarterly. That is a pain, but it
could be part of someone's weekly duties to resign/republish the
canary. One of the largest issues here, is that Riseup has failed to be
precise in how often their canary is updated—leaving room for lots of
speculation and counting of days. People relying on Mayfirst (or Riseup)
should not have to perform numerology to determine if the canary is dead
or alive. It should be clear ahead of time what to expect when the
canary has died.

In the end, I think a real problem here is one of poor timing. The left
is panicked as a result of Trump's election. As was pointed out in the
membership meeting, people were somehow more comfortable with the
surveillance apparatus in Obama's hands, and the notion that it will
shift to Trump has made people care about these issues in a way that the
Snowden revelations or the Bush administrations failed to do. And, like
most panics on the left, allows rumors to spread like wildfire. The
left, historically, loves a good conspiracy theory involving the
government. We are no more immune to all of the fake news criticism
lobbed at Facebook because we are the left. Everyone is very primed to
believe rumors right now. If Riseup is under an NSL or gag order, they
may not be able to (or think it wise to) refute the rumors. In this
moment, it is a disaster, since everyone is convinced everything is
falling down around us. 

Just today I had someone apologize to me for being so dismissive of my
pleas to secure their org's communications; they now want me to work on
trainings with them.

If this stuff is all of this moment, any real strategy needs to take
that into account. There may well be a reversion to the mean of people
not caring about these issues, and also of people being more willing to
trust folks like Riseup than to assume they are completely taken over by
the government.

My 2¢,
~~Nat
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mayfirst.org/pipermail/support-team/attachments/20161128/0cc3c10f/attachment.sig>