Warrant Canary not updated yet


#1

Shouldn’t there be a Warrant Canary update on the 1st of October?
Do we need to worry?


#2

Just as last time.
It’s in github, but not updated on the website


#3

Thanks for the heads up. The warrant canary on Gitlab is the “source of truth”, and that is updated. But e will get right on updating the website as well. Probably the sync was not triggered.


#4

Heh. Tests on production are the best, but quarterly run cycles are somewhat long. :slight_smile:


#5

So I had to DuckDuckGo what a Warrant Canary was. The 4th result was …

I think the colloquial response is, “noice”.


#6

… showing exactly what @kurt is concerned about. It hasn’t been updated yet.

Cmon guys I rely on the warrant canary for my quarterly news feed. LOL.


#7

It is updated: https://puri.sm/warrant-canary/


#8

I wonder if doj can issue a warrant to update warrant canary…


#9

Like explained some posts above Purism Warrant Canary is in this git repo in our gitlab instance: https://source.puri.sm/Purism/warrant-canary/commits/master

The commits in that warrant canary are signed with PGP. And it was updated on time as you can check.

However since a portion of our users don’t go to search for the warrant canary in our Gitlab instance, but they search for it in our website (like other projects), we have a page in our website were we link the warrant canary for it to be easier to find.

It was this page in our website that was not updated. The warrant canary was updated properly, as you can see by the signed commits here:


#10

No that is clear, I mean in theory - can they force someone to apply pgp signature?


#11

By official law, by secret court orders, or by “we don’t give a damn, you’ll sign or regret it”?

I have a feeling this is not strictly a yes or no question…


#12

Yep, that was clear. I am wondering whether it can be automated.

Depends on who “they” are? what government we are talking about? what the law is in that country? what country the victim person is in?

In that regard, if you are going to have a warrant canary signed by two (or more) people, it is good to have geographical diversity.


#13

US Department of Justice


#14

So if you are in the US, you tell us? Can they force someone in the US to sign something? Can they force someone outside the US to sign something? I mean … by law, not with enhanced interrogation.


#15

I don’t understand your sarcasm, that’s exactly what I’m asking. Warrant canary was found legal by DoJ, subpoenas are also legal. So can there be subpoena to make someone apply digital signature?


#16

In theory, the US government cannot compel speech. The FBI fought with Apple trying to get them to build a back door into iOS. But writing computer code is considered a type of speech. Apple said no, and said these issues should be worked out by Congress.

[Edit: All this is the official story as seen in the media. Who knows what was going on behind the scenes? BTW, Apple used to have a warrant canary -

https://gigaom.com/2014/09/18/apples-warrant-canary-disappears-suggesting-new-patriot-act-demands/
]

The US government can forbid you from revealing the existence of a secret subpoena, but they cannot force you to say that you have not received one. Hence the warrant canary.

In theory. We also have secret laws, so… who knows?

It does help if you have several signatures from people in different countries, just in case.


#17

No sarcasm was intended. Sorry if the tone didn’t come across well.


#18

your $, mustache or your life ? what’s it gonna’ be ?