Apple recently stated that when the company previously responded to a subpoena for information, it was unaware that former President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice required him to provide metadata about Democratic lawmakers.Apple admitted that the company complied with the requirements of the Department of Justice. This incident shows that when technology companies are forced to choose between consumers’ private online activities and the legal requirements of law enforcement agencies, these technology companies are often in a very awkward position.
access:
Apple Online Store (China)
Generally speaking, companies like Apple will question such demands, but in the above cases, the grand jury and federal judges forced Apple to obey and kept their mouths tight.
Prior to Apple’s confession, there were media reports that Trump’s Justice Department seized at least 12 records from people close to the House intelligence team, which were related to news reporting on Trump’s contacts with Russia. At the time, the Justice Department was looking for records from Adam Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Group, and Eric Swalwell, a member of the group.
Apple stated that it received a subpoena from a federal grand jury on February 6, 2018. Apple said the subpoena required the company to provide some data that belonged to a seemingly random set of email and phone numbers. Apple said that for the data requested by the Department of Justice, it provides existing identifiers, but not all requirements are for Apple consumers.
Because the federal district judge signed a confidentiality order, Apple was unable to notify the persons involved that their data was subpoenaed. The so-called ban was lifted on May 5, so Apple only recently reminded affected users. According to Apple, the subpoena did not specify the nature of the investigation.
Apple spokesman Fred Sainz said in a statement that the company does not know, and cannot possibly know, the target of the subpoena request.
Sainz said in the statement: “We often question search warrants, subpoenas and confidentiality orders. We have also formulated a policy to notify affected users of their government requirements as soon as possible. However, in this case, the subpoenas It comes from a federal grand jury and contains a confidentiality order signed by a federal district judge. It also fails to provide information about the nature of the investigation. If you don’t mine user accounts, Apple has little way to figure out the intent of the requested information. Upon request, Apple will provide the information Limited to account subscriber information, but did not provide any content such as emails or pictures.”
Apple also said that due to the nature of the subpoena, the company believes that the Justice Department has also issued similar orders to other technology companies.
Microsoft also said recently that it received a similar subpoena from the Department of Justice.
A Microsoft spokesperson said: “In 2017, Microsoft received a subpoena related to a personal email account. As we said before, we believe that consumers have the right to know when the government requests their emails or documents under the Constitution. We also have the right to inform consumers. However, in this case, due to the existence of the gag order, we did not know about the consumer for more than two years. Once the gag order expired, we were notified of the impact. Through their explanations, we knew that they were members of Congress. We then provided them with information. In response to the above-mentioned cases, we will continue to actively seek reforms and require reasonable restrictions on government confidentiality.”
The regulator under the Department of Justice is currently investigating the investigation during Trump’s term.
related articles:
Reports claim that Apple has complied with the Trump administration’s request to obtain data from members of Congress without censorship
.