Warrant canaries are dumb.

@bot how are they dumb? what other legally defensible measure against gag orders exists?

What makes you think they’re legally defensible? Sure, you can publish them but if you reveal the existence of a gag order or other legal process that forbids it, you’ll still face consequences.

@bot can the government compel speech? at least in the US it seems extremely unlikely that someone could be at fault for failing to publish a warrant canary. it's literally the entire point of the thing. of course you won't be able to publish the details about the warrant itself but at least people will know that you were served one

@bot please elaborate

@bot @roboneko try to talk about jury nullification around a court room

Some ppl don’t get that judges aren’t going to put up with cutesy little tricks. It may be wrong but that’s just how it is.

@bot @gray

> compel you to disclose if you have STDs to any partners

I don't think that's the same thing as a court ordering a specific person to make a specific statement. your example is quite general whereas a warrant canary would be extremely targeted

also, are those US jurisdictions? have any of those laws actually been tested in court?

> aren’t going to put up with cutesy little tricks

I agree with that, sure. but I don't think a warrant canary qualifies as such. it isn't some vague loophole. I'm not aware of any examples of a US court compelling a specific individual to actively publish a concrete and specific lie for the benefit of the government

there's a huge difference between being compelled to turn over documents that the court reasonably believes you to possess versus being compelled to parrot lies in a deceptive manner

@roboneko @gray @bot afaik the warrant canary is because you cannot be compelled to lie.

@icedquinn @gray @bot what if I said "I will publish the (accurate and true) weather forecast on this subdomain every day except in the event that I have received a warrant that day, in which case I won't". I wonder if that would make a difference?

ie I wonder what the threshold would be for the government to compel issuing an honest statement

@icedquinn @bot @gray related, has any device manufacturer in the US ever been successfully compelled (over their objections ofc) to unlock a device or decrypt data?

@roboneko @gray @bot they can't make up their mind if you can be forced to disclose access secrets or not.

@icedquinn @gray @bot last I checked you could be compelled to hand over passwords or pin codes if they could convincingly demonstrate that you know them. iirc this came about because some guy said something along the lines of "I could give you guys the password but I'm not going to. anyway we both know what's on those hard drives" to some fbi agents

gotta pass those INT checks

@roboneko @icedquinn @gray @bot I think there was some guy who got like 10 months in prison for not giving up his decryption codes after he was suspected of CP possession. Can't remember the whole story though.

@beardalaxy @roboneko @gray @bot they keep going back and forth on if a password counts as compelling someone to open a door or if it counts as self incrimination.

because you can't be forced to testify if it would result in your conviction. also a password could be a confession to a crime.

@beardalaxy @bot @gray @roboneko if you make the password to your cp vault "i fuck kids" then its technnically illegal to force you to give it up