RE: AOL: 'We Did Not Comply With All of the DOJ's Search Data Request

["Fergie" <fergdawg () netzero net>]

Sure, whatever.

In for a penny....

It's the simple fact of rolling over for __insert_your_hell_here___
that gets under my skin, and then spinning it.

Had it not been for Google refusing the DoJ, we'd have never known
that AOL "just" turned over a little bit.

- ferg


-- "Larry Seltzer" <larry () larryseltzer com> wrote:
> > > > "We did receive a subpoena from the DOJ last fall, 
> > > > but we did not comply with the requests made in 
> > > > that subpoena. Instead, we gave them a list of 
> > > > aggregate and anonymous search terms that did not 
> > > > include any results nor any personally-identifiable 
> > > > information."

> > As my father always told me,"In for a penny, in for a pound." 

I don't have a problem with them providing aggregate data. Nobody's privacy
is violated.

Larry Seltzer
eWEEK.com Security Center Editor
http://security.eweek.com/
http://blog.ziffdavis.com/seltzer
Contributing Editor, PC Magazine
larryseltzer () ziffdavis com 



_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.