With the NSA PRISM scandal growing, Yahoo finally won something of a moral victory in their ongoing FISA court battle with the US government, with the court agreeing that the secret details of a 2008 lawsuit about PRISM must be made public.
Yahoo got the court to declassify the fact that the case happened last month, though most of the details remain secret. Yahoo was forced to join the PRISM surveillance scheme in early 2008 as the result of the lawsuit, and the US government reportedly used Yahoo’s defeat in the secret case to convince other dotcoms to go along without challenging the demands in court.
Yahoo is hoping to show “how vehemently” they had objected to the wide-ranging surveillance of its customers, hoping that it will save its reputation after being outed last month as one of the “PRISM nine” companies.
The FISA court’s ruling could take awhile to implement, however, as they gave the US government until July 29 just to say “how long” it will take them to get around to releasing the data ordered.
It’s also not clear how much it will really help Yahoo’s public image, as their objections in 2008 don’t change the fact that they are known collaborators in the scheme now, albeit unwilling, and data on Yahoo servers must still be considered of questionable security.
The primary benefit of this ruling is that we might get a glimpse at the actual implementation of the surveillance apparatus. It's time the Stasi have some light shining on their cockroach activities.
Plus it will probably confirm that U.S. citizens and the REST OF THE WORLD should not trust U.S. tech companies no matter how well intentioned they are, unless your privacy is protected by more than good intentions (protected say by the actual software itself).
Suppose it shows that yahoo fought the good fight to the end, just like the yahoo PR says. Then it would instantly place ANY other tech company in the U.S. on the exact same footing as yahoo. As all equally unstrustworthy, some through not fault of their own perhaps, but nontheless. So it doens't raise yahoo up, but it drags them all down into the same and equal muck, which is probably the true state of things anyway.
Perhaps this "would instantly place ANY other tech company in the U.S. on the exact same footing as yahoo. As all equally unstrustworthy (sic)…" as you say. However I tend to disagree. Google, for example, seems to have seen only its own benefit in all of this.
I don't think you can really call Yahoo a collaborator if it was unwilling. I mean, a huge gang forced them to hand over information. Is this really Yahoo's fault? As long as it is true that they vehemently objected but were forced, I think we need to stick to condemning Washington on this issue.