Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Operational Security

10/11/2017
04:02 PM
Curtis Franklin
Curtis Franklin
Curt Franklin
50%
50%

Final Decision in Dreamhost Battle With DOJ

In the legal battle between the Department of Justice and Dreamhost, a resolution and a victory.

In August, Security Now reported on the legal battle between hosting provider Dreamhost and the US Department of Justice. On October 10, the judge in the case made a final ruling -- and it looks as though Dreamhost got most of what it was fighting for.

Security Now covered the first salvoes in the battle and yesterday had a chance to correspond with DreamHost's general Counsel Christopher Ghazarian. Before our conversation, Dreamhost announced the judge's decision in a blog post titled, "The End of the Road." In the post, the company wrote, "Today Chief Judge Morin of the Washington D.C. Superior Court issued the court’s final order, and we’re elated to see significant changes that will protect the constitutional rights of innocent internet users worldwide."

How will those rights be protected? According to Dreamhost, "Under this order, we now have the ability to redact all identifying information and protect the identities of users who interacted with disruptj20.org before handing over any data to the court."

Asked about the specific information that Dreamhost may now remove from the information provided to the government, Ghazarian said,

  1. HTTP logs consisting of 1.3 million IP addresses of website visitors
  2. User identifying information of any non-subscribers who communicated through, or interacted with, the website
  3. Names, emails, addresses, member and email lists, IP addresses, etc.
  4. Unpublished draft publications, work product, and documentary materials under the Privacy Protection Act
  5. Info protected by attorney-client privilege

In addition, he said, Dreamhost will redact, "A ton of court-applied protections and procedures that were not part of the original warrant." And even some specific information that will be provided is subject to review. "#3 and #4 are subject to the Court's review, as we have to provide a log of these materials to explain why we’re not turning them over," Ghazarian said.

And that is an important point in all of this: There is material that Dreamhost will be turning over to the government under this ruling. Ghazarian said, "DreamHost will still provide some data, such as (1) data belonging to the account owner, (2) records and data that are outlined in the new Order (but with all identifying information redacted), (3) website database files, etc."


You're invited to attend Light Reading's 11th annual Future of Cable Business Services event. Join us in New York on November 30 for the premier independent conference focusing on the cable industry's continuing efforts in the commercial services market – all cable operators and other communications service providers get in free. 

As Dreamhost wrote in the blog post announcing the ruling, "As it stands today, the sum total of requested data in this case very closely aligns with hundreds of other government requests that DreamHost has received, and complied with lawfully, in the past." The essential disagreement, according to Dreamhost, was not with the government's warrant but with the scope of the information the Department of Justice was requesting under that warrant.

Dreamhost wrote, "To be clear, DreamHost has been deputized to redact sensitive information. No government employee will see this data until we’ve personally gone over it with a fine-toothed comb." For companies that collect personally identifiable information, this ruling is important because it does confirm limits on the government's legitimate interest in data that can be requested under a warrant. As interest in that information increases, limits will be critical for customer confidence -- and could be an essential consideration in compliance with international regulations such as GDPR.

Related posts:

— Curtis Franklin is the editor of SecurityNow.com. Follow him on Twitter @kg4gwa.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 7/2/2020
Ripple20 Threatens Increasingly Connected Medical Devices
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  6/30/2020
DDoS Attacks Jump 542% from Q4 2019 to Q1 2020
Dark Reading Staff 6/30/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
How Cybersecurity Incident Response Programs Work (and Why Some Don't)
This Tech Digest takes a look at the vital role cybersecurity incident response (IR) plays in managing cyber-risk within organizations. Download the Tech Digest today to find out how well-planned IR programs can detect intrusions, contain breaches, and help an organization restore normal operations.
Flash Poll
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
This report describes some of the latest attacks and threats emanating from the Internet, as well as advice and tips on how your organization can mitigate those threats before they affect your business. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-9498
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-02
Apache Guacamole 1.1.0 and older may mishandle pointers involved inprocessing data received via RDP static virtual channels. If a userconnects to a malicious or compromised RDP server, a series ofspecially-crafted PDUs could result in memory corruption, possiblyallowing arbitrary code to be executed...
CVE-2020-3282
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-02
A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Unified Communications Manager, Cisco Unified Communications Manager Session Management Edition, Cisco Unified Communications Manager IM & Presence Service, and Cisco Unity Connection could allow an unauthenticated, remote attack...
CVE-2020-5909
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-02
In versions 3.0.0-3.5.0, 2.0.0-2.9.0, and 1.0.1, when users run the command displayed in NGINX Controller user interface (UI) to fetch the agent installer, the server TLS certificate is not verified.
CVE-2020-5910
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-02
In versions 3.0.0-3.5.0, 2.0.0-2.9.0, and 1.0.1, the Neural Autonomic Transport System (NATS) messaging services in use by the NGINX Controller do not require any form of authentication, so any successful connection would be authorized.
CVE-2020-5911
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-02
In versions 3.0.0-3.5.0, 2.0.0-2.9.0, and 1.0.1, the NGINX Controller installer starts the download of Kubernetes packages from an HTTP URL On Debian/Ubuntu system.