Charts: Here’s How Often Google and Facebook Say Yes to Government Snoops

Plus, internal data on how many user accounts have been targeted.


Edward Snowden’s leaks have prompted many questions about government surveillance activity in the United States, including this one: How often do tech firms turn over user data to the feds? In recent years, companies including Google, Microsoft, and Twitter have released data on this front—but it’s been incomplete, because the government has prohibited them from revealing the full extent of the requests they’ve received.

Last week, following Snowden’s disclosures about the National Security Agency’s PRISM program, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Twitter pressed the federal government to allow them to give the public a fuller picture of how often the authorities request user information, including the number of requests they receive under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). In response, the FBI and the Department of Justice granted permission on Friday to disclose the number of FISA requests they get—but with a pretty big catch. The companies must lump these top-secret surveillance orders in with ordinary criminal investigations by local, state, and federal authorities, a caveat that provides little insight into how often the government is invoking its surveillance powers, let alone the type of content that is being released to federal authorities. The government is “failing to offer the public anything but the bare minimum amount of transparency,” argues Sina Khanifar, a privacy activist who helped launch Stopwatching.us, a coalition demanding more information about NSA surveillance efforts. 

After the government relaxed the rules about the type of information they could make public, Microsoft and Facebook released data combining national security requests and criminal investigations. But Google and Twitter have so far declined to do so until the government allows them to break out FISA requests. “Our request to the government is clear: to be able to publish aggregate numbers of national security requests, including FISA disclosures, separately,” says Google spokesman Chris Gaither.?

In an effort at transparency, Google, Microsoft, and Twitter (but not Facebook) have issued reports for the past several years disclosing bare bones information about the requests they receive from a variety of law enforcement authorities. Google and Microsoft (which owns Outlook and Skype) have also reported limited data about national security letters, controversial documents used by the FBI to secretly compel the disclosure of certain online records. The companies have permission to report only a vague range of the number of national security letters they receive. For instance, Google could only report that it had received as many as 999 national security letters in 2012, targeting between 1,000 and 1,999 user accounts.

Collectively, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Twitter report receiving tens of thousands of requests for user data from the US government annually. In 2012, Google received more than 16,400 requests covering 31,000-plus user accounts from federal, state, and local authorities. The number of data demands directed to Google has been increasing since 2010, when the company reported receiving less than 9,000 requests. (Gaither says he doesn’t “want to speculate” on why the company is getting more requests—although he points out that each year more people are using the internet.)

Microsoft revealed on Friday that in the second half of 2012 it received between 6,000 and 7,000 criminal and national security warrants, subpoenas, and orders affecting up to 32,000 accounts. (Before it could factor in FISA orders, the company had reported 11,000 data requests affecting less than 25,000 accounts for all of 2012.) During the same time period, Facebook says government entities made between 9,000 and 10,000 requests, covering up to 19,000 accounts.

The tech companies don’t comply with all law enforcement requests, but they go along with most of them. A Facebook spokesperson told Mother Jones that the company provided information in response to 79 percent of the data requests it received between July and December 2012. The other companies haven’t released new data that incorporates FISA requests, but here are the compliance rates reported in 2012 by Google, Microsoft, and Twitter:                                                              

The companies still can’t reveal much about the type of content released under national security requests. Google says that it will only hand over the content of an email if a search warrant is issued. According to Gaither, under a subpoena, Google can disclose the name listed when on the account, the IP address from which it was created, and the date and time a user signed in and out. Using a national security letter, Google says that the FBI can also only obtain limited information, excluding email content and Google search queries.

Twitter, which follows a similar policy, received 1,494 requests affecting 2,093 accounts from federal, state and local authorities in 2012. Between July and December 2012, most of the requests were subpoenas, which require Twitter to provide basic user information. In order to get direct messages, Twitter notes that the requester would have to present a court order.

Microsoft put together a chart detailing what is generally released when the company provides “non-content information” to the authorities:  

Nate Cardozo, a staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, notes that normal restrictions on the type of information released may go out the window when FISA orders are involved. “What we know about FISA orders is that they seem to be targeting non-US persons, so they may actually request content, since Fourth Amendment protections don’t apply.” Snowden claimed Monday in a live chat with the Guardian that when a NSA analyst targets an email address, he or she gets “all of it…IPs, raw data, content, headers, attachments, everything.” And even when the NSA isn’t targeting domestic communications, Snowden claimed that the content of a US citizen’s email is only protected by a “very weak” filter that can be “stripped out at any time.”

Charts by Ian Gordon and Maggie Severns

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate