On: Google is giving data to police based on search ke...

[duxup]

The warrant was sealed. I think that means there's a fairly high chance they were told to keep quiet (legally). Not 100% sure but it seems likely.

Maybe things have changed but IIRC the past Google has fought to be able to disclose publicly the extent of some requests made by the government.

[CivBase → duxup]

Can they not even say what they're not allowed to say?

When prompted about how many warrants they've had, why not just respond with "We are not legally allowed to answer"?

And what is the justification for a gag order like that in the first place?

[srj → CivBase]

Disclaimer: Googler

In a broad sense this information is available in the Transparency Report: https://transparencyreport.google.com/

[duxup → CivBase]

"Can they not even say what they're not allowed to say?"

In the past they couldn't even say that.

I believe Google and Microsoft have litigated over that point specifically. I don't recall if they won or not.

[bbarn → duxup]

Maybe, but more likely no.

Path of least risk and resistance is for them to declare it internally to be kept quiet. An army of internal counsel would be telling everyone in the room to keep their mouth shut to prevent everything from PR issues to actual legal threats. They don't even need a gag order, they'll do it willingly.