Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...
  1. AirPods Pro Prime Day Deal
    11:46 Deals

    AirPods Pro are back in stock at Amazon after selling out – and they’re $52 off

  2. Early Prime Day Deals
    08:06 Deals

    10 incredible early Prime Day deals that are about to end at Amazon

  3. Best Prime Day TV Deals
    16:38 Deals

    Best Prime Day TV deals: Samsung, LG, Vizio, and more

  4. Amazon Deals
    10:10 Deals

    Today’s top deals: Early Prime Day deals, $6 Kasa smart plugs, $20 Blink Mini cam, $15 luxurious shower head, Fitbits, more

  5. Best Prime Day Apple Deals
    12:00 Deals

    Amazon Prime Day 2021: Best Apple deals

Why Lavabit shut down: Founder explains 38 days of legal hell

May 21st, 2014 at 3:10 PM
Why Did Lavabit Shut Down

After Edward Snowden’s NSA leaks from last year, rumors circulated that Snowden used Lavabit, which at the time was a hugely popular secure email service. Soon after that, Lavabit founder Ladar Levison wrote that he was forced to decide between being “complicit in crimes against the American people or walk away from nearly ten years of hard work by shutting down Lavabit.” He decided to shut Lavabit down, and he added ominously, “I wish that I could legally share with you the events that led to my decision. I cannot.”

Apparently he can now. In a post yesterday at The Gaurdian, Levison detailed what the 38 days of what sounds like legal hell that lasted from the day federal agents knocked on his door to the day he shut Lavabit down. During the first two weeks, he was served legal papers seven times and talked with the FBI every other day.

He had trouble finding a lawyer, in part because he needed one with the proper technological and legal expertise, but also because he could not talk to anyone who wasn’t a lawyer about the case. At one point, he was ordered to appear in a Virginia courtroom in less than a day, more than a thousand miles from where he lives. It got worse, and he had to deal with arguments from the government that made no sense to him.

For example, “the government argued that, since the ‘inspection’ of the data was to be carried out by a machine, they were exempt from the normal search-and-seizure protections of the Fourth Amendment.”

And he writes that the prosecution argued “that my users had no expectation of privacy, even though the service I provided – encryption – is designed for users’ privacy.”

For the full account, definitely check out Levison’s post at The Guardian, which is linked in the source below.

Popular News