Comment by 1oooqooq
2 years ago
Maybe their keys are safer than yours?
Not saying you are obviously compromised, but the simplest explanation after this news is that maybe they relay the authorization to NSA et al, and they OK'ed your case and not theirs for some reason...
The simplest explanation is that reviewer A was responsible for Home Assistant Companion's request and reviewer B was responsible for Firefox's request, and they judged the request differently. Or that implementation details made the two cases different. Or that the company policy changed over time between the two requests. "Apple can break Firefox's encryption so they happily allowed it" is certainly not the simplest explanation.
The simplest explanation is not that Apple is colluding with multiple national government's intelligence agencies which all specifically agreed to a conspiracy against Firefox's mobile browser notifications.
You clearly do not work on the field. There's an industry for that. It's not uncommon as you think.
Consulted for a company who implemented access logs for law enforcement to telephone records. A friend works at ring just fetching data from the DB for the legal team after they receives pro forma requests.
And those are the regular cases since the 80s. with judges from regular courts. If there's a law those companies must follow they will implement the same systems as they had for other laws. Only that these new ones prevent them from discussing. That's the only difference. the rest is banal day to day from legal and the industry that exist to sell compliance services to them.