When Google and Amazon negotiated a major $1.2bn cloud-computing deal in 2021, their customer – the Israeli government – had an unusual demand: agree to use a secret code as part of an arrangement that would become known as the “winking mechanism”.

The demand, which would require Google and Amazon to effectively sidestep legal obligations in countries around the world, was born out of Israel’s concerns that data it moves into the global corporations’ cloud platforms could end up in the hands of foreign law enforcement authorities.

For Israel, losing control of its data to authorities overseas was a significant concern. So to deal with the threat, officials created a secret warning system: the companies must send signals hidden in payments to the Israeli government, tipping it off when it has disclosed Israeli data to foreign courts or investigators.

To clinch the lucrative contract, Google and Amazon agreed to the so-called winking mechanism. The strict controls include measures that prohibit the US companies from restricting how an array of Israeli government agencies, security services and military units use their cloud services. According to the deal’s terms, the companies cannot suspend or withdraw Israel’s access to its technology, even if it’s found to have violated their terms of service.

  • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    22 hours ago

    The guy who’s only part of the crime was watching out for the police is also guilty of the crime.

    These executives should consider that, especially given that the war crimes and genocide charges are a matter of public record so they can’t claim ignorance.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 day ago

    So the deal violated (admittedly questionable, but still valid) US laws? Make the companies pay dearly for this, so they’ll think not only twice, but a dozen times if ever asked again.

    • gian @lemmy.grys.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Make the companies pay dearly for this

      No, not the company, this would only put in in danger the employees (guess who would be fired in case of downsizing).
      You need to dearly punish who signed the contract.

  • borth@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 day ago

    “If you want our money, you are not allowed to stop our services when you find out that we violated your terms of services… I mean IF!”

  • 5too@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    According to sources familiar with negotiations, Microsoft’s bid suffered as it refused to accept some of Israel’s demands.

    …why is Microsoft the upstanding company here?!

    • floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      15 hours ago

      It was definitely not on ethical grounds. Most likely just got worried the bad PR would outweigh the profit, or the “you cannot get out of this contract” clause

      • 5too@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Yeah, I’m just pissed that even with that they’re still head and shoulders above the competition