Why are you leaving out the important details:

You can't as an ISP prevent malicious actors from using your service, but you do can assist the government - in the case of the recent attacks on Berlins electricity that caused a fatality the German - to hand over the data to help assist law enforcement.

If US state-department's claims [1] are true, did noblogs.org do so – help German authorities track Terrorists or did it cover for them?

Because their statement does say nothing about the claims made by the state department.

[1] https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...

▲

throwawayqqq11 a day ago | parent [-]

> did they help authorities to track Terrorists or did they cover up?

Nice framing. Binary "either you are with authorities or you are against them", no consideration that "terrorist" is up for courts to decide, not govs or ISPs and that complying-or-not with a legal-or-not order can have many reasons and outcomes. Would you call apple, refusing to decrypt a terror org too? Framing those subjects as terrorists is true darkage backwards reasoning. A/I calls it radical activism, the US gov calls it marxist terrorism. To me, its clear who is more credible.

	▲	woodpanel a day ago \| parent [-]
		there's no framing. just the law. if you are not handing over terrorist's data you are abating them. what that data is (encrypted or not), is an entirely different thing. oh, and if you believe apple doesn't cooperate with the us govt., good luck!