Intelligence cooperation between the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US) is perceived as exemplary. Yet, tensions occur within the partnership. Scholars frequently attribute tensions within intelligence partnerships to strategic divergence, technical interoperability, and security concerns. An analysis of post-9/11 UK-US intelligence cooperation points to an alternative explanation: differential human rights obligations. In this paper, I propose a general typology of allied intelligence-sharing, where states navigate their differing human rights obligations based on considerations of reputation and threat levels. Such a discussion provides a unique perspective to the intelligence cooperation scholarship.