Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence • Hacker News Board

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#211

Post by CodeMage » Tue, Oct 04, 2016, 10:24 PM UTC

dEnigma wrote: post #196

trendia wrote: post #192

In China and Russia, it is well known that all oligarchs are corrupt. However, not all of them will go to prison -- only those who cross the politicians will ever be tried and convicted.

Which reminds me of this great passage in Atlas Shrugged : “Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough…

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

-- John Rogers

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#212

Post by tedunangst » Tue, Oct 04, 2016, 10:25 PM UTC

envy2 wrote: post #171

compiler-guy wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chelsea Manning, who is imprisoned over something similar to this case, may have a different opinion on how nice jail is than you.

Chelsea Manning was imprisoned over something very different: she was a US soldier, not a private citizen, and she made public internal government documents, not a letter explicitly addressed to her. Different standards do (and, IMO, should) apply to leakers who are government employees or members of the armed forces with a security clearance and to private citizens who are not 'leaking' something but rather sharing…

Also, if you disclose that you received a NSL, that probably means you at least read the thing you're leaking before leaking it.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#213

Post by dmix » Tue, Oct 04, 2016, 10:26 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #200

dmix wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maximizing shareholder value is like a death grip that squeezes any public corporation into not making financial gambles on ethical grounds. It's so important that these leaks go public for two critical reasons: 1) with that type of financial regulatory environment for public companies, the only way to create incentives for that type of consumer protection play is when it has monetary consequences if they do nothing…

> Maximizing shareholder value is like a death grip that squeezes any public corporation into not making financial gambles on ethical grounds. Will this meme never die on HN? There is an obvious counter-example: Apple, a public corporation who publicly fought a similar request. The idea that "maximizing shareholder value" is some sort of inescapable Faustian bargain is just not supported by the facts. People who run…

> Apple, a public corporation who publicly fought a similar request.

The FBI went public with the case, not Apple... and the warrant was signed by a public criminal courts judge not a FISA court. That's a critical difference. There are no examples of successful challenges to NSLs, don't downplay the seriousness of doing so.

"Going public" is not really an option for the stuff we're talking about (as the Yahoo case I mentioned made clear, the whole warrant is predicated on secrecy ). If they do they could face serious financial penalties or face their CEOs going to jail where yes shareholder value will take a hit. The markets are very sensitive to large lawsuit liability and CEO changes.

So I don't see how you could challenge these laws as a public corporation without knowing full well you will damage the share value.

Their obligation to maintaining the stock value is only part of the issue here. You're expecting these businesses to be heroic martyrs when the state has stacked the chips extremely high against them. There's no question who is responsible for this mess.

Yet the US is on track to vote in another president whose primary national security strategy on her website is to expand NSA power and increase domestic and foreign intelligence gathering.

Four more years!

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#214

Post by jmadsen » Tue, Oct 04, 2016, 10:28 PM UTC

I'm sorry, but have you used Yahoo Mail?

I don't believe they are capable of writing the "siphon" they are accused of. To be honest, I don't think they actually have engineers. I think they just use summer interns.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#215

Post by tedunangst » Tue, Oct 04, 2016, 10:28 PM UTC

Phlarp wrote: post #100

tptacek wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing Stamos' background, it's possible that she was specifically required not to tell him.

How do you slip something like this past a corporate security team? Stamos and @bcrypt never struck me as individuals that were "asleep at the wheel". Surely there was evidence somewhere? If Stamos wasn't briefed as to the situation and a security engineer found the rootkit on their own how could they be bound by the terms of an NSL / gag order?

Add it to the spam filter? The security team probably reviews the spam filter code, but perhaps not the particular weights and measures it uses on a daily basis. So you set up a parallel filter for "arabic spam" that generally looks like regular filter, just tuned a little differently.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#216

Post by ryanlol » Tue, Oct 04, 2016, 10:30 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #195

Bartweiss wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like the more interesting question. Whether Mayer went around him willingly or by legal requirement is basically unanswerable, except to note that the email team chose to do the same. There's not much to say when we can't tell collusion from compulsion. The question of accidental discovery, by contrast, is a fascinating one. A gag order couldn't possibly compel someone who made the discovery on their own (…

> A gag order couldn't possibly compel someone who made the discovery on their own (for the simple reason that they wouldn't know about it to be compelled). If the company was gagged, I don't see how it would matter whether company employees knew about it in advance or found it by accident. Either way, the company is still gagged. Also, while your comment makes common sense, national security restrictions don't have…

That particular employee may not be. Obvious solution is to have a page ran by some reasonably trustworthy organisation where people can report these breaches before passing them on to their superiors.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#217

Post by tedunangst » Tue, Oct 04, 2016, 10:31 PM UTC

odbol wrote: post #207

ethbro wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> full weight? You mean like a small fine ? The amount of leverage NSA/FISA have is rather different than what the CFPB has at its disposal.

aka treason and the death penalty

The bar for treason is a little higher than refusing to secretly forward some emails.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#218

Post by pascalmemories » Tue, Oct 04, 2016, 10:32 PM UTC

mtgx wrote: post #190

DubiousPusher wrote: post #11

I think the attitude here that most tech companies are rolling over and just complying without a single ethical consideration is misplaced. The government has been doing an excellent job of basically extorting these companies into compliance. They threaten the full weight of the US government's wraith and then tie every order up with classifications and gag orders. You aren't legally allowed to talk to other companie…

If that were the case, then Apple would've caved in, too. Mayer was probably too new and too scared to deal with this, especially when she had to think about her new baby. My point is it has less to do with "Yahoo being scared about being destroyed by the US government" and more with Mayer's own personal fear of the US government, and easily caving to such threats, whether it was because of her baby, because of weak…

> Mayer was probably too new and too scared to deal with this, especially when she had to think about her new baby.

OK, I normally think misogyny claims are over-blown and people are way too sensitive.

But your comment positively reeks of misogyny.

Rather than go for a down-vote, because you're able to edit your comment, I think you should reconsider the phrasing and delete the misogyny. If your comment doesn't stand without it, I believe deleting it would add to rather than subtract from, the discussion.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#219

Post by dwaltrip » Tue, Oct 04, 2016, 10:33 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #200

dmix wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maximizing shareholder value is like a death grip that squeezes any public corporation into not making financial gambles on ethical grounds. It's so important that these leaks go public for two critical reasons: 1) with that type of financial regulatory environment for public companies, the only way to create incentives for that type of consumer protection play is when it has monetary consequences if they do nothing…

> Maximizing shareholder value is like a death grip that squeezes any public corporation into not making financial gambles on ethical grounds. Will this meme never die on HN? There is an obvious counter-example: Apple, a public corporation who publicly fought a similar request. The idea that "maximizing shareholder value" is some sort of inescapable Faustian bargain is just not supported by the facts. People who run…

Apple is also the most profitable company in the history of the world. So, they have more ability than most to fight something like that.

Re: Yahoo scanned customer emails for US intelligence

#220

Post by mason240 » Tue, Oct 04, 2016, 10:33 PM UTC

lkbm wrote: post #159

mason240 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's totally the fault of tech companies that the US Federal government forces them to give up access to any information they want, and a non-profit email org would immune US intelligence agencies. /s

Non-profit is not the opposite of corporation. In fact, most non-profits are corporations. The message is obviously to control your own security to the maximum extent practicable. Esau didn't assign fault in their comment. You might disagree with their assertion, but your comment is attacking a straw man, rather than the claim posted.

That's the problem with responding to people who don't actually make complete arguments.