Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gmail security warnings for suspected state-sponsored attacks

googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 123 posts

Re: Gmail security warnings for suspected state-sponsored attacks

#71

Post by thornofmight »

sneak wrote: post #35
haberman wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> USA reading your mail: Business as usual. According to the first paragraph of the article you linked: "NSLs can only request non-content information, such as transactional records, phone numbers dialed or email addresses mailed to and from." According to the sample NSL from the article you linked: "We are not directing that you provide, and you should not provide, information pursuant to this letter that would disc…

> NSLs can only request non-content information NSLs can't legally request ANYTHING. They are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The government has NO AUTHORITY to issue them. The fact that they are presently limiting themselves to illegal request x instead of illegal request y is not relevant. Let's skip the abuses of the FBI et al and talk about the government as a whole for a minute. Are you aware that the NSA monitors _all_ traff…

Where can I read about these recent changes to Skype?

I use Skype mostly for IM, but also the occasional voice/video call, what's a better, more secure alternative?

Re: Gmail security warnings for suspected state-sponsored attacks

#73

Post by thornofmight »

sneak wrote: post #35
haberman wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> USA reading your mail: Business as usual. According to the first paragraph of the article you linked: "NSLs can only request non-content information, such as transactional records, phone numbers dialed or email addresses mailed to and from." According to the sample NSL from the article you linked: "We are not directing that you provide, and you should not provide, information pursuant to this letter that would disc…

> NSLs can only request non-content information NSLs can't legally request ANYTHING. They are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The government has NO AUTHORITY to issue them. The fact that they are presently limiting themselves to illegal request x instead of illegal request y is not relevant. Let's skip the abuses of the FBI et al and talk about the government as a whole for a minute. Are you aware that the NSA monitors _all_ traff…

Where can I read about these recent changes to Skype?

I use Skype mostly for IM, but also the occasional voice/video call, what's a better, more secure alternative?

Re: Gmail security warnings for suspected state-sponsored attacks

#74

Post by sneak »

tosseraccount wrote: post #64
sneak wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dissent in China will get you a prison sentence or worse. Dissent in America will get your karma modded down. I think Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, and Dmitry Sklyarov may disagree with you.

Sklyarov - charges dropped. Manning - U.S. soldier deliberately mishandled diplomatic cables. Assange - I'm aware of no official charges or actions by the U.S.

I have a friend who's life was completely ruined by a federal criminal case before charges were ever even filed.

I'm not sure you understand the implications of "charges dropped". Sometimes that can consume 5+ years of one's life, sometimes part or all of that imprisoned. It always costs a fortune, too.

If you aren't aware of what the US is planning for Assange, you're not paying attention. This is the same government that thinks that people at the New York Times should be indicted for espionage.

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-01-05/entertainment...

Re: Gmail security warnings for suspected state-sponsored attacks

#75

Post by brown9-2 »

sneak wrote: post #30
w1ntermute wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Google doesn't really have a choice but to follow the laws of the country it's based in. Do they at least explicitly explain this caveat somewhere?

Google is a huge multinational, operating on the internet, which is (at least historically) devoid of specific jurisdictions. They could, at the expense of profits, sidestep this issue - but they don't. Unfortunately the US is trying to deny that, with less and less success, but that's where we're at today. I just think it's shitty of them to make such a noise about non-US state-sponsored surveillance, but remain rel…

How could Google sidestep compliance with US laws? They are incorporated in the US, are they not?

Re: Gmail security warnings for suspected state-sponsored attacks

#76

Post by huggah »

dfc wrote: post #16

Why the emphasis on state sponsored attacks? (I am aware of stuxnet/flame/sanger's book) If google knows I am being targeted by a non-state actor are they choosing not to notify me? Are we going back to a cold war mentality where the only credible attacks are state sponsored?

State sponsored attacks are often more serious than non-state attacks. Most malware attempts to exploit victims for the financial gain of the authors--which is bad, but something individuals recover from. If someone is targeted for surveillance by a totalitarian state, it's possible that their life is in danger.

Gmail already warns users when Google suspect their accounts are compromised. All this is doing is changing a small subset of those warnings into a less-easily-ignorable warning for those users that may be targeted by state actors.

Re: Gmail security warnings for suspected state-sponsored attacks

#77

Post by sneak »

lotharbot wrote: post #65
sneak wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dissent in China will get you a prison sentence or worse. Dissent in America will get your karma modded down. I think Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, and Dmitry Sklyarov may disagree with you.

There's a difference between "dissent" and "passing classified information to unauthorized sources". You can get away with criticizing the government here; you can't get away with espionage. Playing fast and loose with facts continues to hurt your case.

I'm not playing fast and loose with facts. I'm talking about free speech.

If you think that "dissent in the USA == downvotes", then you've never pissed off anyone powerful before.

Re: Gmail security warnings for suspected state-sponsored attacks

#79

Post by ktizo »

tomjen3 wrote: post #44
haberman wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> USA reading your mail: Business as usual. According to the first paragraph of the article you linked: "NSLs can only request non-content information, such as transactional records, phone numbers dialed or email addresses mailed to and from." According to the sample NSL from the article you linked: "We are not directing that you provide, and you should not provide, information pursuant to this letter that would disc…

I understand as a hacker that you want to provide the truth, but the way to stop these letters isn't to downplay their danger, but to make people scared to death of them.

Spreading more FUD on the internet is not likely to help a cause in the long run, it won't even make it stand out from the background noise. And you aren't really scaring the shit out of people by telling them that the government can read their emails, which they already think anyway, when they also know that the same government has nukes and has been happy to play brinkmanship with them against other countries with nukes, for well over a generation.

Re: Gmail security warnings for suspected state-sponsored attacks

#80

Post by pooriaazimi »

duskwuff wrote: post #13
jcromartie wrote: post #6

aka China, right?

Mostly! I believe there's been some tampering noticed in various Middle Eastern countries (such as Iran and Syria) as well, and I suspect this warning is targeted at them too.

I guess so. A couple weeks ago I experienced something spooky (like session hijack) in Iran and contacted them...
Post reply on HN