Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
plus.google.com
Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
1–10 of 82 posts
Re: Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
#2I don't know who to believe anymore...
Re: Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
#3The referenced story: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57588337-38/no-evidence-of...;
declan submitted his story https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5844091 but it languished.
It's a shame, because it's the first responsible piece of reporting I've seen on this mess. The media has been trolled by a Powerpoint brief from self-important USG bureaucrats.
Re: Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
#4Drummond adds:
We cannot say this more clearly—the government does not have access to Google servers—not directly, or via a back door, or a so-called drop box. Nor have we received blanket orders of the kind being discussed in the media. It is quite wrong to insinuate otherwise. We provide user data to governments only in accordance with the law. Our legal team reviews each and every request, and frequently pushes back when requests are overly broad or don’t follow the correct process. And we have taken the lead in being as transparent as possible about government requests for user information.
Re: Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
#5The referenced story: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57588337-38/no-evidence-of... ; declan submitted his story https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5844091 but it languished. It's a shame, because it's the first responsible piece of reporting I've seen on this mess. The media has been trolled by a Powerpoint brief from self-important USG bureaucrats.
Yes, but it's still using the term "direct access", which we've seen is the antithesis of forthrightness.
Surveillance is tricky business and technology makes the boundaries of what's acceptable to reveal even trickier. It's true that the muddling of the Verizon/AT&T stories is being interwoven with this, which may not have helped. And the scope of the information requested falls well within acceptable procedure for "traditional" investigations I.E. who contacted whom at what hour on which day. But this isn't a traditional investigation anymore.
In essence, they tried to automate police footwork, which still doesn't fly with a lot of us.
Re: Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
#6The referenced story: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57588337-38/no-evidence-of... ; declan submitted his story https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5844091 but it languished. It's a shame, because it's the first responsible piece of reporting I've seen on this mess. The media has been trolled by a Powerpoint brief from self-important USG bureaucrats.
Yes, but it's still using the term "direct access", which we've seen is the antithesis of forthrightness. Surveillance is tricky business and technology makes the boundaries of what's acceptable to reveal even trickier. It's true that the muddling of the Verizon/AT&T stories is being interwoven with this, which may not have helped. And the scope of the information requested falls well within acceptable procedure for…
Google Chief Legal Officer:
"the government does not have access to Google servers—not directly, or via a back door, or a so-called drop box" https://plus.google.com/+google/posts/TMh6gUVrwMq
Re: Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
#7The referenced story: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57588337-38/no-evidence-of... ; declan submitted his story https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5844091 but it languished. It's a shame, because it's the first responsible piece of reporting I've seen on this mess. The media has been trolled by a Powerpoint brief from self-important USG bureaucrats.
Yes, but it's still using the term "direct access", which we've seen is the antithesis of forthrightness. Surveillance is tricky business and technology makes the boundaries of what's acceptable to reveal even trickier. It's true that the muddling of the Verizon/AT&T stories is being interwoven with this, which may not have helped. And the scope of the information requested falls well within acceptable procedure for…
[deleted]
Re: Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
#8I don't know who to believe anymore...
Believe in yourself and take reasonable steps (use your judgment to discern what's reasonable, including my post) and take adequate steps to ensure your privacy by investigating as much as you can.
Provided you're of sound mind, you're the only person who can't let you down.
Re: Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but it's still using the term "direct access", which we've seen is the antithesis of forthrightness. Surveillance is tricky business and technology makes the boundaries of what's acceptable to reveal even trickier. It's true that the muddling of the Verizon/AT&T stories is being interwoven with this, which may not have helped. And the scope of the information requested falls well within acceptable procedure for…
Google Chief Legal Officer: "the government does not have access to Google servers—not directly, or via a back door, or a so-called drop box" https://plus.google.com/+google/posts/TMh6gUVrwMq
Yes, I read your previous excerpt and I've read this very post here before. Repeating it over and over (this is your 3rd post so far posting this link) doesn't make me believe it any more strongly.
Re: Eric Schmidt: CNET gets it right on the NSA/Google issue
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but it's still using the term "direct access", which we've seen is the antithesis of forthrightness. Surveillance is tricky business and technology makes the boundaries of what's acceptable to reveal even trickier. It's true that the muddling of the Verizon/AT&T stories is being interwoven with this, which may not have helped. And the scope of the information requested falls well within acceptable procedure for…
Google Chief Legal Officer: "the government does not have access to Google servers—not directly, or via a back door, or a so-called drop box" https://plus.google.com/+google/posts/TMh6gUVrwMq
What sense of "directly" are they using?