11–20 of 202 posts
It may have been published at the Post for the first time, but Guardian released this over a month ago. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-prism-server...
It may have been published at the Post for the first time, but Guardian released this over a month ago. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-prism-server...
Was just about to post this, the only difference is that two of the secret program names are unredacted in the Wapo version.
> "collection directly from the servers" So either Snowden has incorrect slides, the slides are falsified, or everyone has been lying. Actual evidence of direct access would be better than these slides. I would like someone from Google, Facebook, et al to testify under oath that there is no direct access. Or maybe even the NSA, but we know they share inaccuracies under oath, so maybe that isn't worth so much.
Anyone still using - Microsoft - Yahoo - Google - Facebook - PalTalk - AOL - Skype - YouTube - or Apple? Yeah, I thought so. EDIT: Seriously, downvoters: you NEED TO WAKE THE FUCK UP !
Yes, because I actually carefully choose what I do online.
- either your data
- and/or your money.
Sincerely, your NSA
> "collection directly from the servers" So either Snowden has incorrect slides, the slides are falsified, or everyone has been lying. Actual evidence of direct access would be better than these slides. I would like someone from Google, Facebook, et al to testify under oath that there is no direct access. Or maybe even the NSA, but we know they share inaccuracies under oath, so maybe that isn't worth so much.
Either way, the tapping of cables is bad enough.
> "collection directly from the servers" So either Snowden has incorrect slides, the slides are falsified, or everyone has been lying. Actual evidence of direct access would be better than these slides. I would like someone from Google, Facebook, et al to testify under oath that there is no direct access. Or maybe even the NSA, but we know they share inaccuracies under oath, so maybe that isn't worth so much.
This might be what the slides meant. And the NSA has already lied under oath to congress. Maybe even twice.
> "collection directly from the servers" So either Snowden has incorrect slides, the slides are falsified, or everyone has been lying. Actual evidence of direct access would be better than these slides. I would like someone from Google, Facebook, et al to testify under oath that there is no direct access. Or maybe even the NSA, but we know they share inaccuracies under oath, so maybe that isn't worth so much.
So, if you're under oath, you're not allowed to lie. And if you're read into an SCI program that controls the disclosure of the existence of such access, you're most definitely not allowed to say anything about it (or, in many cases, even acknowledge that such a thing exists). There is no way someone would risk perjuring themselves OR disclosing classified information under oath.
All these revelations regarding call metadata, PRISM collection (albeit under a different codename at the time), modern fiber taps, and even more are covered.
You'll learn about how they shave fiber optic cables in order to intercept traffic and not be detected. You'll find out about the various facilities already reported, along with others like the NSA Georgia facility. You'll find out exactly where on what beach these fiber lines run in and out of. It's a very well-researched book.
You'll learn a lot more than what's been verified with these leaks.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Shadow-Factory-Eavesdropping-Ameri...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, because I actually carefully choose what I do online.
Good, continue to support the surveillance state with - either your data - and/or your money. Sincerely, your NSA
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Was just about to post this, the only difference is that two of the secret program names are unredacted in the Wapo version.
As the article points out, the map is different in both as well. One shows CONUS, the other, the whole Earth.