Allow me to be surprised this time, I don't see much new here, compared to what we already saw about Prism (all the slides). Maybe the only thing newsworthy this time is that additional documents confirm that Prism exist? I applaud this article of course, as it gives less chance for unnatural interpretations of the slides that we saw by pro-status-quo writers ("it's not really a direct access") -- now we have additio…
How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages
11–20 of 164 posts
Re: How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages
#12Allow me to be surprised this time, I don't see much new here, compared to what we already saw about Prism (all the slides). Maybe the only thing newsworthy this time is that additional documents confirm that Prism exist? I applaud this article of course, as it gives less chance for unnatural interpretations of the slides that we saw by pro-status-quo writers ("it's not really a direct access") -- now we have additio…
I haven't read the article yet, but if what I'm gathering from the comments is true, what's new here is that Microsoft has been caught in a lie to the public and their shareholders.
Also note that the "official client" is FBI, so MS can claim they don't know that NSA accesses the data of US citizens. But that "there will be more interagency sharing and cooperation" was publicly announced by G W Bush soon after 9/11.
Re: How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages
#13Microsoft's June 7th statement: "We provide customer data only when we receive a legally binding order or subpoena to do so, and never on a voluntary basis. In addition we only ever comply with orders for requests about specific accounts or identifiers. If the government has a broader voluntary national security program to gather customer data we don’t participate in it." One down, several to go. If I were Google/Fac…
It may just be a gag order thing, sure. But with the level of access required for stuff like this, I don't think they could shut the whole team up. How many people worked on this Microsoft back door? It can't have been less than a couple dozen at least. And none of them raised the issue or let someone know, a journalist for instance, or publicly raised the question?
It makes me wonder about the true extent of the programs we're freaking out about. I mean, of course they exist and they're big and threatening, but I don't buy that they could combine complete access with complete secrecy. They need the cooperation of the companies, and the companies, by NSA standards, just aren't trustworthy enough. In fact, they're full of wild cards like Snowden, denizens of newsgroups, IRC, 4chan, etc, who would LOVE to be the one to blow up an NSA attempt to write a back door into Skype.
Maybe they did, and it all faded away. But it just seems strange to me that so little has been said about the elephant that must surely have been in everyone's room for the last few years.
Re: How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages
#14Microsoft's June 7th statement: "We provide customer data only when we receive a legally binding order or subpoena to do so, and never on a voluntary basis. In addition we only ever comply with orders for requests about specific accounts or identifiers. If the government has a broader voluntary national security program to gather customer data we don’t participate in it." One down, several to go. If I were Google/Fac…
This document just says that surveillance was broken for chats when they did the outlook.com upgrade, but that has since been fixed.
Re: How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages
#15CALEA applies to telecommunications providers, which is a label that would seem to clearly apply to Skype. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calea
Are major companies based or operating in the US allowed to provide secure email and/or data storage without options for lawful surveillance from law enforcement?
If people do not like these policies and the cooperation from the companies operating them, I think the proper place to direct your anger is at the laws that require them to cooperate.
Re: How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages
#16Allow me to be surprised this time, I don't see much new here, compared to what we already saw about Prism (all the slides). Maybe the only thing newsworthy this time is that additional documents confirm that Prism exist? I applaud this article of course, as it gives less chance for unnatural interpretations of the slides that we saw by pro-status-quo writers ("it's not really a direct access") -- now we have additio…
Re: How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages
#17Re: How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages
#18To play devil's advocate here, what else would people have Microsoft do? Is there a scenario in which they can successfully resist enabling surveillance features in their products while operating in the US? CALEA applies to telecommunications providers, which is a label that would seem to clearly apply to Skype. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calea Are major companies based or operating in the US allowed to provide sec…
Re: How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages
#19To play devil's advocate here, what else would people have Microsoft do? Is there a scenario in which they can successfully resist enabling surveillance features in their products while operating in the US? CALEA applies to telecommunications providers, which is a label that would seem to clearly apply to Skype. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calea Are major companies based or operating in the US allowed to provide sec…
Re: How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages
#20This is pretty scary. When you talk about emails, it's sort of "impersonal". But collecting audio and video data from your casual chats on Skype is a fucking break in.