Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys" • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#181

Post by youngtaff » Wed, Nov 06, 2013, 1:09 PM UTC

samstave wrote: post #29

tantalor wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Chinese were targeting specific journalists and critics. Presumably to harass them. I'm not saying the US doesn't do that, but the evidence is not as clear.

Maybe you didn't notice the detainment of Greenwald's partner by the GCHQ whereby they demanded him to turn-over/destroy whatever he had. Further, the break-in to Greenwald's residence and theft of his machine. As well as the visit to the Guardian and destrution of machines.... The evidence is crystal.

The destruction of the Guardian's laptops was about ensuring they didn't get stolen by someone else - if you read the story at the time, the spooks actually wanted the Guardian to hand the laptops over but Guardian refused and destruction was a mutually agreed way out.

Miranda's detainment, confiscation of the memory sticks etc was to be expected - as far as the UK Government is concerned he's carry stolen state secrets.

What I don't really understand is why he flew through London carrying them, I believe Madrid has more routes to South American - I wonder if he was routed so he would be picked up for massive publicity.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#182

Post by tokenadult » Wed, Nov 06, 2013, 1:13 PM UTC

cromwellian wrote: post #5

It's ironic that when the Chinese attack against Google occurred, we thought the Chinese government was the most hostile state actor threat to worry about, but it turned out to be the US and UK government.

China is a much more hostile state actor in how it would use any information it gathers up, especially to a free-enterprise company like Google.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#183

Post by ewbuoi » Wed, Nov 06, 2013, 1:18 PM UTC

redblacktree wrote: post #160

macmac wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Chinese do not need any agreements to tap undersea cables and are more than capable of doing just that.

Sure, but they don't have the "home field advantage" that the NSA does, whereby much of the core internet infrastructure is housed in the US. I forget the exact number, but something like 70% of the world's internet traffic transits the US. (they mention this constantly in NSA-related articles)

But how much of the core infrastructure is made by the Chinese?

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#184

Post by LiamMcCalloway » Wed, Nov 06, 2013, 1:18 PM UTC

I am surprised this exerpt from Alan Rusbriger's article in the New York Review of Books [1] hasn't made the rounds:

> "But I did have an interesting (unattributable, of course) briefing from someone very senior in one West Coast mega-corporation who conceded that neither he nor the CEO of his company had security clearance to know what arrangements his own organization had reached with the US government. “So, it’s like a company within a company?” I asked. He waved his hand dismissively: “I know the guy, I trust him.”

West Coast mega-corporation does not know what West Coast mega-corporation does.

[1] http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/nov/21/snowden...

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#185

Post by nyrina » Wed, Nov 06, 2013, 1:20 PM UTC

InclinedPlane wrote: post #154

serge2k wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try to find a fix for the ridiculously broken system that is the US government?

Yes. It's fixable the moment the public realizes that it is within their power to fix.

Until you realize that the public doesn't have as much money as the lobbyists.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#186

Post by w_t_payne » Wed, Nov 06, 2013, 1:30 PM UTC

So how long before HN gets shut down for supporting criminality and terrorism?

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#187

Post by eliasmacpherson » Wed, Nov 06, 2013, 1:30 PM UTC

tokenadult wrote: post #182

cromwellian wrote: post #5

It's ironic that when the Chinese attack against Google occurred, we thought the Chinese government was the most hostile state actor threat to worry about, but it turned out to be the US and UK government.

China is a much more hostile state actor in how it would use any information it gathers up, especially to a free-enterprise company like Google.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON#Examples_of_industrial...

Airbus might disagree with you there, I can't see the NSA ratting Boeing out for supplying bribes.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#188

Post by opinali » Wed, Nov 06, 2013, 1:30 PM UTC

vinkelhake wrote: post #45

acqq wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only published information is how the values are encoded, not what is encoded (the specifications aren't transported together with the data) so to crack 1622 different protocols only involved in authorization according to the NSA slide is not such a small task, at least if they are interested in more than just recognizing e-mail addresses which can be found using regexps. And just counting the protocols proves th…

Yes, that's what I meant with "message descriptions". It's definitely not a small task, but again not something that I would say is extremely hard. It's just a lot of work. I'm curious what 1622 represents here. 1622 different protocols, each with their different messages? Seems like a crazy amount. 1622 different message types for authorization? Even that seems like a stretch.

I guess its just 1622 fields or message types.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#189

Post by acd » Wed, Nov 06, 2013, 1:30 PM UTC

I think the trends has been like this and history tends to repeat it self but in different forms. 1) Main frame - central computing 2) PC revolution - decentralized computing 3) The cloud - central computing 4) ? Hackers invent p2p - decentralized network corporations,government not in control of any communication, information heavily encrypted possibly distributed using erasure codes. Network run by friends who you can trust. Code written by hackers

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#190

Post by wzdd » Wed, Nov 06, 2013, 1:39 PM UTC

enneff wrote: post #165

Amadou wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't. I so disbelieve in his argument that I won't sign up for G+. Besides, as Upton Sinclair was fond of saying, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

I'm suggesting you could rebut his argument here instead of just insulting his integrity.

Hearn claimed that there are two ways to fund services: through advertising, and through direct user payment. This is wrong. There are plenty of other ways to fund services.

You could fund them indirectly, through sales of another product. Think about Apple giving away its software and Web services (funded by hardware sales), or Microsoft giving away its Web services (funded mostly by software sales), or even of Google's nonprofitable services and projects (the ultimate income source here is ads, but it needn't be).

Alternatively, you could accept some anonymous form of payment. Bitcoin is the obvious one, but there are plenty of others -- gift cards come to mind, and these have been pretty successful for iTunes and the XBOX arcade.

Or, of course, there's cash, Bitcoin, and other less convenient or mature technologies.

Finally, the argument is a little disingenuous, given Google's push, with Google Plus, to know people's real identity anyway. It is clear that "advertising = better privacy" isn't a Google goal, at the high level.