41–50 of 77 posts
[deleted]
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-07-17/how-russian-... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora Nope, they target anyone and everyone big. True, there are some DoD names on that list... but Nasdaq, Google, Yahoo, and Adobe are most decidedly not DoD companies.
Quite the patriot--and one wonders why Millenials have no faith in the senior .gov folks.
"Alexander said that if he determines that he needs to use technology or methods that the NSA has patented, he will pay for a license". Why can the NSA patent anything at all, preventing the public from using the technology it generated with taxpayers' money?
Why not? It is just like many other companies that invent technologies that might happen to also be funded by the public. See DARPA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA
"Alexander said that if he determines that he needs to use technology or methods that the NSA has patented, he will pay for a license". Why can the NSA patent anything at all, preventing the public from using the technology it generated with taxpayers' money?
I wouldn't bother with anything they patented.
If they did that it means it's not worthy of secrecy. It's that simple.
Patents are public
"Alexander said that if he determines that he needs to use technology or methods that the NSA has patented, he will pay for a license". Why can the NSA patent anything at all, preventing the public from using the technology it generated with taxpayers' money?
"Why can the NSA patent anything at all" I wouldn't bother with anything they patented. If they did that it means it's not worthy of secrecy. It's that simple. Patents are public
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Why can the NSA patent anything at all" I wouldn't bother with anything they patented. If they did that it means it's not worthy of secrecy. It's that simple. Patents are public
Not all patents are public, for at least some the government can file a private patent on secret tech and only have to reveal it when someone else tries to patent the same thing.
How would this work if it were say, Krebs doing the consulting? He would not have access to secret government patents... nor should he (if the patents are supposed to be secret for "national security" purposes). Neither should Alexander.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's a little more than an endorsement deal. He knows deep inside information into what surveillance programs the NSA operates. I read it as follows: "we guarantee your company's IT infrastructure will no longer be seen as a low hanging fruit to the NSA"
He's not a clueless career bureaucrat. He's been in the cybersecurity business for a very long time (from his Wiki page): > Alexander worked on signals intelligence at a number of secret National Security Agency bases in the United States and Germany. He earned an MS in business administration in 1978 from Boston University, an MS in systems technology (electronic warfare) and an MS in physics in 1983 from the Naval…
I know the article tries to address this, but his "unique insight" can never (especially this soon) be separated from his knowledge of classified information and software techniques.
This is, IMHO, incredibly perverse.
Edit: clarification.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? It is just like many other companies that invent technologies that might happen to also be funded by the public. See DARPA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA
Can I call up the NSA and obtain a license for say... XKeyScore? Probably not... so this is egregious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's a little more than an endorsement deal. He knows deep inside information into what surveillance programs the NSA operates. I read it as follows: "we guarantee your company's IT infrastructure will no longer be seen as a low hanging fruit to the NSA"
> He knows deep inside information into what surveillance programs the NSA operates. I assume any application of that information would have him arrested too.