61–70 of 87 posts
Google was a premium partner in the Prysm NSA program. According to the first leaks, Google along with Facebook, Skype and Apple were the first to sign up to the NSA spying programs as partners. All along they're trying to paint themselves as victims of the spying, which is ridiculous really...but I guess they can still fool a large population.
You're getting down voted because of all the Google, Facebook, and Apple employees here on HN.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never mentioned Matadano. I specifically refered to the "larger transnational security company" that acquired Matasano. If that's not correct regarding Matasano, I'm sorry. But I'm not being evasive in any way. I'll let you know when I scale up to where I get a glimpse into the abyss.
I ran the professional services division for one of the largest companies in the same space as Matasano. I'd love to hear what you think the NSA might have persuaded us to do?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never mentioned Matadano. I specifically refered to the "larger transnational security company" that acquired Matasano. If that's not correct regarding Matasano, I'm sorry. But I'm not being evasive in any way. I'll let you know when I scale up to where I get a glimpse into the abyss.
I ran the professional services division for one of the largest companies in the same space as Matasano. I'd love to hear what you think the NSA might have persuaded us to do?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I ran the professional services division for one of the largest companies in the same space as Matasano. I'd love to hear what you think the NSA might have persuaded us to do?
Since your indignation is fully intact, "one of the largest companies..." would not be RSA, right?
As I rock back and forth in my chair, silently repeat the serenity prayer, and try to remain charitable; what sort of work do you think Matasano (or NCC, Accuvant, or VerizonBusiness, my former employer) does?
I wonder, is that the right thing to do? How would you do it technically if you thought it was? Who would you leak it to?
If you're a google employee and you see a gag order and disagree with it you almost certainly have the skills to leak it undetectably such that you can't be prosecuted because there is no evidence. I wonder, is that the right thing to do? How would you do it technically if you thought it was? Who would you leak it to?
At bottom, there's someone at Google in charge of overseeing the gag order. If the gag order leaks and they can't figure out who's responsible, I'm pretty sure they end up going to jail - if only because a court would have a hard time telling the difference between genuinely not being able to find the leaker and stonewalling / implementing a cover-up.
(Any lawyers here who could weigh in?) Could a company nullify gag orders if it was their policy to post ALL their correspondence on their website? For example, AcmeCo gets a request from the US Government to share information about one of AcmeCo's customers (e.g. WikiLeaks). AcmeCo scans and posts this letter (as it does for everything it receives including its electricity bill) on its website. Could they then circu…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like the gag orders are "don't tell these suspects that we're monitoring them". Seems quite legitimate and essential in ordinary cases. But we need a robust court system that will restrict gag orders to legit things, rather than suppressing dissent.
Would people involved with Wikileaks actually change their behavior if they were given proof that the US government was spying on them? I assume they are already operating under the assumption that that is the case. From what I have seen, the US government spying on that community is already taken as established fact within that community.