Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

schneier.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 66 posts

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#21

Post by 7952 »

Lagged2Death wrote: post #11
anxiousest wrote: post #4

I agree that it's ultimately a policy issue that needs to be mended by congress, what I disagree with is the needless "dig" at companies that store and analyze large amounts of data, as if that somehow is invalid conduct. The problem is the government demanding access to that data, not that the data is there in the first place.

...what I disagree with is the needless "dig" at companies that store and analyze large amounts of data, as if that somehow is invalid conduct. The argument against building systems to amass huge databases of personal information has always been that the very existence of such systems would almost inevitably lead to abuse, through inappropriate expansion of the collection activity and through inappropriate uses of th…

Arguably the collection of large amounts of private data is a fundamental property of the internet and impossible to avoid. In a world of government back doors into hardware and software the difference between cloud and local is an increasingly mute point for most people; making privacy a technical improbability. If any connected device can be accessed how can invalid conduct ever be avoided?

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#22

Post by anxiousest »

Lagged2Death wrote: post #12
anxiousest wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These companies can't detain you in an airport or throw you in prison, there are massive benefits to be had from this data for the user, not to mention that you have a contract in place with these companies that don't have with the NSA.

These companies can't detain you in an airport or throw you in prison... Neither can the NSA. Remember this? ( http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/08/government-k... ) Cops searched this family's house at a private corporation's behest, more or less. The fact that a large database is privately held isn't going to protect you from the government.

Other branches of government can, relying on NSA intelligence.

Just to be clear that example you offer is a case of an employer monitoring employee activity on company equipment, which is another can of worms: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/08/pressure-cooker/

Also it's not an account of action taken against consumers or users, nor is it any example of a "large database".

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#23

Post by jbuzbee »

You read where companies cannot divulge that fact that they have received a NSL? What if they all started reporting that they did NOT receive a NSL? Then when the reporting stopped, you could draw your own conclusions. Wouldn't work for large companies that might get them frequently, but would be an option for the smaller ones like Lavabit.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#24

Post by einhverfr »

leokun wrote: post #18

Several months ago that tone would have sounded conspiracy crazed nutty. But post-Snowden and given that it's schneier, it's sad to realize we've come to realize how bad the situation is. I'm still inclined to not change any actions on my part because I'm not worried about being under surveillance. I'm neither interesting, nor engaged in anything interesting. However, I would like it if the spying were reduced to rem…

I have changed my behavior a bit. There is something about feeling a big brother presence looking over your shoulder when you type. This is particularly present in private conversations.

With comments to HN or public comments on blog posts, etc. I think that the government could have gotten it anyway. If the government wants to snoop on things I say publically there isn't much I can do about it. But with private emails, it's a different matter. The question is, "what will someone think if they read this?" And so those emails end up self-censored, not discussing big controversies, and I put the political thoughts out there front and center for all to see.

So it means that for HN, no difference. I will say what i would say before. Same for any other public comment area. But there are things now that I would say in public that I am not sure I would say in private.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#26

Post by einhverfr »

goatforce5 wrote: post #10

I know nothing of Lavabit, but let's say he did comply with the order and then months or years later the company simply isn't profitable and he needs to shut it down. Could he shut it down then? Or would he suddenly find himself hosting lots of paid government accounts - enough to make it financially viable? (But define viable... Does "I'm not pocketing $1m/year from this business, so I don't care any more. Turn it o…

I would think he could quit saying it was not profitable. The argument is that because he mentioned an order he violated the gag order.

It is stupid. It is blatantly Unconstitutional. I would hope he'd be suing for declaratory judgement that his conduct did not violate the law (now that he has been threatened with arrest he has standing to sue, I think).

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#27

Post by epistasis »

jbuzbee wrote: post #23

You read where companies cannot divulge that fact that they have received a NSL? What if they all started reporting that they did NOT receive a NSL? Then when the reporting stopped, you could draw your own conclusions. Wouldn't work for large companies that might get them frequently, but would be an option for the smaller ones like Lavabit.

By stopping reporting that, they have divulged that they received a letter. So once you receive one, in order to avoid prosecution, you need to keep your notification up as a continuous lie.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#28

Post by kabdib »

jbuzbee wrote: post #23

You read where companies cannot divulge that fact that they have received a NSL? What if they all started reporting that they did NOT receive a NSL? Then when the reporting stopped, you could draw your own conclusions. Wouldn't work for large companies that might get them frequently, but would be an option for the smaller ones like Lavabit.

Never seen one, but I imagine the NLS reads along the lines of "not giving any indication" -- so if you stopped telling the world, you'd be going against it.

The people who do this for a living aren't stupid, and most of them probably don't even think they're being evil.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#29

Post by xradionut »

"That was before the Patriot Act and National Security Letters. Now, presumably, Nacchio would just comply. Protection rackets are easier when you have the law backing you up."

Reminds me of this old chestnut:

Q: Why does the government prosecute the Mafia?

A: They don't want any competition.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#30

Post by RyanMcGreal »

jbuzbee wrote: post #23

You read where companies cannot divulge that fact that they have received a NSL? What if they all started reporting that they did NOT receive a NSL? Then when the reporting stopped, you could draw your own conclusions. Wouldn't work for large companies that might get them frequently, but would be an option for the smaller ones like Lavabit.

That's called a warrant canary:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_canary

Rsync.net does this:

http://www.rsync.net/resources/notices/canary.txt

It's not clear whether the secret courts that enforce NSLs could consider this a legitimate loophole or too cute to get away with, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Post reply on HN