Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Wednesday October 05 2016, @02:14AM   Printer-friendly
from the everyone-invited-to-look dept.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37551415

Yahoo secretly scanned millions of its users' email accounts on behalf of the US government, according to a report. Reuters news agency says the firm built special software last year to comply with a classified request.

"Yahoo is a law abiding company, and complies with the laws of the United States," the tech firm said in a statement provided to the BBC.

The allegation comes less than a fortnight after Yahoo said hackers had stolen data about many of its users. Yahoo is in the process of being taken over by Verizon Communications in a $4.8bn (£3.8bn) deal. The telecoms provider declined to comment on the report.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by butthurt on Wednesday October 05 2016, @05:46AM

    by butthurt (6141) on Wednesday October 05 2016, @05:46AM (#410510) Journal

    "We've never received such a request, but if we did, our response would be simple: 'No way'," a spokesman for Google said in a statement.

    A Microsoft spokesperson said in a statement, "We have never engaged in the secret scanning of email traffic like what has been reported today about Yahoo.” The company declined to comment on whether it had received such a request.

    -- https://www.thequint.com/technology/2016/10/05/yahoo-wrote-program-to-snoop-on-emails-for-us-intelligence-report-fbi-facebook-google [thequint.com]

    The Wall Street Journal article says that Twitter and Facebook also "denied scanning incoming user emails"; however, those companies don't provide e-mail as a service.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 05 2016, @03:42PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 05 2016, @03:42PM (#410652)

    You are using those quote marks like it is what twitter and facebook literally said, but that's not the case, that's the WSJ's rephrasing.

    • (Score: 2) by butthurt on Wednesday October 05 2016, @04:38PM

      by butthurt (6141) on Wednesday October 05 2016, @04:38PM (#410695) Journal

      Perhaps I should have introduced the quote with "the Wall Street Journal article says"--oh wait, I did.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 06 2016, @01:35AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 06 2016, @01:35AM (#410910)

        Oh don't play stupid. Your post makes no sense if facebook and twitter didn't literally say email.
        Seriously, what is wrong with you that made you think there was meaning in the false literalism of your post? Are you a trumpkin or maybe just an aspie?

        • (Score: 2) by butthurt on Thursday October 06 2016, @04:12AM

          by butthurt (6141) on Thursday October 06 2016, @04:12AM (#410959) Journal

          > Your post makes no sense if facebook and twitter didn't literally say email.

          What makes you think they didn't?

          > Seriously, what is wrong with you that made you think there was meaning in the false literalism of your post?

          Sometimes, the exact meaning of words is important. If, as the article says, those companies used the word "e-mails" in their announcements then the announcements don't pertain to the services those companies are best known for.

          > Are you a trumpkin or maybe just an aspie?

          Instead of giving out information about myself, I'd prefer to discuss the news.