SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the that's-the-polite-form-of-the-response dept.
Since word spread that Yahoo! backdoored its own email servers for US intelligence services, we've heard from rival webmail providers denying they have put in place similar arrangements.
That Yahoo! has a cosy relationship with the Feds is not surprising, especially given what we know about PRISM and Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. What is bizarre is that Yahoo!'s engineering team did not, it is claimed, involve its internal security team and introduced exploitable vulnerabilities into the email scanning system.
There's also the issue that this blanket surveillance, as reported, potentially scoops up private and personal communications of millions of innocent people.
We asked Google if it created a similar mechanism in which g-men can search all incoming messages for certain keywords, or if it has been asked to. A spokesman told us:
We've never received such a request, but if we did, our response would be simple: 'No way.'
Previously:
Yahoo "Secretly Scanned Emails for US Authorities"
US Government Threatened Yahoo with $250K Daily Fine if it didn't use PRISM
(Score: 5, Insightful) by TheGratefulNet on Friday October 07 2016, @02:11AM
that's the two words, and I have two for you in reply:
"no way"
all we have is their smiling faces and a bunch of 'do no evil' bullshit non-promises.
why would anyone believe them?
there is a concept of a gag order. that, alone, means you can't trust anyone to reveal the reality of what the gov is asking them.
don't make me laugh, google. your word is worthless and even if you were a saint, because of gag orders and NSL's, no one can ever be sure what the gov is asking and to what level.
we're not stupid. well, not all of us.
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
(Score: 2) by melikamp on Friday October 07 2016, @02:15AM
This.
If Google were served with a gag order, they would not be able to answer this query in any other way. So dear Google, either implement end-to-end encryption on a 100% free+libre software stack, or shut the fuck up.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Friday October 07 2016, @06:06PM
So dear Google, either implement end-to-end encryption on a 100% free+libre software stack, or shut the fuck up.
That may not be enough [washingtonpost.com].
(Score: 3, Informative) by Arik on Friday October 07 2016, @02:30AM
Alphabet, as best I know, has always given them what they want without a fight. Parse the words carefully.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 3, Informative) by martyb on Friday October 07 2016, @02:48AM
Yes, that was why, when they lost the fight in court and still tried to resist, they were threatened with a $250k/day fine.
I could be mistaken, but ISTR that when word got out that the NSA was sniffing traffic on Google's connections between its data centers, there was a very rapid effort to implement encryption on all those links. Can't seem to find that story now, though I'm pretty sure we covered that story here. So, not exactly a fight in the sense you meant, but it's not like they roll over and make it as easy as possible, either.
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Friday October 07 2016, @03:22AM
Of course not, they have their corporate secrets and if the NSA can MITM them then so can others. Just because they protected themselves does NOT mean they are protecting you to any real degree.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 5, Insightful) by TheGratefulNet on Friday October 07 2016, @03:30AM
this ;)
when someone says 'this is encrypted', I still have no trust in it.
because - 'reasons'. you know.
OT: we're seeing some of the worst in human behavior, on a massive scale, these days. I wonder how that will affect the generation growing up. they know not to trust cops, not to trust authority; and the world mostly does not trust americans and the US, anymore. its all kinds of fucked up, and they're seeing it all, since they are very connected (online) and unless they are in a sheltered community, they're free to read all sides of the issues and make up their own minds. they see the greed and the failure of capitalism (lets be honest) and I do wonder how its going to work out when they get to run things.
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @03:34AM
> they're free to read all sides of the issues and make up their own minds.
And they are also free to read the constant flows of bullshit that pass for truth in the minds of so many credulous fools.
The problem isn't just the loss of trust in institutions, its the placing of trust in the bullshit artists.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday October 07 2016, @05:15AM
This comment reminded me to start my own cult.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @04:49PM
its the placing of trust in the bullshit artists
Ah, the likes of Trump and what the alt-right puts out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @03:46AM
> Just because they protected themselves does NOT mean they are protecting you to any real degree.
Hhhm, arikl makes a completely undocumented claim and y'all take that as gospel.
Martyb cites an actual example to the contrary [washingtonpost.com] and its dismissed as irrelevant.
Well, how about this - google's move to shame other email systems into using encrypted smtp. [theverge.com] I await your mental contortions needed to dismiss that as purely self-serving.
(Score: 2) by Chromium_One on Friday October 07 2016, @04:51AM
Just depends where the data tap is placed in the software stack. Fuck the hardware or the network stack.
When you live in a sick society, everything you do is wrong.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @05:41AM
Well you see, after decades of constitutional violations and being lied to by government and corporations, yes, cynicism takes precedent. You reminded me of a link posted by butthurt: https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-cia-made-google-e836451a959e [medium.com]
The surveillance machine has been in place for a very long time. I guess Snowden couldn't shake enough sense into people. While I understand the desire to believe that things aren't truly that bad, it flies in the sense of reason to think that the government hasn't strong armed corporations into giving them what they want. The closet in the AT&T building, denied by the company for a long time. Yahoo claiming that they fought long and hard, yet it turns out they rolled right over, lying about their cooperation the whole time. More leaks showing the DNC actively undermining Sanders in order to promote Clinton. Federal agencies committing crimes in order to discredit political organizations.
But Google, hey they say they aren't evil and some of their engineers put systems in place to protect Google's data streams, so they of all the companies truly care about their customers. Oh wait. Not their customers, their product. Any benefit that the users gain is due only to the fact that Google is trying to protect its own interests. I'm sure a lot of their employees are legitimately interested in protecting users, and lots of good work comes from their efforts. However, it only takes a few bought off engineers or managers to get another secret closet built that undermines every other effort.
So please, explain how you can justify defending the largest tech company that runs the most openly pervasive data mining surveillance business?
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday October 07 2016, @11:54AM
Don't forget Acxiom [acxiom.com]. They aggregate all those other data sets Google doesn't have access to, like your offline purchases, your medical history, etc. The corporate HQ is in Little Rock, Arkansas. Their CEO is good pals with the Clintons; they have a little game where they try to spy each other on the telescopes they have at the little penthouses on top of their respective buildings, the Acxiom HQ and the Clinton Presidential Library.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Friday October 07 2016, @01:42PM
In the case of Google protecting their/my data, it's a matter of their interests aligning with mine. Same applies to their desire for an open internet, so they can serve ads on all platforms.
(Score: 2) by AnonymousCowardNoMore on Friday October 07 2016, @05:32PM
In the case of Google protecting their/my data, it's a matter of their interests aligning with mine.
Let's examine Google's interests in the matter:
Only the second aligns with your interests.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @01:53PM
> So please, explain how you can justify defending the largest tech company that runs the most openly pervasive data mining surveillance business?
I'm not "defending" them. I'm arguing that believing they (or anyone) are pure evil rather than a complicated mix of good and bad is not only stupid but also counter-productive because if you aren't willing to acknowledge the good parts then they have no reason to do any good.
You are creating the very monster you accuse them of being.
(Score: 1) by Crash on Friday October 07 2016, @06:28AM
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Friday October 07 2016, @06:57AM
> It was a yahoo CEO that actually tried to fight them, remember.
Who, when?
(Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Friday October 07 2016, @02:57AM
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 1) by Crash on Friday October 07 2016, @06:31AM
I thought I left the tin-foil hatters behind at Slashdot...
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Friday October 07 2016, @05:56AM
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @02:02PM
"non-violence"? That's anti-american. Let's put this guy under harder scrutiny...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bradley13 on Friday October 07 2016, @06:04AM
Unfortunately, you're right. Precisely the concepts of "gag orders" and "secret courts" - those are the most dangerous elements, because they allow the US government to act in secrecy, with no one checking or applying any sort of control. This is the short road to tyranny.
I actually do believe Google, in the sense that they have good intentions not to install a backdoor to their servers. However, when the federal marshals come calling with their secret court order, and threaten to haul non-compliant Googlers off to jail? Suddenly those easily mouthed platitudes may take second place to being allowed to go home at the end of the day.
If Google is really serious, it needs to find a way to demonstrate this. Moving their corporate headquarters out of the US to someplace like Switzerland or Iceland would be a good first step.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday October 07 2016, @12:37PM
Recruiting a private army? Declaring itself a nuclear power and sovereign corporate state? That would put teeth in their refusal, but that feels like it's not a good road to start down either.
The dystopian future we read about as kids is now.
Washington DC delenda est.