Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Google Says it Would Have a Two-Word Answer for Feds Seeking Yahoo!-Style Email Backdoor

posted by martyb on Friday October 07 2016, @01:57AM   Printer-friendly
from the that's-the-polite-form-of-the-response dept.

Phoenix666 writes:

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

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Google Says it Would Have a Two-Word Answer for Feds Seeking Yahoo!-Style Email Backdoor | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 49 comments | Search Discussion
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: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Friday October 07 2016, @02:23AM

    by Knowledge Troll (5948) on Friday October 07 2016, @02:23AM (#411295) Homepage Journal

    I'm disappointed that out of all the two word combinations they selected no way. I'd like to see any of the following:

    • Fuck you
    • Fuck no
    • Fuck yourself
    • Fuck that
    • Get Bent
    • Blow me

    Anyone else think of a better two word response?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 5, Touché) by coolgopher on Friday October 07 2016, @02:31AM

    by coolgopher (1157) on Friday October 07 2016, @02:31AM (#411302)

    Anyone else think of a better two word response?

    "Already done" ? Might be the honest one...

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by el_oscuro on Friday October 07 2016, @03:29AM

      by el_oscuro (1711) on Friday October 07 2016, @03:29AM (#411323)

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUZgPfdkWis [youtube.com]

      --
      SoylentNews is Bacon! [nueskes.com]

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @06:48AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @06:48AM (#411379)

        This feels appropriate in more ways than one!

    • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday October 07 2016, @09:51AM

      by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Friday October 07 2016, @09:51AM (#411410) Homepage
      As an email industry insider (I work for Dovecot, we power the vast majority of the world's email (IMAP/POP) servers[1], so I know what features are being demanded, by whom, and why), google already have a lawful interception facility.

      And the only difference between lawful interception and a backdoor is whether a google hand signs off on the status change of whether to enable sniffing for an indivual or not, there's no technological difference at all.

      [1] http://openemailsurvey.org/ (disclosure - we, Dovecot, perform that survey, but it's done 100% fairly, trust us!)
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @04:18AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @04:18AM (#411341)

    I think "no way" is more appropriate, because it conveys the surprise and possible amusement of the irony that such a backdoor would be a tiny drop in the ocean of data they already let the government have and probably already exists anyway.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @05:11AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @05:11AM (#411346)

    I think 2 words is far too restrictive for the correct and obvious response, "How about you eat an entire bag of dicks?"

  • (Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Friday October 07 2016, @05:48AM

    by Capt. Obvious (6089) on Friday October 07 2016, @05:48AM (#411355)

    There are three far more likely responses from Google. "Already Done", "How Much" or "Yes Sir"

  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @06:50AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @06:50AM (#411381)

    I have always liked "Cowa Bunga!"

  • (Score: 2) by Bot on Friday October 07 2016, @09:19AM

    by Bot (3902) on Friday October 07 2016, @09:19AM (#411406) Journal

    I vote for "Uwot m8?"

    Why those guys whose mail system logo is basically a masonic apron share stuff with lowly feds? What is this world coming to, no respect for higher authorities?

    --
    Account abandoned.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @12:43PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @12:43PM (#411452)

    Zu Befehl!