Re:More encryption means less privacy
by icebraining on Tuesday August 09, 2016 @03:30PM
(#12257156)
You use a weird definition of "mass surveillance" if installing a single tapping device that can snoop on every customer of a company (hundreds of millions, for the large providers) doesn't qualify.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:More encryption means less privacy
by mike_hearn on Wednesday August 10, 2016 @03:47AM
(#12260123)
No, I use the definition that makes sense given the Snowden documents: high capacity cable taps on the backbone itself, not FBI style taps on specific companies after getting the keys via some sort of court process.
Re:More encryption means less privacy
by icebraining on Wednesday August 10, 2016 @04:55AM
(#12260371)
OK, under which of them would you classify NSA's MUSCULAR program?
Re:More encryption means less privacy
by mike_hearn on Wednesday August 10, 2016 @10:24AM
(#12261970)
MUSCULAR is/was a codename for a UK based bulk cable tap.
It's easy to confuse that with the name of a programme to reverse engineer and analyse Google internal traffic (which is presumably now over as all that traffic is encrypted), and I made that mistake myself, but I was corrected on HN no less by someone who is closer to the leaks than I am.
It wasn't something done with the knowledge of Google or Yahoo, as evidenced by the use of reverse engineering of the data formats.