Re:Snowden: Hack of an NSA server is not unprecedented, publ...
by opaque on Tuesday August 16, 2016 @09:06AM
(#12297184)
Care to elaborate?
TAO (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tailored_Access_Operations)
seems fine to me.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Snowden: Hack of an NSA server is not unprecedented, publ...
by irishcoffee on Tuesday August 16, 2016 @10:02AM
(#12297507)
TAO is composed of much, much more than "hackers". To give him the benefit of the doubt, his comment shows willful ignorance of this fact.
Re:Snowden: Hack of an NSA server is not unprecedented, publ...
by Someone1234 on Tuesday August 16, 2016 @10:15AM
(#12297572)
No it doesn't.
To use an analogy this is like someone saying the "US Army" in reference to infantrymen specifically and then someone, such as yourself, coming along throwing their hands up and saying "The US Army is composed of much more than just 'infantrymen,' this comment shows willful ignorance of that fact."
We can all read the Wikipedia article on the TAO[0]. You aren't fooling anyone by acting like you know more than is publically available, and trying to correct someone who provably worked for the NSA seems at best arrogant, at worst ridiculous.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tailored_Access_Operations
Re:Snowden: Hack of an NSA server is not unprecedented, publ...
by ceejayoz on Tuesday August 16, 2016 @11:05AM
(#12297920)
C'mon, it's Twitter, where you only have 140 characters. He's not going to type out "NSA's hackers (generally part of the group known as Tailored Access Operations, but there are some in other groups)" just so you can't be pedantic.