rasterizer
Re:How upgrading to Google Apps for Business killed my company's email...
on Monday July 08, 2013 @04:32AM (#6005754)
So the upgrade took a few hours to complete and it didn't happen instantly in defiance to the laws of physics. Next time play it safe and upgrade during the weekend.
The post is dated May 27, is Google planning to announce a new feature for Apps this week and this is some sort of a preemptive PR attack?
Re:NSA slides explain the PRISM data-collection program
on Sunday June 30, 2013 @08:25AM (#5965537)
You want me to speculate about arrow direction?! alright, generally speaking the access is not "direct" because the "boxes" act as buffers. I can't say if they "pull" the boxes or they just serve subpoenas to them and get the data pushed back.
Re:NSA slides explain the PRISM data-collection program
on Saturday June 29, 2013 @10:00PM (#5964414)
Obviously there is plenty of room for speculation but what seems to emerge, at least as I see it, is that even the worst case scenario doesn't entail actual "direct access".
In the case of activity timestamps (which I'm sure legally don't get the same protection as content) they would be sent by the companies to the FBI/NSA not have their actual servers monitored by them.
Re:NSA slides explain the PRISM data-collection program
on Saturday June 29, 2013 @09:24PM (#5964354)
Interesting. Some insight, some contradiction and confusion especially when compared to earlier reportings on the first slides:
- The "direct access" claim is replaced with "FBI interception unit" which is "government equipment on private company property to retrieve matching information from a participating company" that detail isn't mentioned in slides but provided in annotations.
- The case format notation points to "real-time notification" when a target logs in or sends emails/IM/VOIP etc:
"Depending on the provider, the NSA may receive live notifications when a target logs on or sends an e-mail, or may monitor a voice, text or voice chat as it happens (noted on the first slide as "Surveillance").
The "Depending on the provider" bit is interesting as it suggests that there are potentially different levels of "participation".
- "On April 5, according to this slide, there were 117,675 active surveillance targets in PRISM's counterterrorism database." can a FISA order cover a target across service providers or each provider requires its own order? the number of targets could dramatically be revises downwards depending on that.
Re:Google Launches Cloud Playground, A Browser Environment For Trying ...
on Monday June 24, 2013 @02:29PM (#5934750)
HN is seemingly so oversaturated with NSA items that they're seeping into all submissions regardless:
I'll assume you are not trolling and just misinformed so I'll address your 'elephants':
- Google already said that there are no "links": http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2013/jun/19/google...
- Statistical analysis of Google closures shows that they deprecate products at below industry pace, so your impression about that is also wrong: http://www.gwern.net/Google%20shutdowns
Re:An Apology to my European IT Team
on Monday June 24, 2013 @12:56AM (#5931075)
According to Google "NSA powers" in their case are restricted to FISA orders, so I'm not sure how a random worker at a government contractor can produce these. Snowden was a sysadmin for a contractor and that is how he got his hands on their internal documents.
Is no one else paying attention to anything beyond the "slides" in this story?!
Re:Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom...
on Sunday June 23, 2013 @05:36PM (#5929598)
That's stupid. Particularly how you list 'plentiful storage' as a drawback, if that's the case then it's plainly an issue of law as it pits privacy against usability.
Also Gmail is the only webmail that offers server-to-server encryption: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57590389-38/how-web-mail-p...
And as mentioned in another comment you can delete messages over IMAP.
So in the future make sure you do some research as to avoid spreading false information.
Re:Google handed over years of e-mails belonging to WikiLeaks chatroom...
on Sunday June 23, 2013 @04:34PM (#5929320)
Already thoroughly discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5920530 and here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5921005
Re:On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea
on Friday June 21, 2013 @04:56PM (#5920944)
They didn't say they keep deleted mail, could be boilerplate warrant language.
Re:On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea
on Friday June 21, 2013 @04:41PM (#5920856)
Abit harsh on Google. I mean what are they to do?
Re:Google challenges U.S. gag order, citing First Amendment
on Tuesday June 18, 2013 @04:50PM (#5901986)
Re:Google challenges U.S. gag order, citing First Amendment
on Tuesday June 18, 2013 @04:49PM (#5901975)
They would want to publish the scope of the FISA requests.
The other companies aren't going this far and I think they deserve a credit for what they're doing.
And I disagree with commend you link to, the solution isn't limiting data collection, sure it makes you a target but more data equals a better product. It's an issue of government overreach not engineering decisions.
Re:Google challenges U.S. gag order, citing First Amendment
on Tuesday June 18, 2013 @04:27PM (#5901836)
Again with the 'carefully worded denials' - the denials were similar because they were accused of the same thing, which is allowing "direct access".
The most worrisome and misunderstood part of these reports is the "direct access" bit: can the government arbitrarily query company servers? their denials address that, they clearly say that is not the case, instead they sftp the data after being served with court orders or warrants and yes also the secretive FISA requests.
So by revealing the number of FISA requests they receive and their scope they hope to clear this "direct access" mess. As even FISA orders are much more acceptable than wholesale access.
As for the development being reported here: I think it has merit seeing how this clearly falls under the first amendment, but I'd like a lawyer to chip in.
[edit: clarity]
Offline Disk Import for Google Cloud Storage - ship your HDDs to Google
Making sense of the confusing Supreme Court DNA patent ruling
Re:With Prism Cooperation, Tech Giants Look Weak
on Monday June 17, 2013 @02:37PM (#5895027)
You are conflating and confusing things.
Re:Dear Mozilla, stop watching me
on Sunday June 16, 2013 @04:35PM (#5889837)
I disagree. Opt-out is the right approach, if you are using someone else's product you should assume you're interactions with it are being measured.
It's beyond quid pro quo, it's how software improves and evolves, and it is to the benefit of everyone: you, other users, vendor.
Re:Dear Mozilla, stop watching me
on Sunday June 16, 2013 @02:09PM (#5889273)
You are overreacting, not to mention reaching the wrong conclusions from these NSA reports. The problem isn't measurement, that is a cornerstone of engineering (and of everything else really), the problem is government overreach.
It's almost as insane as that piece in Slate claiming that Hadoop is evil because it enabled large scale data analysis (http://www.salon.com/2013/06/14/netflix_facebook_and_the_nsa...). Technology is not the issue.
This newly found aversion to tracking and measurement is a stupid knee-jerk reaction to the news.
Re:Poll: What Language would/do you use to build a web application
on Friday June 14, 2013 @04:13PM (#5882209)
Go. Add it :)
Re:Just noticed, Chrome Incognito warned us about secret agent spying
on Friday June 14, 2013 @11:09AM (#5880329)
Also "People standing behind you".
Microsoft Said To Give Zero Day Exploits To US Government Before It Patches Them
Re:PRISM fears give private search engine DuckDuckGo its best week ever
on Thursday June 13, 2013 @05:40PM (#5876779)
At least you can't blame them for missing a PR opportunity: https://plus.google.com/+JeffJarvis/posts/5X7nHcjijsC
Re:How fucked is SSL?
on Wednesday June 12, 2013 @12:05AM (#5866484)
Google uses Perfect Forward Secrecy: http://googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.com/2011/11/protecting-...
Re:Google’s Real Secret Spy Program? Secure FTP
on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @07:05PM (#5865310)
I assume they need to know what data to send; the "system" might refer to the database with FISA orders.
Re:Google’s Real Secret Spy Program? Secure FTP
on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @06:58PM (#5865280)
How else would one comply with data requests?
Re:Asking the U.S. to allow Google to publish more national security r...
on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @01:55PM (#5863505)
"millions of requests per day"?! the number of FISA requests since 1979 is just short of 34,000: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06/fisa-court-nsa-spyin...
Let's try and keep the speculation to a minimum.
Re:Asking the U.S. to allow Google to publish more national security r...
on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @01:50PM (#5863462)
Assertions in the press that our compliance with these requests gives the U.S. government unfettered access to our users’ data are simply untrue.
Just read the damn thing, it's not long.
Re:Mozilla should move Persona out of the US
on Monday June 10, 2013 @10:40AM (#5854680)
You can't know that.
Canada has it: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6870/125/
Sweden has it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5852497 http://peterfleischer.blogspot.se/2007/05/sweden-and-governm...
Re:Mozilla should move Persona out of the US
on Monday June 10, 2013 @10:31AM (#5854607)
If you think that the US is the only country with overreaching intelligence bodies then you're deluded.