9 ms·
'Give' is harsh if you understand the operational constraints people on government salaries and budgets had to work under. USGAs collected/acquired/amassed rath
by nthcolumn 10y ago
'Give' is harsh if you understand the operational constraints people on government salaries and budgets had to work under. USGAs collected/acquired/amassed rather than developed these and packaged them into a field kit - they were in the dark domain (for $$$), then meh punkery. Sure we'd all love to be chillin' with JMac shootin' up the neighbors porch. Not just NSA either... just sayin'. Even GCHQ have warez :O TSB are the curly, moe and larry of this sorry affair. they got lucky, now they gonna bees unlucky lol!
- jacquesm 10y agoSo, if the NSA becomes aware of an exploit that they are able to procure for $ and they really have the security of the United States at heart don't you think the proper course of action would be to alert the vendor rather than to leave their own people just as wide open to attack as their enemies? I could understand them hoarding their own research but this essentially confirms that the NSA doesn't care about the security of the home country as much as they care about being able to infiltrate elsewhere and to me that seems to be a badly chosen priority. After all they can't know for sure who also has access to that vulnerability.
- azernik 10y agoIn this circumstance, the NSA's two missions come into conflict - to spy on foreign targets, and to protect American targets. From the perspective of that institutional mission, it's not clear which motive should win out.
- nthcolumn 10y agoDo you really think that Microsoft are unaware of the limburger that lurks within their codebase to allow subtee, image hijinx, and the rest? cpls and pifs were in windows 3.1!