3 ms·
You mean being able to do one cancel the ability to do the other ? That makes no sense.
by sametmax 9y ago
You mean being able to do one cancel the ability to do the other ? That makes no sense.
- dogma1138 9y agoNo but we haven't seen mass surveillance in any of the leaks. All we've seen is specifically targeted capabilities with expiration dates. Penetrating air-gapped networks is exactly the capability one would expect from the CIA and its exactly the capability it should have under its mandate.
- sametmax 9y agoYou have a short memory if you don't remember PRISM.
- austinprete 9y agoPRISM was an NSA operation, so it's not clear how that is evidence against his claim that the CIA is more responsible with their cyber offense/surveillance than the NSA. If anything it seems to lend even more credence to his point.
- sametmax 9y agoThat would assume that NSA and CIA do not share informations. So that actions from the first don't benefit the other. It would be foolish. No need to create 2 mass system if your brother has one and you can use it as much as you want.