3 ms·
If, for the sake of argument, a hostile (to the security of SpiderOak users) government actor was able to arbitrarily manipulate SpiderOak's further statements
by zipwitch 8y ago
If, for the sake of argument, a hostile (to the security of SpiderOak users) government actor was able to arbitrarily manipulate SpiderOak's further statements for purposes of furthering said government agency's goals, what might they have it say and how would those government-sourced statements differ from what we're seeing?
- philipov 8y agoIt doesn't have to be direct manipulation, and it doesn't have to further a government agency's goals. It could be a voluntary self-interested act by SpiderOak, and they should still have trust removed.
- zipwitch 8y agoOh, I agree that they cannot now be trusted. I was just trying to indirectly make the point that from our POV SpiderOak acknowledging they made a mistake, or them deliberately covering for a NSL look identical.