3 ms·
This is interesting in how vehemently all the companies are denying everything. I am pretty clueless about how the feds work so I'll ask: is it possible they wo
by crunchlibrarian 8y ago
This is interesting in how vehemently all the companies are denying everything. I am pretty clueless about how the feds work so I'll ask: is it possible they would be violating secrecy laws or leaking classified info if they acknowledge this really happened? Could they already be under NDAs or whatever the equivalent is in the national security world?
Or is it simply a matter of their shareholders having lofty expectations about tapping the biggest market in the world (China) and saying anything that angers China is the worst thing you could possibly do from a PR perspective?
- Eridrus 8y agoI don't think there needs to be a conspiracy for vehement denials to make sense. Security is a hugely important reputational good for both Apple & AWS.
- ISL 8y agoThat reputation would be sullied substantially if the BusinessWeek article is correct, and the companies' first public statements state otherwise.
- SyneRyder 8y agoThe article actually says that some of the information is classified: "The sources were granted anonymity because of the sensitive, and in some cases classified, nature of the information."
- ectospheno 8y agoThat people who made promises not to divulge information continue doing so on a regular basis is the disturbing part for me. If you make an agreement then stick with it. If you no longer can then quit.
- MaupitiBlue 8y agoYes and no. Often, and I think in this situation, the government wants the story out, but not officially, so certain people are told to leak.
- ahi 8y agoThe more likely answer is that the PR department isn't being told the truth by corporate security. Security clearances trump corporate hierarchy.
- 21 8y agoThis would have gone up to CEO level. If anybody blocks this, is senior management.