4 ms·
The usual list of security services, BND etc., not sure why adding lists of acronyms is important to you, when "security services" captures the meaning quite w
by diffeomorphism 7y ago
The usual list of security services, BND etc., not sure why adding lists of acronyms is important to you, when "security services" captures the meaning quite well.
> "especially"
That refers to news and new laws in recent years, which extended their surveillance capabilities. Also, it is relevant because Germany both has relative strong data protection against non-state actors, but also quite capable intelligence agencies.
That said, I think arguing about state actors is the wrong threat model for this discussion.
- tannhaeuser 7y ago> I think arguing about state actors is the wrong threat model for this discussion My post was just a rebuttal to GP's framing the discussion around vague accusations towards state actors. > security services captures the meaning quite well It really doesn't. The various secret services (internal, external, military) are reporting to parliament (not the whole of it, just a close circle/committee nevertheless having received trust by being elected), and their heads are nominated by the government. It's of course entirely within your right to criticize their existence or operations, but yielding power to private monopolies based in another country without any public control whatsover and potential ties to foreign secret services (we don't really know) can't possibly solve whatever problem you're on to, and shouldn't be justified on such vague arguments.