> But seriously, this laptop idiot was planning to blow up a building, or something equally as bad, but wasn’t smart enough or flush enough to pop for the $39.9

> But seriously, this laptop idiot was planning to blow up a building, or something equally as bad, but wasn’t smart enough or flush enough to pop for the $39.99 to step up to the maximum-strength encryption? Says the developer who could have been social engineered to give away what he had done by being rushed in a way that others would perhaps call 'not smart enough'. And where does the skill set of knowing about encryption come close to what someone needs to know in order to 'blow up a building'? Why would you expect that someone understands the difference or the risk? Or should? After all it's risky to begin with what they are doing. This is just another and different risk. Now the question is if you were the NSA and of course I have no clue how they operate but maybe it would have made more sense to send the local police to a house to deliver the message AND the other part 'call this number' etc. And who knows how that could have been fake for that matter (it all hinged on calling 411 as being definitive and/or someone not intercepting a legit call). Sure someone could social engineer the local police to show up (I would think that would be easy for someone who knows how they operate or with whoever is on shift at that time). Also the coffee cup is strange. Secretive agency but they send a gift as a thank you with their name so you have some kind of proof that allows you to detail how they operate and that they did this? Would make more sense that they got you to agree to not reveal they had requested the info not that they gave you some kind of bragging rights and story.