8 ms·

the same way I feel much comfortable using Yandex in united states. Google and Facebook feed their data to NSA.

by honkler 4y ago

riku_iki 4y ago
Any proof of that?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Snowden's leaks are not enough for you?
  - riku_iki 4y ago
    What proof Snowden provided about Google and FB feeding data to NSA exactly?
    - waffleiron 4y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM#The_slides https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM#The_slides
      - riku_iki 4y ago
        There is no clarity on these slides if collection happened proactively or it was a way to transfer information for FISA warrants.
        waffleiron 4y ago
        You asked for proof of the following: > Google and Facebook feed their data to NSA. We know that at least some companies were ordered to handover all data, continuously [1]. edit: I think we have enough evidence that I would assume that it's valid for the other companies on the slides, and if it's not true you'll have to provide some proof of that. edit 2: [2] > It searches that database and lets them listen to the calls or read the emails of everything that the NSA has stored, or look at the browsing histories or Google search terms that you've entered, and it also alerts them to any further activity that people connected to that email address or that IP address do in the future." > Greenwald explained that while there are "legal constraints" on surveillance that require approval by the FISA court, these programs still allow analysts to search through data with little court approval or supervision. > "There are legal constraints for how you can spy on Americans," Greenwald said. "You can't target them without going to the FISA court. But these systems allow analysts to listen to whatever emails they want, whatever telephone calls, browsing histories, Microsoft Word documents." > "And it's all done with no need to go to a court, with no need to even get supervisor approval on the part of the analyst," he added. edit 3: > Equally unusual is the way the NSA extracts what it wants, according to the document: “Collection directly from the servers of these U.S. Service Providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.” [3] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-reco... [2] https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/07/glenn-greenwald-low-level-nsa-analysts-have-powerful-and-invasive-search-tool/ https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/07/glenn-greenwal... [3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligenc...
        riku_iki 4y ago
        You brought two links on: - phone calls surveillance in Venezuella: no Google no FB mentioned - plain words of some reporter without any evidence provided, no Google no FB mentioned
        waffleiron 4y ago
        Weird how there is limited hard evidence of a secret, illegal government program... It's a lot more than I've seen than evidence for the claims of Yandex proactively sharing data with the Russian government. Also where do you see Venezuela?
        riku_iki 4y ago
        So, no proof, no evidence. Ok. > It's a lot more than I've seen than evidence for the claims of Yandex proactively sharing data with the Russian government. The difference is that checks and balances are much stronger in US, and such activities can be successfully investigated and government sued. As an example, your verizon case was successfully challenged: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klayman_v._Obama https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klayman_v._Obama In Russia, court system works in manual mode from Kremlin. > Also where do you see Venezuela? I misread, you are right.
        waffleiron 4y ago
        > The difference is that checks and balances are much stronger in US, You say that after we were talking about the NSA literally spying on US citizens, and without any proof? C'mon, are you really going to badger me about not having having the exact "hard evidence", and not even read my sources or provide ANY evidence yourself. edit: Yes, it got challenged AFTER needing to be leaked by a whistleblower that still can't return to his home.
        riku_iki 4y ago
        > Yes, it got challenged AFTER needing to be leaked by a whistleblower that still can't return to his home. Good chance is that whistleblowing would be protected in this specific case.
      - dekhn 4y ago
        You misunderstand. The NSA went out of their way to tap Google's lines outside of the US, which made the leadership at Google furious. It accelerated the work to encrypt international fiber (I think many people were really bothered by the tcpdump of a bigtable RPC containing a user ID). I was at a conference shortly after an saw a SVP rip an NSA rep to pieces. If Google is doing anything that is required of them legally as a US corp, I don't have a problem with that.
        waffleiron 4y ago
        That's what Google claims, however the leaked slides claimed "direct access". edit: Does it really matter if they setup an FTP server instead of direct access, when we know a request can literally ask for "all" data (see Verizon). > When required to comply with these requests, we deliver that information to the US government — generally through secure FTP transfers and in person," Google spokesman Chris Gaither told Wired, among other news outlets. [1] [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/googles-ftp-nsa-really-better-direct-access/314347/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/googl...
        dekhn 4y ago
        right, you're discussing the mechanism by which Google shares information with the US government- when required by law. These systems don't give access to "all" data. Telephone companies are different- AT&T had a long standing, off the books agreement with US intelligence agencies (see Idea Factory for a fact-based discussion of what AT&T did) to share large amounts of information illegally.

the same way I feel much comfortable using Yandex in united states. Google and Facebook feed their data to NSA.

riku_iki 4y ago

Any proof of that?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Snowden's leaks are not enough for you?
- riku_iki 4y ago
  What proof Snowden provided about Google and FB feeding data to NSA exactly?
  - waffleiron 4y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM#The_slides https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM#The_slides
    - riku_iki 4y ago
      There is no clarity on these slides if collection happened proactively or it was a way to transfer information for FISA warrants.
      - waffleiron 4y ago
        You asked for proof of the following: > Google and Facebook feed their data to NSA. We know that at least some companies were ordered to handover all data, continuously [1]. edit: I think we have enough evidence that I would assume that it's valid for the other companies on the slides, and if it's not true you'll have to provide some proof of that. edit 2: [2] > It searches that database and lets them listen to the calls or read the emails of everything that the NSA has stored, or look at the browsing histories or Google search terms that you've entered, and it also alerts them to any further activity that people connected to that email address or that IP address do in the future." > Greenwald explained that while there are "legal constraints" on surveillance that require approval by the FISA court, these programs still allow analysts to search through data with little court approval or supervision. > "There are legal constraints for how you can spy on Americans," Greenwald said. "You can't target them without going to the FISA court. But these systems allow analysts to listen to whatever emails they want, whatever telephone calls, browsing histories, Microsoft Word documents." > "And it's all done with no need to go to a court, with no need to even get supervisor approval on the part of the analyst," he added. edit 3: > Equally unusual is the way the NSA extracts what it wants, according to the document: “Collection directly from the servers of these U.S. Service Providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.” [3] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-reco... [2] https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/07/glenn-greenwald-low-level-nsa-analysts-have-powerful-and-invasive-search-tool/ https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/07/glenn-greenwal... [3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligenc...
        riku_iki 4y ago
        You brought two links on: - phone calls surveillance in Venezuella: no Google no FB mentioned - plain words of some reporter without any evidence provided, no Google no FB mentioned
        waffleiron 4y ago
        Weird how there is limited hard evidence of a secret, illegal government program... It's a lot more than I've seen than evidence for the claims of Yandex proactively sharing data with the Russian government. Also where do you see Venezuela?
        riku_iki 4y ago
        So, no proof, no evidence. Ok. > It's a lot more than I've seen than evidence for the claims of Yandex proactively sharing data with the Russian government. The difference is that checks and balances are much stronger in US, and such activities can be successfully investigated and government sued. As an example, your verizon case was successfully challenged: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klayman_v._Obama https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klayman_v._Obama In Russia, court system works in manual mode from Kremlin. > Also where do you see Venezuela? I misread, you are right.
        waffleiron 4y ago
        > The difference is that checks and balances are much stronger in US, You say that after we were talking about the NSA literally spying on US citizens, and without any proof? C'mon, are you really going to badger me about not having having the exact "hard evidence", and not even read my sources or provide ANY evidence yourself. edit: Yes, it got challenged AFTER needing to be leaked by a whistleblower that still can't return to his home.
        riku_iki 4y ago
        > Yes, it got challenged AFTER needing to be leaked by a whistleblower that still can't return to his home. Good chance is that whistleblowing would be protected in this specific case.
    - dekhn 4y ago
      You misunderstand. The NSA went out of their way to tap Google's lines outside of the US, which made the leadership at Google furious. It accelerated the work to encrypt international fiber (I think many people were really bothered by the tcpdump of a bigtable RPC containing a user ID). I was at a conference shortly after an saw a SVP rip an NSA rep to pieces. If Google is doing anything that is required of them legally as a US corp, I don't have a problem with that.
      - waffleiron 4y ago
        That's what Google claims, however the leaked slides claimed "direct access". edit: Does it really matter if they setup an FTP server instead of direct access, when we know a request can literally ask for "all" data (see Verizon). > When required to comply with these requests, we deliver that information to the US government — generally through secure FTP transfers and in person," Google spokesman Chris Gaither told Wired, among other news outlets. [1] [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/googles-ftp-nsa-really-better-direct-access/314347/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/googl...
        dekhn 4y ago
        right, you're discussing the mechanism by which Google shares information with the US government- when required by law. These systems don't give access to "all" data. Telephone companies are different- AT&T had a long standing, off the books agreement with US intelligence agencies (see Idea Factory for a fact-based discussion of what AT&T did) to share large amounts of information illegally.