7 ms·

> As soon as it lets a major secret out, even just once, it's game over, and no-one will ever trust a secret to Google again. Just out of curiosity, how would

by r0h1n 13y ago

> As soon as it lets a major secret out, even just once, it's game over, and no-one will ever trust a secret to Google again. Just out of curiosity, how would we know even if a secret was let out to, say, the NSA or US Govt? Because (a) Google isn't allowed to legally acknowledge it and (b) US LEOs will use "parallel construction" to obscure the fact that they obtained such secret information. Moreover, if you're not a US citizen, even lesser chances of ever coming to know what information is being handed over/intercepted by the US Govt. If Presidents of countries can be targeted for surveillance, no reason a common person cannot. Please note, I am not saying Google was specifically guilty of passing on info to the NSA in these cases, but just that, even if they were forced to, there's no way the affected users would come to know. Link: http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/02/20291489-snowden-leak-journalist-nsa-spied-on-emails-of-brazil-and-mexico-presidents http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/02/20291489-snowd...

educating 13y ago
> Just out of curiosity, how would we know even if a secret was let out to, say, the NSA And the smartest thing to do, whether you are the NSA or some other foreign government or any entity that holds that information, is to keep quiet about it. The less others know that you know something, the more power you have. For that reason, it is unlikely that we will see these powers used by the NSA, or other government. It is in their best interest to hold on to that data as secretly as possible and as restrictively as possible, to avoid the chance of others getting a hold of the data. Snowden if anything has only given the NSA and all others who hold the information that we do not know about reason to be careful open even mentioning that they have the data, to anyone.
- SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
  > For that reason, it is unlikely that we will see these powers used by the NSA, or other government. The "parallel construction" mentioned above is how they do use these powers while obscuring the use of these secrets.
DominikR 13y ago
Is this Googles failure or are goverments the issue? You cannot prevent that some entity will have private data about you, once you start using mainstream online services whose focus is on mainstream issues like ease of use, portability of data and seamless access from multiple devices. Ensuring that the legal frameworks we live within have strong privacy laws makes more sense to me, because what are the realistic options for any of the mayor tech players right now, when they face a data request from the US goverment other than fighting it in the courts? (which they do) Moving all Google employees to Iceland or some asian country and closing all offices in the US/Western Europe? Closing down any service that collects private data?
- grandalf 13y ago
  Is this Googles failure or are goverments the issue? Both, but any Google executive aware of the abuses could have anonymously tipped off Wikileaks or some other journalist. None did. To explain Google's behavior, classic diffusion of responsibility is all that is necessary. Without any such dissent, it's no surprise that the government abused its power. Snowden is a significant outlier... hiring policies are intended to prevent the hire of the kind of person who would do what he did. The scary thing is that Google's hiring practices achieve the same thing.
  - superuser2 13y ago
    You are unlikely to find anyone at management level who feels so strongly opposed to lawful government surveillance that he'd risk his personal freedom over it.
  - DominikR 13y ago
    "Both, but any Google executive aware of the abuses could have anonymously tipped off Wikileaks or some other journalist. None did." We do not know this and it would be questionable if the risk associated with such an act would be worth it considering that Google can actually use its resources to move things in a legal way. (via courts, lobbying in Washington etc.) "To explain Google's behavior, classic diffusion of responsibility is all that is necessary. Without any such dissent, it's no surprise that the government abused its power." I remember Google protesting (SOPA) and actively pursuing privacy initiatives multiple times in the last years and even pull out of the Chinese market. They release detailled copyright removal reports: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/ http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/ They let you take all your data out of all Google products: http://www.dataliberation.org/takeout-products http://www.dataliberation.org/takeout-products They fight governments data requests in courts (sometimes successfully) and release strongly worded statements when they are allowed to. Suggesting that we ended up with an abusive goverment because Google slavishly followed orders seems unrealistic to me. "Snowden is a significant outlier... hiring policies are intended to prevent the hire of the kind of person who would do what he did. The scary thing is that Google's hiring practices achieve the same thing." Google as a company would arguably not exist anymore, if its developers/admins constantly leaked data. The survival of the NSA does not depend on public trust and a positive public image - Google does.
virtuz 13y ago
I can't remember where I read it, but google does notify you. They can't say the NSA was in your account – they're under a gag order – but they do put a notice on your account so you're aware. I'll try to find a linl.

by r0h1n 13y ago

educating 13y ago

> Just out of curiosity, how would we know even if a secret was let out to, say, the NSA And the smartest thing to do, whether you are the NSA or some other foreign government or any entity that holds that information, is to keep quiet about it. The less others know that you know something, the more power you have. For that reason, it is unlikely that we will see these powers used by the NSA, or other government. It is in their best interest to hold on to that data as secretly as possible and as restrictively as possible, to avoid the chance of others getting a hold of the data. Snowden if anything has only given the NSA and all others who hold the information that we do not know about reason to be careful open even mentioning that they have the data, to anyone.

SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
> For that reason, it is unlikely that we will see these powers used by the NSA, or other government. The "parallel construction" mentioned above is how they do use these powers while obscuring the use of these secrets.

DominikR 13y ago

Is this Googles failure or are goverments the issue? You cannot prevent that some entity will have private data about you, once you start using mainstream online services whose focus is on mainstream issues like ease of use, portability of data and seamless access from multiple devices. Ensuring that the legal frameworks we live within have strong privacy laws makes more sense to me, because what are the realistic options for any of the mayor tech players right now, when they face a data request from the US goverment other than fighting it in the courts? (which they do) Moving all Google employees to Iceland or some asian country and closing all offices in the US/Western Europe? Closing down any service that collects private data?

grandalf 13y ago
Is this Googles failure or are goverments the issue? Both, but any Google executive aware of the abuses could have anonymously tipped off Wikileaks or some other journalist. None did. To explain Google's behavior, classic diffusion of responsibility is all that is necessary. Without any such dissent, it's no surprise that the government abused its power. Snowden is a significant outlier... hiring policies are intended to prevent the hire of the kind of person who would do what he did. The scary thing is that Google's hiring practices achieve the same thing.
- superuser2 13y ago
  You are unlikely to find anyone at management level who feels so strongly opposed to lawful government surveillance that he'd risk his personal freedom over it.
- DominikR 13y ago
  "Both, but any Google executive aware of the abuses could have anonymously tipped off Wikileaks or some other journalist. None did." We do not know this and it would be questionable if the risk associated with such an act would be worth it considering that Google can actually use its resources to move things in a legal way. (via courts, lobbying in Washington etc.) "To explain Google's behavior, classic diffusion of responsibility is all that is necessary. Without any such dissent, it's no surprise that the government abused its power." I remember Google protesting (SOPA) and actively pursuing privacy initiatives multiple times in the last years and even pull out of the Chinese market. They release detailled copyright removal reports: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/ http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/ They let you take all your data out of all Google products: http://www.dataliberation.org/takeout-products http://www.dataliberation.org/takeout-products They fight governments data requests in courts (sometimes successfully) and release strongly worded statements when they are allowed to. Suggesting that we ended up with an abusive goverment because Google slavishly followed orders seems unrealistic to me. "Snowden is a significant outlier... hiring policies are intended to prevent the hire of the kind of person who would do what he did. The scary thing is that Google's hiring practices achieve the same thing." Google as a company would arguably not exist anymore, if its developers/admins constantly leaked data. The survival of the NSA does not depend on public trust and a positive public image - Google does.

virtuz 13y ago

I can't remember where I read it, but google does notify you. They can't say the NSA was in your account – they're under a gag order – but they do put a notice on your account so you're aware. I'll try to find a linl.