This is the same megaupload where FBI agents took part in a raid on a house in a non-US country? http://www.listener.co.nz/commentary/the-internaut/kim-dotcom-

This is the same megaupload where FBI agents took part in a raid on a house in a non-US country? http://www.listener.co.nz/commentary/the-internaut/kim-dotcom-megaupload-new-zealand-timeline/ http://www.listener.co.nz/commentary/the-internaut/kim-dotco... As I said in a response on our forum, if the stakes are high enough, no datacentre in the world is safe. Bruce Schneier recommends protecting against terrorist attacks by improving emergency response capabilities - with the side benefit that your measures also help against natural disasters: https://www.schneier.com/essay-292.html https://www.schneier.com/essay-292.html (edit: that's not a great version of his point actually, https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/09/katrina_and_sec.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/09/katrina_and_s... is more on point) Similarly, our main focus for security is protecting against all forms of attackers, including common theft or misplacement of our servers. We consider that to be more valuable for the overall security of our users (including security against denial of service) than fighting an impossible fight. FACT: if the three letter agencies in the USA want your data desperately enough, they will get it. With FastMail, they have a legal way to obtain it which is quite a lot of effort, but (hopefully) less expensive to them than taking our servers offline. What they can't do, by Australian law, is require our cooperation in blanket surveillance on all our users.