4 ms·
Access is access. Regardless of whether it's enabled by real time interception, SSH, remote desktop, FTP, a rich web app UI, or snail-mail based optical disk ex
by qwerty_asdf 13y ago
Access is access. Regardless of whether it's enabled by real time interception, SSH, remote desktop, FTP, a rich web app UI, or snail-mail based optical disk exchanges.
And besides, whatever PRISM may or may not be, it's pretty clear MUSCULAR would fill in any gaps, and dispel your claim of mere theories, in favor of reality.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6641378 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6641378
NSA infiltrates links to Yahoo, Google data centers worldwide (washingtonpost.com)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-infiltrates-links-to-yahoo-google-data-centers-worldwide-snowden-documents-say/2013/10/30/e51d661e-4166-11e3-8b74-d89d714ca4dd_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-in...
I mean, you gave the top comment on that thread, after all.
- tptacek 13y agoNow you're changing your story. PRISM was widely reported not to provide automated/unauthorized access to data; it is now believed to be a submission/management system for FISA requests, which are reviewed by providers before the providers own personnel locate the data. The Guardian silently (to their shame) retracted the claims that PRISM was anything more than that. Meanwhile, illegal direct access to intra-provider communications can be cured by improving operational security at providers, which is exactly what the story we're commenting on is an instance of. No, I don't think your argument is valid.
- MisterWebz 13y agoIIRC, they were/are pulling tons of data with just a single FISA request. While the system you described is certainly much better than having a backdoor installed, I'm not sure whether that'll protect your data from being "accidentally" collected.