4 ms·

Collaborated? Not so much. Each company was issued a gag order. Not all of these companies can be like Lavabit and spit it back in big government's face. I th

by l33tbro 13y ago

Collaborated? Not so much. Each company was issued a gag order. Not all of these companies can be like Lavabit and spit it back in big government's face. I think this is an awesome development.

jnbiche 13y ago
>Not all of these companies can be like Lavabit and spit it back in big government's face. Sure they could. In fact, these companies are in a much better position than Lavabit to spit it back in big government's face...financially, legally, and politically. But I agree that this is a positive development.
- ChrisAntaki 13y ago
  > these companies are in a much better position than Lavabit to spit it back in big government's face...financially, legally, and politically. Here's an example of Yahoo's fight against PRISM. http://mashable.com/2013/06/14/yahoo-fought-prism-lost/ http://mashable.com/2013/06/14/yahoo-fought-prism-lost/
vidarh 13y ago
None of them were issues with gag orders that would have prevented them from taking the actions they are now taking in asking for reforms.
nate_meurer 13y ago
Yes, collaborated. Microsoft provides the NSA with holes in its OS (and presumably other SW) long before it provides us with patches.
- CWuestefeld 13y ago
  This is a recurring talking point, but it's not entirely accurate. Microsoft provides early information about known weaknesses, even before fixes are available, to MANY large customers, one of whom is the US government. This is done so that those customers can mitigate the risks ASAP, before the zero-day hackers can leverage the weakness. So while your statement is correct, it implies a relationship that doesn't actually exist.
  - nate_meurer 13y ago
    Are you saying that Microsoft provides no information to the NSA that it doesn't also provide to its other customers? If so, I'd love to see your source. In response to the Bloomberg story that first described this situation, Microsoft's spokesman made no attempt to deny the specific accusation that the U.S. government has special access to MS exploits.

by l33tbro 13y ago

Collaborated? Not so much. Each company was issued a gag order. Not all of these companies can be like Lavabit and spit it back in big government's face. I think this is an awesome development.

jnbiche 13y ago

>Not all of these companies can be like Lavabit and spit it back in big government's face. Sure they could. In fact, these companies are in a much better position than Lavabit to spit it back in big government's face...financially, legally, and politically. But I agree that this is a positive development.

ChrisAntaki 13y ago
> these companies are in a much better position than Lavabit to spit it back in big government's face...financially, legally, and politically. Here's an example of Yahoo's fight against PRISM. http://mashable.com/2013/06/14/yahoo-fought-prism-lost/ http://mashable.com/2013/06/14/yahoo-fought-prism-lost/

vidarh 13y ago

None of them were issues with gag orders that would have prevented them from taking the actions they are now taking in asking for reforms.

nate_meurer 13y ago

Yes, collaborated. Microsoft provides the NSA with holes in its OS (and presumably other SW) long before it provides us with patches.

CWuestefeld 13y ago
This is a recurring talking point, but it's not entirely accurate. Microsoft provides early information about known weaknesses, even before fixes are available, to MANY large customers, one of whom is the US government. This is done so that those customers can mitigate the risks ASAP, before the zero-day hackers can leverage the weakness. So while your statement is correct, it implies a relationship that doesn't actually exist.
- nate_meurer 13y ago
  Are you saying that Microsoft provides no information to the NSA that it doesn't also provide to its other customers? If so, I'd love to see your source. In response to the Bloomberg story that first described this situation, Microsoft's spokesman made no attempt to deny the specific accusation that the U.S. government has special access to MS exploits.