The other thing that gets me is what while they sort of hint that there was no such secret contract, they simultaneously (and rather clearly) state that they ca

The other thing that gets me is what while they sort of hint that there was no such secret contract, they simultaneously (and rather clearly) state that they cannot divulge customer contracts. So, whether or not it's a "secret" contract is moot; they aren't going to release information about any and all contracts. I guess that effectively makes them all secret, but it seems to me that debating whether or not these contracts are or are not secret is a pointless endeavor. We cannot find out the details of them through RSA (they are contractually obligated not to provide this information), so we must instead rely on the leaked documents Snowden has been providing, assuming it's true. And it probably is. I think the real kicker here isn't that RSA was intentionally including maliciously modified algorithms as much as the NSA simply bribed^Woffered them $10 million to, err, "prioritize" its inclusion. This is probably more a lesson on distrusting government offers for lucrative contracts in exchange for nifty tools more than anything, IMO.