4 ms·

> No privacy interest in information held by third parties -> sending third-party subpoenas instead of directly tapping companies' networks really? https://pl

> No privacy interest in information held by third parties -> sending third-party subpoenas instead of directly tapping companies' networks really? https://plus.google.com/+MikeHearn/posts/LW1DXJ2BK8k https://plus.google.com/+MikeHearn/posts/LW1DXJ2BK8k

rayiner 11y ago
If you follow the links in the article: > We do not know exactly how the NSA and GCHQ intercept the data, other than it happens on British territory.
- throwawayaway 11y ago
  Please give me the url that contains that text string in the body, because I can't find it. I followed those links. I did find this though(directly tapping companies networks in the past): In 2011, when the FISC learned that the NSA was using similar methods to collect and analyze data streams — on a much smaller scale — from cables on U.S. territory, Judge John D. Bates ruled that the program was illegal under FISA and inconsistent with the requirements of the Fourth Amendment. [0] [0] 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...
  - rayiner 11y ago
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/04/how-we-know-the-nsa-had-access-to-internal-google-and-yahoo-cloud-data http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/04...
    - throwawayaway 11y ago
      Thank you. It would appear that collection under the MUSCULAR program relies on UK fibre links. Given previous, I'm going to assume they still do routinely collect data between US data centres on fibre links - but that's only an assumption. No supporting evidence. For the same reason, and previous behaviour, given no evidence to the contrary - thinking that they don't is only an assumption too.

rayiner 11y ago

If you follow the links in the article: > We do not know exactly how the NSA and GCHQ intercept the data, other than it happens on British territory.

throwawayaway 11y ago
Please give me the url that contains that text string in the body, because I can't find it. I followed those links. I did find this though(directly tapping companies networks in the past): In 2011, when the FISC learned that the NSA was using similar methods to collect and analyze data streams — on a much smaller scale — from cables on U.S. territory, Judge John D. Bates ruled that the program was illegal under FISA and inconsistent with the requirements of the Fourth Amendment. [0] [0] 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...
- rayiner 11y ago
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/04/how-we-know-the-nsa-had-access-to-internal-google-and-yahoo-cloud-data http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/04...
  - throwawayaway 11y ago
    Thank you. It would appear that collection under the MUSCULAR program relies on UK fibre links. Given previous, I'm going to assume they still do routinely collect data between US data centres on fibre links - but that's only an assumption. No supporting evidence. For the same reason, and previous behaviour, given no evidence to the contrary - thinking that they don't is only an assumption too.