onecommentonly

6 ms·

1.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
They aren't telling, and that may be telling on itself. Court approval apparently is needed but then Verizon hands all metadata every day, based on a court approval.
2.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
PDF link of the description http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Facts%20on%20the%20Collec...
3.
NSA Chief describes what PRISM is(businessinsider.com)
63 points by onecommentonly 13y ago|21 comments
4.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
Expected, unless the leaked doc said "ignore court order" or "kill the Presi..." leaking is illegal. The person that leaked this knew that he /she would be prosecuted, if... Let's hope that he took care not to
5.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
True, if not for this http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2013/jun/06/veri... The order, signed by Judge Roger Vinson, compels Verizon to produce to the NSA electronic copies of "all c
6.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
Wow! Just waiting for "directly doesn't mean direct access" excuse. He has posted the slide, and considering what happened with Verizon I am likely to believe that Google, Facebook and "we care about your privacy" M
7.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
If Google says that Takeout has all your information stored on Google, and if NSA wants everything for Person X, why isn't this ideal?
8.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
giving preferential treatment to the places frequented by our social networking friends, the places we mention in our emails, the sites we look up on the search engine. This all of the sudden looks like a nightmare to me, post NSA Prism.
9.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
To answer precisely: I have given more than $50 each to both ACLU and EFF in the past 10 years.
10.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
You are assuming I didn't write that $50 check.
11.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
It's a disgrace. Not to pick on any particular person, considering that Silicon Valley has dozens of billionaires and thousands of filthy rich people, but Sean Parker got lucky with Facebook and spent like $12.5m in a wedding (includin
12.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
Google has way more data from a million little things we online than it should have. The government can easily get it, it can leak, get hacked etc. If the data isn't archived, no one can ask for it. Simple as that.
13.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
"If they were servicing extremely-broad FISAs like Verizon's "send us all your phone metadata" then the distinction would be academic, but both Google and the NYT seem clear that Google hasn't accepted anything on
14.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
>> the fact that we do stand up for individual users' privacy and protection, for their right to have a personal life which is not ever shared with other people without their consent, even when governments come knocking at our d
15.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
Verizon said what they could: we have to comply with the orders when we get them. Nothing weaselly, maybe because we read the judge's order. Why should we trust the safety of any information on our searches, emails, location data, ch
16.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
Either way, if Google has troves of info of everything you do online, NSA will get it. One way or another, front door, back door, in-direct access and what not
17.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
The Guardian suggested that more leaks are going to be published...
18.
by onecommentonly 13y ago
A few thoughts: It's unlikely that he cannot deny or admit giving data to NSA /FBI, because he both admitted and denied, albeit with weasel words. No "backdoor" and "no direct access" but maybe from the front d