If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Ars Technica)   Google to NSA: Fark You   (arstechnica.com) divider line 83
    More: Spiffy, NSA, Google, private networks, AdWords, Picasa, Google Talk, GCHQ, user agents  
•       •       •

6165 clicks; posted to Geek » on 06 Nov 2013 at 5:22 PM (41 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



83 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-06 05:25:43 PM
Later, Google to NSA: "Sorry about that...we had to say that for PR purposes.  Here's all the stuff you wanted."
 
2013-11-06 05:33:16 PM
Google to NSA: Fark You and come again tomorrow
 
2013-11-06 05:38:33 PM
I'll be surprised if they say it again to the NSA when it demands Google hand over the encryption key.
 
2013-11-06 05:40:10 PM
MUSCULAR.  Jesus, how insecure about your manhood do you have to be to name your surveillance program MUSCULAR?
 
2013-11-06 05:41:57 PM
I'm surprised it took them this long.

I have friends who manage communications between data centers and that's the first thing they do when the get a new long-haul circuit stood up.
 
2013-11-06 05:42:08 PM
OMG WOW
 
2013-11-06 05:44:54 PM

FrancoFile: I'm surprised it took them this long.

I have friends who manage communications between data centers and that's the first thing they do when the get a new long-haul circuit stood up.



and I am sure those DCs transfer as much data as Google does.
 
2013-11-06 05:44:59 PM
You'd think, if they were sending unencrypted data, that the NSA would be the least of their worries.
 
2013-11-06 05:47:56 PM
Right. I believe you, Google.
 
2013-11-06 05:50:12 PM
6 months ago, the FBI announced they had no way to break into TOR traffic.  2 months ago they announce the busting of a child porn ring...because they broke into TOR traffic.

this too will not last, it it's true at all.
 
2013-11-06 05:50:24 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: MUSCULAR.  Jesus, how insecure about your manhood do you have to be to name your surveillance program MUSCULAR?


They could have used penisface and had the same result
 
2013-11-06 05:52:00 PM
NEXT TIME USE LUBE!
 
2013-11-06 05:54:16 PM

oryx: I'll be surprised if they say it again to the NSA when it demands Google hand over the encryption key.


And as long as they hand over the keys, the NSA will be happy.  Which they will.
 
2013-11-06 05:56:59 PM

oryx: I'll be surprised if they say it again to the NSA when it demands Google hand over the encryption key.


Well, if nothing else, Google has the resources to hire a phalanx of lawyers to fight National Security Letters, or whatever other warrants or subpoenas or court orders might be coming down the pike.
 
2013-11-06 05:59:10 PM
NSA will have to pay like everyone else.
 
2013-11-06 06:06:14 PM

Cybernetic: oryx: I'll be surprised if they say it again to the NSA when it demands Google hand over the encryption key.

Well, if nothing else, Google has the resources to hire a phalanx of lawyers to fight National Security Letters, or whatever other warrants or subpoenas or court orders might be coming down the pike.



I read that as "Google has more money than our government so they can drag them through court"
 
2013-11-06 06:06:25 PM
Everytime I see one of these leaked slides I just have to wonder how an organization like the NSA can't bring in a single unpaid intern to do a better job at making them.
 
2013-11-06 06:07:06 PM
What happens when Google buys Burundi or whatever and simply sets themselves up as an independent entity.   I don't like snooping, but I get nervous when I see a corporation with un-monitored control of so much freaking data.

/Snow Crash anyone?
//As long as I get to drive one of those Deliverators
 
2013-11-06 06:07:44 PM

cyberspacedout: You'd think, if they were sending unencrypted data, that the NSA would be the least of their worries.


They were sending the data over their internal network, not the Internet.  Most companies don't encrypt all of their data, just sensitive stuff (customer info, payment info, healthcare-related stuff, and so on).
 
2013-11-06 06:10:30 PM
Ah, the last bastion of privacy...Google.

*snicker*
 
2013-11-06 06:11:55 PM

comslave: 6 months ago, the FBI announced they had no way to break into TOR traffic.  2 months ago they announce the busting of a child porn ring...because they broke into TOR traffic.

this too will not last, it it's true at all.


They were able to break TOR because they seized a hosting facility that had a ton of TOR entry and exit nodes. They didn't break TOR encryption at all, they used a zero day in a browser and injected that in to the parts of the TOR network they controlled. This in turn allowed them to see more data than they should have been able to see, and circumvented a lot of the TOR anonymity.
 
2013-11-06 06:18:59 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: MUSCULAR.  Jesus, how insecure about your manhood do you have to be to name your surveillance program MUSCULAR?


It's rather serendipitous.
 
2013-11-06 06:34:31 PM
The NSA and Google are different entities?
 
2013-11-06 06:35:40 PM

sethen320: Ah, the last bastion of privacy...Google.

*snicker*


Hah. Yeah I was thinking the same thing. NOW Google is all pro-privacy?
 
2013-11-06 06:41:40 PM
Google, you farking noobs.

You're not running a neighborhood network anymore. You're playing with the big boys now. World governments.

You think they're not going to tap your networks out of respect for how much money you make? They farking print money.

They're upset because they are "the greatest hackers in the world", and they have been owned for years now without any idea.

/Rude awakening.
 
2013-11-06 06:43:48 PM

Veritas: sethen320: Ah, the last bastion of privacy...Google.

*snicker*

Hah. Yeah I was thinking the same thing. NOW Google is all pro-privacy?


They're banking on the same thing the government is -- that people are too stupid to have a memory of their complicity in NSAs activity.

If recent history is any indication, this is a smart strategy.
 
2013-11-06 06:52:06 PM

cannotsuggestaname: FrancoFile: I'm surprised it took them this long.

I have friends who manage communications between data centers and that's the first thing they do when the get a new long-haul circuit stood up.


and I am sure those DCs transfer as much data as Google does.



Same order of magnitude, yes.  There are all sorts of private data centers for industry-specific systems that the general public is not aware of.
 
2013-11-06 06:57:10 PM

comslave: 6 months ago, the FBI announced they had no way to break into TOR traffic.  2 months ago they announce the busting of a child porn ring...because they broke into TOR traffic.

this too will not last, it it's true at all.


To be fair, the Tor thing was because they found a vulnerability in a hidden site, which let them plant malware that would break visitors' identities by reporting back in the clear, rather than over Tor.
 
2013-11-06 06:57:39 PM

aendeuryu: Veritas: sethen320: Ah, the last bastion of privacy...Google.

*snicker*

Hah. Yeah I was thinking the same thing. NOW Google is all pro-privacy?

They're banking on the same thing the government is -- that people are too stupid to have a memory of their complicity in NSAs activity.

If recent history is any indication, this is a smart strategy.


Yep. What sucks is, it'll work.
 
2013-11-06 07:10:16 PM
This is great.  Now only Google can spy on me.
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-11-06 07:18:45 PM

DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: Later, Google to NSA: "Sorry about that...we had to say that for PR purposes.  Here's all the stuff you wanted."


THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
 
2013-11-06 07:46:05 PM

oryx: I'll be surprised if they say it again to the NSA when it demands Google hand over the encryption key.


This isn't LavaMail with a shiatty GoDaddy hosting service.  Google has as much influence and power as the government.  I doubt they would roll over when the NSA asks for anything.  All they have to do is broadcast a statement about what the NSA is trying to do and the media has another shiatstorm to descend on.

After all, this is the company that gets 10 to 20 different articles published about changing their Gmail icon.

Encryption key?  They would handle it over and create a new one in the same breath.  "Oh, you wanted to actually USE that key?  Frak you!"
 
2013-11-06 07:46:05 PM

Pichu0102: comslave: 6 months ago, the FBI announced they had no way to break into TOR traffic.  2 months ago they announce the busting of a child porn ring...because they broke into TOR traffic.

this too will not last, it it's true at all.

To be fair, the Tor thing was because they found a vulnerability in a hidden site, which let them plant malware that would break visitors' identities by reporting back in the clear, rather than over Tor.


I don't get how that's legal. They broke into and sabotaged someone's system to break the function that it was providing.

/child porn people can rot
 
2013-11-06 07:49:42 PM

blue_2501: oryx: I'll be surprised if they say it again to the NSA when it demands Google hand over the encryption key.

This isn't LavaMail with a shiatty GoDaddy hosting service.  Google has as much influence and power as the government.  I doubt they would roll over when the NSA asks for anything.  All they have to do is broadcast a statement about what the NSA is trying to do and the media has another shiatstorm to descend on.

After all, this is the company that gets 10 to 20 different articles published about changing their Gmail icon.

Encryption key?  They would handle it over and create a new one in the same breath.  "Oh, you wanted to actually USE that key?  Frak you!"


They'll get served with two papers. First a court order saying "hand over the keys," and the court order behind that will be a gag order, so you'll never know.
 
2013-11-06 08:01:20 PM
Google would never hand over keys to tap their main network because that's a huge portion of their business.  They make money serving targeted ads, they determine who to serve those ads based on that data.  They aren't going to just hand it all over.

NSLs might require specific individuals, but not the entire farking data store.

Also for those who DNRTFA

- Google was already upgrading all its connections between data centers 6 months before Snowden
- This is not Google PR, it's two network engineers posting their opinions on G+
- The reason they weren't already encrypted is due to performance overhead.  Only in the past few years has hardware become fast enough to make on-the-fly encryption not cost a ton of performance.

There are reasons not to trust Google, this however is one time they are doing the right thing.  It's funny to see the paranoia crowd freak the fark out though.
 
2013-11-06 08:20:39 PM
Consumer Watchdog's latest complaints about the relationship of Google and the Obama administration are outlined in a 32-page report.

The paper questions a decision by NASA allowing Google executives to use its Moffett Federal Airfield near Google headquarters. Although H211, a company controlled by Google top executives, pays NASA rent, they enjoy access to the airfield that other companies or groups don't have, Simpson said.

The paper also questions Google contracts with the U.S. Department of Defense and other agencies, suggesting that, in some cases, Google contracts were fast-tracked. The paper also questions Google's relationship with the U.S. National Security Agency and calls for the company to be more open about what consumer information it shares with the spy agency.

When asked if other companies, including broadband providers, should disclose what customer information they share with the NSA, Simpson said they should, too.

"I understand the NSA is a super-secret spook organization," he said. "But given Google's very special situation where it possesses so much personal data about people, I think that there ought to be a little more openness about what precisely goes on between the two."


Wake the fark up you naive fools. Or you'll be the last to know.

/but you're probably already quite used to that
 
2013-11-06 08:25:35 PM

Marcus Aurelius: oryx: I'll be surprised if they say it again to the NSA when it demands Google hand over the encryption key.

And as long as they hand over the keys, the NSA will be happy.  Which they will.


They don't even need to. The NSA probably already has them.
 
2013-11-06 08:30:17 PM
I suppose they can always change their encryption key every day or every 8 hours.
 
2013-11-06 08:31:44 PM

cheer: cyberspacedout: You'd think, if they were sending unencrypted data, that the NSA would be the least of their worries.

They were sending the data over their internal network, not the Internet.  Most companies don't encrypt all of their data, just sensitive stuff (customer info, payment info, healthcare-related stuff, and so on).


When the article said "between its data centers," I assumed it meant different buildings that aren't on the same property. Wouldn't they transmit data from their internal network over the series of tubes that is the internet?
 
2013-11-06 08:33:00 PM

untaken_name: Marcus Aurelius: oryx: I'll be surprised if they say it again to the NSA when it demands Google hand over the encryption key.

And as long as they hand over the keys, the NSA will be happy.  Which they will.

They don't even need to. The NSA probably already has them.


It's going to be real fun when the NSA back doors get found and broadcast into the wild. Not a network on earth will be secure and hackers and cyber thieves will be plundering everything. Thanks, NSA. Thanks a heap.
 
2013-11-06 09:01:36 PM
More propaganda.
 
2013-11-06 09:20:03 PM

cyberspacedout: cheer: cyberspacedout: You'd think, if they were sending unencrypted data, that the NSA would be the least of their worries.

They were sending the data over their internal network, not the Internet.  Most companies don't encrypt all of their data, just sensitive stuff (customer info, payment info, healthcare-related stuff, and so on).

When the article said "between its data centers," I assumed it meant different buildings that aren't on the same property. Wouldn't they transmit data from their internal network over the series of tubes that is the internet?


No, they do it over isolated fiber cables, either leased or owned.

But the spooks physically tap into the cables or the intermediate equipment.

They aren't the totally isolated pressurized-gas conduits that the DoD deployed back in the 70s and 80s.
 
2013-11-06 09:21:15 PM

Ed Grubermann: It's going to be real fun when the NSA back doors get found and broadcast into the wild. Not a network on earth will be secure and hackers and cyber thieves will be plundering everything. Thanks, NSA. Thanks a heap.



The NSA is secretly run by an anarchist hacker who, under the guise of perfect control and security, will use the Orwellian apparatus to create a world where no information can be owned or kept secret.

He's been working under contract for the parent organization that controls both Anonymous and Scientology.

duh, this is all covered in the timecube book

/You guys really shouldn't have written that guy off as crazy.
 
2013-11-06 09:24:11 PM

pedobearapproved: They'll get served with two papers. First a court order saying "hand over the keys," and the court order behind that will be a gag order, so you'll never know.


So what?  An "anonymous source" leaks the information to the media.  Gag order, smag order.
 
2013-11-06 09:24:25 PM
They just want the NSA to use Google+
 
2013-11-06 09:34:11 PM
So this whole time, they WEREN'T encrypting the data they send between nodes? Christ, forget the NSA, that's just bad for everybody.
 
2013-11-06 09:44:59 PM
Amazing how Google was totally fine with handing data to spies -- until they were caught.
 
2013-11-06 09:54:43 PM

DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: Later, Google to NSA: "Sorry about that...we had to say that for PR purposes.  Here's all the stuff you wanted."


I wouldn't be surprised if NSA told google to issue that press release to catch more supects/wank material.
 
2013-11-06 09:56:10 PM
Goggle to China: I ruv you rong time.
 
2013-11-06 10:11:50 PM

alostpacket: Google would never hand over keys to tap their main network because that's a huge portion of their business.  They make money serving targeted ads, they determine who to serve those ads based on that data.  They aren't going to just hand it all over.

NSLs might require specific individuals, but not the entire farking data store.

Also for those who DNRTFA

- Google was already upgrading all its connections between data centers 6 months before Snowden
- This is not Google PR, it's two network engineers posting their opinions on G+
- The reason they weren't already encrypted is due to performance overhead.  Only in the past few years has hardware become fast enough to make on-the-fly encryption not cost a ton of performance.

There are reasons not to trust Google, this however is one time they are doing the right thing.  It's funny to see the paranoia crowd freak the fark out though.




Google does not own a data center in England. They rent space. GCHQ has the data center install taps for access to a Googles servers.

Encryption between data centers is pointless.
 
Displayed 50 of 83 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report