Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Daily Mail)   NSA steals technology info from Chinese company that was stolen by Chinese hackers from US companies   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 69
    More: Interesting, Huawei, NSA, Chinese, Madden, british law, Der Spiegel, Hu Jintao  
•       •       •

4928 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Mar 2014 at 4:53 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-23 04:56:00 PM  
Snowden: The gift that keeps on giving, so long as you are China or Russia
 
2014-03-23 04:56:18 PM  
Well, that's convenient.
 
2014-03-23 04:58:38 PM  
sphotos-d.ak.fbcdn.net
 
2014-03-23 04:59:26 PM  
So...

.. Someone care to explain, if Snowden only took stuff about how the US spied on its citizens:

Why he took this, or why he leaked this?

I mean, isn't.. isn't this, literally, EXACTLY what the NSA is supposed to be doing? (Especially if they suspect it was the vector the Chinese used to steal a lot of data, and especially if they were trying to tie it to government-sanctioned hackers?)
 
2014-03-23 05:00:21 PM  
As long as they've moved away from that whole putting pee-pee in our Coke, business, I'm ok with this.
 
2014-03-23 05:06:03 PM  
That's the cycle of life, Simba.
 
2014-03-23 05:06:40 PM  

Felgraf: So...

.. Someone care to explain, if Snowden only took stuff about how the US spied on its citizens:

Why he took this, or why he leaked this?


Not really, because explaining it to you doesn't do anything to stop you or the rest of the uninformed masses from keeping up their wilfully ignorant postings.

But here you go:

Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

You're welcome to now go on and say that he should have sorted through the thousands of documents, only giving the ones away that exposed whatever you personally happen to think was correct to expose. But he didn't, end of story.
 
2014-03-23 05:10:25 PM  
Of course they had to hack them to find out who they were hacking.  Duh.
 
2014-03-23 05:17:48 PM  
What's Chinese for "password"? Because that's how you "hack" into a company's emails.
 
2014-03-23 05:18:59 PM  
Anyone got a flow chart that explains this better?
 
2014-03-23 05:21:38 PM  

Felgraf: I mean, isn't.. isn't this, literally, EXACTLY what the NSA is supposed to be doing?


Somehow I don't think corporate espionage was supposed to be one of their goals.
 
2014-03-23 05:22:23 PM  

Felgraf: So...

.. Someone care to explain, if Snowden only took stuff about how the US spied on its citizens:

Why he took this, or why he leaked this?

I mean, isn't.. isn't this, literally, EXACTLY what the NSA is supposed to be doing? (Especially if they suspect it was the vector the Chinese used to steal a lot of data, and especially if they were trying to tie it to government-sanctioned hackers?)


https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/03/23/facts-nsa-stories-repo rt ed/

i.imgur.com
 
2014-03-23 05:24:19 PM  
Spawn73, you are a fool if you believe Snowmen isn't responsible for these disclosures. If he gave information to unauthorized individuals about classified programs that are legit he is a traitor and should be hung!
 
2014-03-23 05:29:35 PM  

spawn73: Felgraf: So...

.. Someone care to explain, if Snowden only took stuff about how the US spied on its citizens:

Why he took this, or why he leaked this?

Not really, because explaining it to you doesn't do anything to stop you or the rest of the uninformed masses from keeping up their wilfully ignorant postings.

But here you go:

Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

You're welcome to now go on and say that he should have sorted through the thousands of documents, only giving the ones away that exposed whatever you personally happen to think was correct to expose. But he didn't, end of story.


What exactly does that change about the question "Why did he take this or why did he leak it?", eh?
 
2014-03-23 05:36:25 PM  
Duh
 
2014-03-23 05:37:54 PM  
Are there any squares left on the Snowden death pool?
 
2014-03-23 06:03:22 PM  

jacks4kevin: Spawn73, you are a fool if you believe Snowmen isn't responsible for these disclosures. If he gave information to unauthorized individuals about classified programs that are legit he is a traitor and should be hung!


RoyBatty's link addresses this. Snowden handed over everything he had to journalists last year and doesn't necessarily agree with what those journalists choose to publish from it. He specifically told the journalists he met that he didn't want all of it published, but that journalists would need to see information that they shouldnt publish to understand the context of material he thought they should publish.  This is exactly the sort of off-the-record transaction that an establishment journalist like Bob Woodward had engaged in time and again.

What a lot of the criticism of the stories about the NSA spying on foreigners reveals is that a lot of Americans are apparently okay with violating the privacy rights and trade secret rights of people in other countries that we are not at war with, as though that's the way things are supposed to work and people shouldn't be allowed to know about it or question it.
 
2014-03-23 06:05:49 PM  

MrEricSir: Somehow I don't think corporate espionage was supposed to be one of their goals.



Just because something may be "corporate" in origin doesn't mean it isn't of interest to national security.
Lockheed Martin and Raytheon are private (non-government) corporations.  That doesn't mean the stuff they work on is free to be published on your internet blog.

Anyway, I think what Felgraf meant was that collecting and analyzing foreign signals intelligence (from outside the U.S.) is exactly what the NSA is supposed to be doing, as opposed to collecting information on U.S. citizens.  And he would be correct.
 
2014-03-23 06:12:59 PM  

jacks4kevin: Spawn73, you are a fool if you believe Snowmen isn't responsible for these disclosures. If he gave information to unauthorized individuals about classified programs that are legit he is a traitor and should be hung!


I don't think that he isn't, so that only leaves you the fool.
 
2014-03-23 06:14:34 PM  

BumpInTheNight: spawn73: Felgraf: So...

.. Someone care to explain, if Snowden only took stuff about how the US spied on its citizens:

Why he took this, or why he leaked this?

Not really, because explaining it to you doesn't do anything to stop you or the rest of the uninformed masses from keeping up their wilfully ignorant postings.

But here you go:

Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

You're welcome to now go on and say that he should have sorted through the thousands of documents, only giving the ones away that exposed whatever you personally happen to think was correct to expose. But he didn't, end of story.

What exactly does that change about the question "Why did he take this or why did he leak it?", eh?


He's saying that he leaked this specifically now, which he didn't. Please inform yourself, I suggest reading RoyBattys post.
 
2014-03-23 06:16:59 PM  

spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.


Wait, are you saying he's not the source of these latest documents?
 
2014-03-23 06:17:15 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: MrEricSir: Somehow I don't think corporate espionage was supposed to be one of their goals.


Just because something may be "corporate" in origin doesn't mean it isn't of interest to national security.
Lockheed Martin and Raytheon are private (non-government) corporations.  That doesn't mean the stuff they work on is free to be published on your internet blog.

Anyway, I think what Felgraf meant was that collecting and analyzing foreign signals intelligence (from outside the U.S.) is exactly what the NSA is supposed to be doing, as opposed to collecting information on U.S. citizens.  And he would be correct.


...

Der Spiegel is a German magazine. Why the fark would they care if that's NSAs job. From their viewpoint NSA is a foriegn agency, and exposing how and against who they're spying is very much Der Spiegels job.
 
2014-03-23 06:18:13 PM  

digistil: spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

Wait, are you saying he's not the source of these latest documents?


No. How could you come to that conclusion?
 
2014-03-23 06:21:10 PM  

Nem Wan: RoyBatty's link addresses this. Snowden handed over everything he had to journalists last year and doesn't necessarily agree with what those journalists choose to publish from it. He specifically told the journalists he met that he didn't want all of it published,


That doesn't exactly absolve him, does it? *HE HANDED IT OVER ANYWAYS*. If he didn't want it published, perhaps *he shouldn't have friggen given it to them*.
 
2014-03-23 06:21:29 PM  

spawn73: He's saying that he leaked this specifically now, which he didn't. Please inform yourself, I suggest reading RoyBattys post.


You're making a lot of assumptions for someone so wrong about assumptions.  Snowden took this information and gave it to reporters, he took it and he leaked it to reporters.  He did this after professing to only want to enlighten america on its self-gazing activities.  He gave everything to these reporters and now they are posting what he leaked to them.  I don't know how many other ways I can say it:  This is Snowden's fault because he leaked it to reporters, what the hell did he think was going to happen?
 
2014-03-23 06:22:51 PM  

spawn73: digistil: spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

Wait, are you saying he's not the source of these latest documents?

No. How could you come to that conclusion?


You said he had no control over who would gain access to this information. But if he's the source, he had the ultimate control.
 
2014-03-23 06:26:07 PM  

spawn73: He's saying that he leaked this specifically now, which he didn't.


To be honest, I didn't read Felgraf's post that way.   Only the fact that Snowden did, in fact, take this information, and did, in fact, leak it to the press.    When he did so doesn't appear to be central, relevant, or even mentioned at all within the post in question.  That seems to be something you imagine into it.
 
2014-03-23 06:26:51 PM  

BumpInTheNight: spawn73: He's saying that he leaked this specifically now, which he didn't. Please inform yourself, I suggest reading RoyBattys post.

You're making a lot of assumptions for someone so wrong about assumptions.  Snowden took this information and gave it to reporters, he took it and he leaked it to reporters.  He did this after professing to only want to enlighten america on its self-gazing activities.  He gave everything to these reporters and now they are posting what he leaked to them.  I don't know how many other ways I can say it:  This is Snowden's fault because he leaked it to reporters, what the hell did he think was going to happen?


I am not sure how to reply to you. You're lecturing me about what I am not disputing, and infact, repeating exactly what I said. And somehow you then think you scored some kind of point?
 
2014-03-23 06:27:52 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Snowden did, in fact, take this information, and did, in fact, leak it to the press.


Don't forget because he was carrying it with him while in China and Russia, those governments also have it now.
 
2014-03-23 06:29:31 PM  

spawn73: Der Spiegel is a German magazine. Why the fark would they care if that's NSAs job.


I was talking about the NSA as relates to corporate IP, not Der Spiegel.  I honestly have no clue how you could have misinterpreted that post.  It had nothing to do with Der Spiegel.
 
2014-03-23 06:30:40 PM  

digistil: spawn73: digistil: spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

Wait, are you saying he's not the source of these latest documents?

No. How could you come to that conclusion?

You said he had no control over who would gain access to this information. But if he's the source, he had the ultimate control.

 No, I made no such claim.
 
2014-03-23 06:31:22 PM  

spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.


What? Yes he did. He absolutely had control over what was published, BECAUSE HE HAD CONTROL OVER WHAT HE GAVE TO THEM.

<i> It is kind of hard to have more control than that. </i>.
 
2014-03-23 06:32:12 PM  

digistil: ThrobblefootSpectre: Snowden did, in fact, take this information, and did, in fact, leak it to the press.

Don't forget because he was carrying it with him while in China and Russia, those governments also have it now.


No they don't, because they didn't have access to his laptop. And if they did, it wouldn't matter as its encrypted.
 
2014-03-23 06:34:17 PM  

spawn73: digistil: ThrobblefootSpectre: Snowden did, in fact, take this information, and did, in fact, leak it to the press.

Don't forget because he was carrying it with him while in China and Russia, those governments also have it now.

No they don't, because they didn't have access to his laptop. And if they did, it wouldn't matter as its encrypted.


Wait, you think they let him through without getting that data unencrypted???
 
2014-03-23 06:34:19 PM  
As Greenwald points out, if Snowden wanted all of the documents released, he could have posted them online. He didn't. There is nowhere you or I can go to download all the "Snowden files". They are, at present, controlled by a handful of people. And Snowden himself is not one of those people.

Snowden is responsible, obviously, but the fact is Snowden has published nothing. Every story from the material he took came from other people deciding what to publish from it.
 
2014-03-23 06:34:47 PM  

Felgraf: spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

What? Yes he did. He absolutely had control over what was published, BECAUSE HE HAD CONTROL OVER WHAT HE GAVE TO THEM.

<i> It is kind of hard to have more control than that. </i>.


How does that change the fact that he has no control of what is published after the fact?

Please do realise that he has no timemachine.
 
2014-03-23 06:36:04 PM  

digistil: spawn73: digistil: ThrobblefootSpectre: Snowden did, in fact, take this information, and did, in fact, leak it to the press.

Don't forget because he was carrying it with him while in China and Russia, those governments also have it now.

No they don't, because they didn't have access to his laptop. And if they did, it wouldn't matter as its encrypted.

Wait, you think they let him through without getting that data unencrypted???


I have no reason to believe Snowden is lying about that fact.
 
2014-03-23 06:38:06 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Just because something may be "corporate" in origin doesn't mean it isn't of interest to national security.
Lockheed Martin and Raytheon are private (non-government) corporations. That doesn't mean the stuff they work on is free to be published on your internet blog.


Right, but this isn't like that. This is like if China hacked into Cisco and stole their source code and company email.
 
2014-03-23 06:38:28 PM  

spawn73: How does that change the fact that he has no control of what is published after the fact?

Please do realise that he has no timemachine.


It also does not change the fact that he is the ultimate source of the leaks, and these leaks run counter to his claim of why he released what he did.

So, I suppose he either lied, or was really incompetent when it came to realizing reporter don't abide by pinky swears, or something.
 
2014-03-23 06:39:23 PM  

spawn73: BumpInTheNight: spawn73: He's saying that he leaked this specifically now, which he didn't. Please inform yourself, I suggest reading RoyBattys post.

You're making a lot of assumptions for someone so wrong about assumptions.  Snowden took this information and gave it to reporters, he took it and he leaked it to reporters.  He did this after professing to only want to enlighten america on its self-gazing activities.  He gave everything to these reporters and now they are posting what he leaked to them.  I don't know how many other ways I can say it:  This is Snowden's fault because he leaked it to reporters, what the hell did he think was going to happen?

I am not sure how to reply to you. You're lecturing me about what I am not disputing, and infact, repeating exactly what I said. And somehow you then think you scored some kind of point?


No one here is trying to suggest he still has active control over everything he leaked so I don't know why you are trying to restate the obvious, unless you're misinterpreting criticism of Snowden's true traitorous character.  Which I think is what's going on here.
 
2014-03-23 06:42:30 PM  

spawn73: digistil: spawn73: digistil: spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

Wait, are you saying he's not the source of these latest documents?

No. How could you come to that conclusion?

You said he had no control over who would gain access to this information. But if he's the source, he had the ultimate control.
 No, I made no such claim.


Did you not say that? If he's the source, he had complete control.
 
2014-03-23 06:43:49 PM  
Years ago I did some contract IDS work for a power tool company, think "orange hexagon with black stripes" and they got regularly POUNDED from two places. Eastern Europe ('stonias and 'stans) and Asia. Oh yes, Asia.

The thing being, they *had* factories in China. It's not like China had to hack anything to get western designs. They were manufacturing the damn things. I've also done IDS work for the US Department of Energy (you know, the guys who design and build nuclear weapons) and proportionally they didn't have half the attacks that China leveled at a company that designs power screwdrivers.
 
2014-03-23 06:44:39 PM  

BumpInTheNight: spawn73: BumpInTheNight: spawn73: He's saying that he leaked this specifically now, which he didn't. Please inform yourself, I suggest reading RoyBattys post.

You're making a lot of assumptions for someone so wrong about assumptions.  Snowden took this information and gave it to reporters, he took it and he leaked it to reporters.  He did this after professing to only want to enlighten america on its self-gazing activities.  He gave everything to these reporters and now they are posting what he leaked to them.  I don't know how many other ways I can say it:  This is Snowden's fault because he leaked it to reporters, what the hell did he think was going to happen?

I am not sure how to reply to you. You're lecturing me about what I am not disputing, and infact, repeating exactly what I said. And somehow you then think you scored some kind of point?

No one here is trying to suggest he still has active control over everything he leaked so I don't know why you are trying to restate the obvious, unless you're misinterpreting criticism of Snowden's true traitorous character.  Which I think is what's going on here.


If nothing else, people are quickly dumping that line of discourse.

Until the next bit is published.
 
2014-03-23 06:46:19 PM  

digistil: spawn73: digistil: spawn73: digistil: spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

Wait, are you saying he's not the source of these latest documents?

No. How could you come to that conclusion?

You said he had no control over who would gain access to this information. But if he's the source, he had the ultimate control.
 No, I made no such claim.

Did you not say that? If he's the source, he had complete control.


Besides the fact that a single person couldn't be expected to be a one-man declassification analyst for the volume of material he had in the short time he could expect to get away with having it before someone stopped him, Snowden believed journalists needed to know more than he wanted them to publish to be able to understand what he wanted them to report. The U.S. government trusts select reporters with background information that's not meant for publication all. the. time.
 
2014-03-23 06:59:17 PM  

digistil: spawn73: digistil: spawn73: digistil: spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

Wait, are you saying he's not the source of these latest documents?

No. How could you come to that conclusion?

You said he had no control over who would gain access to this information. But if he's the source, he had the ultimate control.
 No, I made no such claim.

Did you not say that? If he's the source, he had complete control.


Please learn the difference between the past and present tense. Ie. the difference what he presently has control over, versus what he at one point had control over.

Then reread what you're quoting.
 
2014-03-23 07:05:47 PM  

spawn73: digistil: ThrobblefootSpectre: Snowden did, in fact, take this information, and did, in fact, leak it to the press.

Don't forget because he was carrying it with him while in China and Russia, those governments also have it now.

No they don't, because they didn't have access to his laptop. And if they did, it wouldn't matter as its encrypted.


Are you so naive you think China and Russia don't have forensic computer experts?
 
2014-03-23 07:07:06 PM  

spawn73: Please learn the difference between the past and present tense. Ie. the difference what he presently has control over, versus what he at one point had control over.

Then reread what you're quotin


You are saying that he is not the one hitting submit on these stories going into the news papers and pedantically you are correct, we are all saying he had that control and he pissed into the wind by handing it all over to the people posting the stories in the first place.  He should be held accountable to everything that's leaked, he caused it.
 
2014-03-23 07:07:34 PM  

spawn73: digistil: spawn73: digistil: spawn73: digistil: spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

Wait, are you saying he's not the source of these latest documents?

No. How could you come to that conclusion?

You said he had no control over who would gain access to this information. But if he's the source, he had the ultimate control.
 No, I made no such claim.

Did you not say that? If he's the source, he had complete control.

Please learn the difference between the past and present tense. Ie. the difference what he presently has control over, versus what he at one point had control over.

Then reread what you're quoting.


If you're going to lecture, perhaps start with Snowden. A source should always assume everything given will be published as early as a moment from now. And that's my point.
 
2014-03-23 07:08:40 PM  

Nem Wan: digistil: spawn73: digistil: spawn73: digistil: spawn73: Snowden only leaked one set of documents, once. He has no control over what is published, or when it is published.

Wait, are you saying he's not the source of these latest documents?

No. How could you come to that conclusion?

You said he had no control over who would gain access to this information. But if he's the source, he had the ultimate control.
 No, I made no such claim.

Did you not say that? If he's the source, he had complete control.

Besides the fact that a single person couldn't be expected to be a one-man declassification analyst for the volume of material he had in the short time he could expect to get away with having it before someone stopped him, Snowden believed journalists needed to know more than he wanted them to publish to be able to understand what he wanted them to report. The U.S. government trusts select reporters with background information that's not meant for publication all. the. time.


What are you trying to say?
 
2014-03-23 07:09:31 PM  
Technlogy!
Technlogy!
Technlogy!
Technlogy!
T-e-c-h-nlogy!!


img.fark.net

Ahh, Daily Fail. You always bring me joy on a Sunday evening.
 
Displayed 50 of 69 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report