skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Could the NSA have recruited Google employees as moles? The company might not be providing "direct access", but an individual employee might be able to.

What kind of security do companies like Google and Facebook have to protect private user data from employees? I remember reading that Facebook used to (?) allow unfettered access to all private user data until (surprise!) some creepy employees began stalking people.
Why is it impossible to evolve X11 to a satisfactory state?
NSA's Project SHAMROCK (2005)
Double-Secret Probation (2007)
Interesting to contemplate juxtaposed against Larry Page's response to PRISM.
Sure, but the statement as worded does not rule out the possibility that a third party contractor (Palantir) has access, and feeds it to the government. So Google has the motive (some theoretical secret law they need to abide) and they haven't denied a potential means (third party mediation). That's enough for people to convict in this situation.
I get the legal argument. I'm saying that from a "spirit of the law" perspective, the intent of the 4th is to protect citizens from having their government search through their personal effects without probable cause.

This is much like if the NSA had an agent whose job it was to go through bank strongboxes - all of them - examining the contents and looking for things that are illegal. It is the bank's security that is violated, not your own, but it's still your "papers and effects" that are not secure against unreasonable searches.

I completely understand the judicial argument that has been made amounting to "Welp, it's on Google's servers, you don't have any right to control it anymore", but as far as the spirit of the Constitution goes, that's complete bunk, and I think that any reasonable, average person would agree with that sentiment. My data, stored on Google's servers, is mine, and is entrusted to them for safekeeping.

The government has managed to finagle its way into an interpretation of the Fourth that utterly defangs it. The purpose is "Hey, you can't go through peoples' stuff without judicial oversight", and that is clearly being violated as a matter of routine.
If my company is outside the US I can try to use infrastructure that at least makes it harder for the US to gain access. If, for example, the US is spying on European allies' infrastructure it would be a diplomatically damaging revelation and the European governments would try to fight it off. If I use a Silicon Valley service I know for a fact that the US can read my data at will without any recourse on my part.

It makes no sense to use Google which is why I'm saying this is threatening to Silicon Valley. Think of it this way, do you think a Chinese email service could become trusted enough to become globally competitive?
I'd love to talk to you sometime... shoot me an email? (No, I don't work for the NSA!)
Larry's post was designed to quickly assuage our knee-jerk fears about a giant like google having anything to do with "PRISM". In that, it is effective.

I think for a lot of folks complaining, his language (i.e. "direct access") is just overly precise enough to leave too much room in the margins for technical loopholes concerning "who" has access to "what" data. When Larry defends their general policies stating google "pushes back on requests", I am not convinced when terms like "overly broad" and "correct process" are left undefined.

But it's a 4 paragraph blog post- what do I expect?
He was also acquitted of all charges due to lack of evidence.
The best explanation I've seen for that is that they are just collecting the content in case it is needed later. If, for example, they see you making a lot of long-distance phone calls to numbers known to be ties to Al Qaeda, then they could 'get a warrant' to actually look at the PRISM data they've collected.

In real life terms, it's like posting an NSA agent in every house in America, who promises to keep his eyes closed. Of course, he can hear everything you're saying, but he promises not to tell anyone unless you say something elsewhere that would give them cause to.
I am really surprised how people are reacting to surveillance revelations. These practices or obvious and have been in use for as long as I can remember. Did no one really know about widespread government surveillance? You don't have to look very hard to find evidence. Bottom line: this has been happening for a long time. Do really think that the military released the internet because it made them feel all fuzzy inside? Think about it.
Smarter sites know its a prepaid card by the BIN and turn off the AVS check.
PRISM and Other Spy Tools
obama - bush = 0
I have TWC residential service. Coincidentally, I just experimented with setting up IPv6 yesterday on my Airport Extreme. TWC is not issuing IPv6 addresses at my location. So I went with an automatic tunnel (192.88.99.1). That IP is 16 hops and 150 ms away for me (anycast by Congent in my case) and its performance was awful.

I switched to a manual tunnel from HE (tunnelbroker.net). I confirmed this worked, that my Apple devices behind the Airport Express all got IPv6 addresses and so forth, and that the performance was decent.

Experience in hand, I then tore it all down, since I couldn't think of a good reason why I really needed IPv6 at home. :-)
Private Networks for Public Safety
Is Scala the new Ruby?
Other common words as scanned upside-down:

"jxau" = "next" : http://www.google.com/search?q="jxau"&tbm=bks
Image: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=agwpOfP2zI4C&pg=RA4-PA82&...

"pire" = "and" : http://www.google.com/search?q="pire"&tbm=bks
>Second, we provide user data to governments only in accordance with the law.

This is problematic when the government decides the law means you have to give them your data, you can't say no, you can't say anything about it, and if asked you must deny it.

In this day and age, who knows who's telling the truth. When lying becomes law, truth no longer exists.
(or related vain product)

I use photo-sharing app just as an example. But I'm referring to the larger context of people telling others to be more innovative and be involved in those world changing stuff instead of building such fleeting apps.

But yes, it does photo-sharing though not the main premise of the developer
What does that even mean? What is "the next generation mobile platform?" I'm not even sure what you mean by "mobile platform." Snapchat is a mechanism for sending photos to friends. Privately. People don't want to send messages on it. They don't want a Snapchat "news feed"(doesn't make sense since the whole point is privacy).

Why do they need to become a mobile platform? The founders can charge $0.99 for an annual app subscription and sit back and have a great income. Instead $100M will evaporate trying to become another FB/Twitter, which doesn't even make sense.
How long until the FSF (and EFF?) are declared "terrorist organizations" by the US government?
How We (Q Branch) Work Together
they are getting the data from different sources to not look too suspicious
That's an exceptionally salient point if you think about how our nation was formed, and how much of what later proved to be the framework of our nation was the work of a bunch of guys secretly meeting in Philadelphia.

If the British had known the names, arrival times, etc. of those meetings, even without knowing the content, it is very likely that our nation would never have been born.
Tech company chooses name that allows a literal eye of evil to spy on any land and corrupt good men from the comfort of its infernal lair.
Twlio Rings Up $70M Round
"They'd have to MITM SSL traffic largely."

To be fair, if anyone can do this it's precisely these people.

... still not likely, though, I agree.
> They do however have fairly-powerful jails(not as powerful as LXC though)

To be honest, I grew up on BSD's, FreeBSD especially, and only later turned to Linux due high marked demand. In my projects, I've tried using LXC as the light (kernel) virtualization of choice, but I've found it extremely buggy, with a lot of security issues, implementation different in almost every flavor of Linux, documentation lacking... Not even close to maturity of Jails, to which I eventually turned back to. Dont get me wrong, I am still big fan of LXC and I can see it working in future, and having features I would like to see in Jails (they're getting there, especially recently) like fine grained resources control and restriction and so on, but as of today, it needs a lot of work in polishing and maturing the code.
Would the NSA list Google as a "partner" that it needs to keep protected in these leaked slides if this were the case?
one person, maybe not, but if you're a intelligence agency with a multi-million dollar budget to tap Google, you'd probe the organisation and bribe those with access, and anyone in the chain those employees could credibly report to.

this isn't difficult or particularity far-fetched!
See http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests&#x...;

Argh. Hacker News refuses to save the URL. Replace %xF; with "/"
No, it's not. Gag orders can also be satisfied by saying "no comment" or just not saying anything at all, which is differently then actively denying something.
I got a far cheaper phone through a reseller. No contract.

You can wear a disguise, use a fake name, and pay cash. Better yet, it isn't shipped to your HOME ADDRESS.
I think "consistent" is the operative word there. On a desktop app, if I change something it changes the entire experience and only for me. On the other hand, if on my theoretical distributed github host I decide that I hate markdown and I want my comments to use textile instead, then not only do I not solve my own itch (I still have to deal with markdown on everyone else's repos) but I've created friction for everyone else who comes to my repo and wants to comment like they do everywhere else.

Multiply that by several thousand hosts and the friction involved in using, let alone contributing to a project goes up considerably. Having a world where every repo uses the same visual and interaction metaphors and supports the same features is a huge UX win, almost regardless of the quality of that interface.

We used to have something sort of federated for source management. Before Github basically won everyone had their own bugtracker and repo set up. It was not uncommon to spend an hour trying to figure out where they hid the pull URL, then installing whichever version control tool they were using, then fighting with whatever half functional import tool you needed to convert their repo to whatever version control your project had. Then spend another half hour creating yet another account and then fighting with whatever half functional plugin they had installed or trying to figure out the difference between "Critical" and "Severe" just to submit a bug.
we've got a problem... stop funding the NSA, TSA, etc...
First world problems require first world solutions, but that doesn't make them any less valuable. Anyways...

Technical innovation, whether or not it seems immediately useful, can inspire others to be more creative and build better products.
Could you quote/link to Obama's confirmation that Prism exists, and also the claim that it is imaginary?
That's not the point. The point is if we have to resort to such measures, we have already lost.
That's moving the goalposts, though. The initial assertion -- that this is a cleverly-worded non-denial -- doesn't hold up with the text. Page is clearly and unambiguously denying that Google supplies any information to the government on a millions-of-users scale.

Saying that denial is a lie . . . is a completely different charge.
I don't know how many of us served as officers in the military, but the requisite action in this situation is pretty clear. If one is interested in day to day security, speaking from a strictly tactical perspective:

You assume Google is giving the NSA information and act accordingly.

Doubts are like bothersome flies...

until they are crushed...

you will never be comfortable at your current position.
Did I miss some information? I only saw two slides. One that show the potential data accessible and one that show when the companies were added. It doesn't say exactly that they had access to everything.
As far as we know PRISM can simply be there to centralize the information that the NSA got in legals ways. We do know that the government ask about 100 users account information each day to Google, we can guess that they do the same to every company on that list and they were all added to PRISM at the date you can find on the slides.
I mean that slide contains one of the most important information that we currently have to guess the magnitude of PRISM, the budget. They only need 20 millions $ every years. True data mining is much more expensive than that.
I don't think that model will ever work. Most SnapChats are trivial random stuff. Cute but you're not going to sit through 10 seconds of Citibank's credit card pitch to see your buddy with a small carrot sticking out his nose. Secondly, SnapChat's are typically under 5 seconds. So it's like watching 2 hour long commercial for a 1 hour show.
Yet another giant intellect felled by the ignorant Athenian polity.
This reminds me of a bit of old time wisdom that seems applicable here. It goes something along the lines of "If it doesn't spook the cows, leave it be."
Poll: Have you ever been asked for your HN handle during the interview process?
I've been asked, and see postings that have listed it as criteria to be considered (along side things like StackOverflow account, Github account, etc). I'm curious how prevalent this is.

Personally, I would feel silly giving up my HN handle in an interview / interview-process. I would almost feel like it was a desperate bid to translate 'internet points' into something tangible in the real world (e.g. but I'm a top commenter on YouTube!).

I'm also curious if it's mostly just a Valley and/or Y-combinator thing.

Check all that apply.
It got me the job!
I would have felt/did feel pressured, and would prefer not to.
I prefer to keep my HN handle separate from my real identity.
This is just a 'Valley thing.'
This is just a 'Y-combinator thing.'
This has happened to me outside of The Valley/Y-combinator.
No, JSON.
I think that's true, though there's a third axis, companies, which is a big part of that failure. One major change in the tech scene over the past few decades is that a significant proportion of us effectively went over the other side: many techies now work for companies whose goal is, as with the government, to collect data on people, construct profiles, and share it around as convenient. That left rather fewer (though still vocal) people working for the opposite goal of anonymity, non-trackability, and flexible/modifiable pseudonymous identities. It also made it much easier for the government to piggyback on that tracking infrastructure we ourselves are building.
I do not disagree with your point, but your example undermined it. It is therefore an example that you should avoid in the future.

When I find out that I've had the facts on an important issue wrong, my response is to say, "Thank you," because I learned something.

shrug
When are you going to start your own company?
> What we don't have(yet) is something so easy that the general public can do it.

Companies are starting to realize that providing a good experience is the most important thing your company can do to stay relevant. Dreams often die in execution -- but I think we're getting to a point where a group of dedicated individuals focused on creating an exceptional Internet experience built on privacy and encryption really could make something happen.

I used to use GPG on Linux and OS X. I tried so very hard to keep using it. But it was the biggest pain in the ass, so eventually I just gave it up. I pulled up my key not long ago and had totally forgotten my passphrase.

The devil is in the details. Creating something familiar, something usable, and something that the average person would actually want to use is the part we need to get right.
It sounded like one big add for userfox. Not as bad as the other stuff that is HN is being suffocated with though.
Wouldn't IPV6 just make overlay networks easier to build? No more NAT or UPNP.

I would want to build on top of something stable, not some proprietary standard that could change next year.
"If we met in private does the government have the right to compel the doorman to reveal these details indiscriminately?"

Of course they do.
The most interesting thing about Google's repeated use of the phrase 'direct access' is that there are so many nerds that don't comprehend how much wiggle room that phrase implies.

My bet is that Google is under order of some kind of National Security Letter and has to deny involvement here.
Any idea what the implications for taking this device out of the country are, given the number of carriers you guys rely on? If you could elaborate on how you guys deal with the carrier networks, I'd be really interested, but I understand if you don't want to.

Great idea, by the way.

EDIT: Ooops, just saw your response to the Canada question below. Ignore this.
Don't you think China/Russia/Israel/etc would have attempted/done the same thing, too?
Move this to an .onion hidden service immediately.
Good point. Managing cash for a vending machine with high-value items seems like it might be a pain. I know there are various ipod vending machines around, but I assume most people use a credit card for those. But I suppose feeding some 20s isn't too hard.
Does that suggestion surprise you? You are talking about an executive branch that is putting tanks, helicopters, and other surplus military equipment in the hands of local law enforcement. For decades, the executive branch has encouraged the use of plea bargains to avoid having cases go to trial. The soldiers who enforce our laws have been deployed against researchers who published the wrong books. Spies have been sent into peaceful anti-war groups. How would you describe the government that undertakes such actions, and then tries to amass even more power?
I'm going to be EXTREMELY CHARITABLE and suggest that your opinion of the branches "being taken over" by the right wing is a statement which only really extends to the scope of their surveillance and antiterror operations, and that you are merely not thinking of certain things that do not affect you as a member of the left wing, like:

* IRS targeting of section-504 nonprofits

* the National Labor Relations Board's apparent failure to comply with rulings suggesting that their recess appointments were irregular and that they do not legally have a quorum

* the Department of Health and Human Services and its campaign to make Catholic institutions pay for birth control and abortions

* irregularities in the bankruptcy process around the auto bailouts

* et cetera.

Given that limitation, I believe it is possible for your argument to be regarded as meaningful. :)
Drafted at Bilderberg 2013
Quartz architect Mike Paquette: Why Apple didn't use X for the window system (2003) http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=75257&cid=673...

In retrospect, Xorg developers like Daniel Stone actually implemented most of the hacks in that list and have come to regret it.
My favorite part is they appear to be snubbing the Valley and the traditional VC's. That's brave and admirable and healthier for the entire ecosystem.
Please... do you think these people are that stupid? Any actual organized CA group is doing anything that might actually be illegal / sensitive / controversial using channels other than G+. A G+ community is just a public face to something bigger... just like there's a "HN community" on G+. Sounds stupid at first blush, right? But then you realize it's just a place for a group of people with some common interests to share links and discussion publicly in a forum get gets a lot of traffic and attention.

Think of it as just marketing / PR.
Thanks! Believe it or not, your one statement made me feel more assured than all the press releases I've seen so far.
And Debian doesn't have a vested interest in making sure a central security component isn't weakened?

Also, how do you know that Tor and Tails aren't infiltrated by the enemy (for any value of "enemy")?
tl;dr - Palantir was chosen because it's a cool sounding name, a pop culture reference, and relevant to the basic idea of accumulating data and analyzing it.

Longer version:

Palantíri (singular, palantír) are the "seeing stones" from Lord of the Rings. They're kind of like mythical crystal balls, but with greater powersets. They were designed by the high elves of Valinor (read: uber-magical), and can be used for communication. For more powerful entities, like wizards, they can be used to see anywhere in the world. Palantíri are rare, powerful and incredibly useful in the right hands.

Saruman uses his palantír to great effect to keep track of the various going-ons of Middle-Earth, and from his tower in Isengard is able to make tactical decisions based on information gathered by the palantír.

Given the stones' incredible power for accumulating information and forming strategic positions based on that information, Palantir Technologies chose the name as a semi-obscure reference to a mythical object of great power. This allies itself well with what Palantir represents - powerful data analysis and mining tools (among other things) with a beautiful design and focused precision.
It is trivial to strip links being sent to a user over unsecured channels.

There are many things that can mitigate an sslstrip style attack, but coverage from those things is patchy.
I've never heard of an interviewer asking about HN. My guess is your location is probably the biggest determinant of whether this situation will happen or not. Midwest? Not so much.
An Early Online Privacy Expert Revisits His 1985 Predictions Today
I think it is relevant, because "overpaid" or "underpaid" don't mean anything until you decide who you're going to compare to. It's fundamentally subjective. Compare yourself to teachers or average U.S. salary and you could make a different argument.

(The trick of only comparing to people who are paid more than you is used by execs all the time in corporate compensation committees.)
He's saying it will replace the need to replace IPv4 with IPv6, not that it will replace TCP/IP.
That's a great point, and it points to a weakness that most privacy advocates don't really address very well: knowing more about you allows some companies to do things better for you. They have to answer the question, how do we provide the same awesome services while also preserving privacy?
Thanks, grellas. Nice to see you back here.

I'll defer to your knowledge of law, but what stands out for me is the lack of focus on individual liberties, among both parties. Everything is now couched in the phrase "for the public good", etc. To paraphrase your comment...So, we get liberals saying things like "it takes a village to raise your kids" and conservatives saying "the village must be defended at any cost and spread the democracy." That's over-simplifying things, but my worry has always been that the concept of individual freedom has morphed into some collectivist concept that no one can precisely define and has no limits. It even expresses itself socially within urban areas. Schools are now childcare facilities, and everyone is looking to the government (local, state, federal) to solve the problem.

This is why I vote for those who try to protect the individual's rights. Unfortunately, many times they're looked at as kooks (see Ron Paul, etc.).
Oh, this retort again. "HN/Reddit/the Government isn't just one person with one opinion you know!" And then someone replies yadda yadda scotsman yadda yadda and then we all kill ourselves.

Make an argument!
with great powers comes great responsibilities.... and I thought he could handle it...
The dark side of the moon.