Slashdot Mirror


Google and NSA Teaming Up

i_frame writes "The Washington Post reports that 'Under an agreement that is still being finalized, the National Security Agency would help Google analyze a major corporate espionage attack that the firm said originated in China and targeted its computer networks, according to cybersecurity experts familiar with the matter. The objective is to better defend Google — and its users — from future attack.'"

125 comments

  1. Conversation between Google and NSA by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    NSA: We need complete access to your gmail system.

    Google: Alright! This is to help us with the recent China break-in, right?

    NSA: Um, sure...

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by biryokumaru · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nah, they prolly just left Google a post-it note.

      --
      When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
    2. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Pfft, I have long held that Google is just a front company for the NSA. Now it seems they are comfortable taking that relationship to the next level, out of the closet so to speak. (Adjusts his tin foil hat and returns to his regular viewing)

    3. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by JWSmythe · · Score: 5, Funny

          They running Windows on their desktops, the NSA already had access.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    4. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I usually don't comment on mods - but holy shit how the hell is this insightful? There have been rumors (always denied) of "NSA backdoors" brought up by tinfoil hatters forever but most people take them for the silly rumors that they are. Insightful? For shame... Funny maybe.

    5. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by vxice · · Score: 3, Informative

      "The sources said the deal does not mean the NSA will be viewing users' searches or e-mail accounts or that Google will be sharing proprietary data. " RTFA, some people do take privacy seriously.

      --
      every anarchist is a baffled dictator. Benito_Mussolini
    6. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Where could the NSA 'narus' off the clear text data?
      Too far out and its still https.
      Too far in and foreign staff might stumble over the 641A like room.
      It's the rooms the NSA rejects that make the NSA the best :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    7. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Are those the same sources that used to say the NSA doesn't tap domestic phone calls--before a whistleblower outed them for doing exactly that?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    8. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just not the one at google.

    9. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by bberens · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Conspiracy theory #1: Google wouldn't let the NSA in (as much as NSA wanted). NSA makes it look like someone in China hacked Google. NSA comes to the rescue in exchange for protection money.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    10. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by derGoldstein · · Score: 1

      I thought that Google was a front company for Microsoft, which in turn is a front company for the NSA. One to collect data on the desktop, and the other to sift through the cloud.

      --
      Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
    11. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by derGoldstein · · Score: 1

      One Hack in China to rule them all,
      One Google to find them,
      One NSA to bring them all and,
      in the darkness bind them

      --
      Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
    12. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by e2d2 · · Score: 1

      Why would they ask for something they already have?

    13. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 4, Informative

      You could google on _NSAKEY or NSA_KEY or NSAKEY and find what some security researchers in Europe discovered and published. For instance http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/5/5263/1.html
      A Microsoft officer offered to explain the presence of NSA_KEY, and indeed gave a partial clarification. Microsoft then declined to answer the follow-up questions which were asked, and refused to explain why they were not answering. http://cryptome.org/nsakey-ms-dc.htm
      Read into this whatever you like - innocent, tinfoil hat, or otherwise. Here's the wikipedia story about it; feel free to vandalize^W improve it with your comprehensive knowledge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSAKEY

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    14. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Dammit! If only we had known before, that it was that easy! Could have saved us all the work.

      The Chinese Government.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    15. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by zill · · Score: 1

      I wholeheartedly concur. All these NSA backdoor conspiracy theories are nonsense.

      I mean, why does the NSA need a backdoor when the front door doesn't even have a lock on it?

    16. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by dave562 · · Score: 1

      I'm not trying to substantiate or refute any theories. Having said that, if it is well known that the front door doesn't have a lock on it, then one day some enterprising individual or organization come along with a business plan along the lines of...

      1. Lock front door
      2. Charge for lock
      3. ??? (completely unnecessary ??? step)
      4. Profit

      Given that scenario, the NSA still has their back door into the system.

    17. Re:Conversation between Google and NSA by daveime · · Score: 1

      I'd say DRM and Apple are both prior art on that idea.

  2. Quid Pro Quo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quid Pro Quo ... I wonder what the NSA could possibly want from a search engine the size of Google?

  3. Could be worse... by Kc_spot · · Score: 1

    Google and the FCC could get in cahoooooooooooo crap hope I didn't give someone a bad idea...

    --
    This needs more cowbell!!!
    1. Re:Could be worse... by derGoldstein · · Score: 2, Funny

      Schmidt: "I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship..."

      --
      Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
  4. joint-venture by muckracer · · Score: 5, Funny

    As part of the agreement a new slogan to be used jointly by both Google and the NSA has been implemented:

    "No Such Evil" ...

    1. Re:joint-venture by derGoldstein · · Score: 3, Funny

      I thought it'd be:
      "Google/NSA: Your privacy is in good hands, with us."
      or
      "Google/NSA: Organizing the world's information; and more*."
      or
      "Google/NSA: Collaboration has a new meaning."

      --
      Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
    2. Re:joint-venture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gcollusion beta!

  5. Defend its users? by sakdoctor · · Score: 4, Informative

    I can defend myself perfectly well, by using the correct tool for the job:

    Self hosted mail server: Business, personal, anarchism.
    Gmail: Fwding Lolcats.

    1. Re:Defend its users? by Pojut · · Score: 1

      I've been considering setting up my own mail server...the service provided by my Domain Hoster (prouddomains) is fairly stable and rock solid, but I still like the idea of having complete control over my email.

      I suppose the question is should I build a seperate box, or just incorporate it into a server I already have running as an archive and (non-HD) media streamer...it's already far overpowered for the task (Core 2 Duo E8400 and 4 gigs of ram), I doubt adding email duties to it would be too big of a deal.

    2. Re:Defend its users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Your "media streamer" system has 125 times the amount of memory, about 70 to 100 times the processing power, and probably several hundred times the storage space of the mail server I set up for a company with 40,000 users back in the late 1990s.

      Thanks to Sun hardware and Solaris, that system handled the load just fine, and even did some rudimentary spam filtering. I doubt you could even generate a similar load on your system. If it can't handle a small fraction of what we could easily handle over a decade ago, then something is really fucked up.

    3. Re:Defend its users? by Pojut · · Score: 1

      Like I said, it's already overpowered for the tasks given to it :-) But it's what I had laying around, so...

    4. Re:Defend its users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So stop writing about it here on Slashdot, and set it up as a goddamn mail server for crying out loud!

    5. Re:Defend its users? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Cloud computing has interesting security implications.

      The IT security team protecting Gmail are better at security than the team protecting your average datacenter, and they are FAR better at security than your average small business or home user "IT security team."

      But on the other hand, far more attackers are going to try far harder to get into gmail than to get into your small business mail server.

      So how do these factors balance out? On the whole, I think medium-to-large businesses with dedicated IT security staff will provide better security than you would get by cloudsourced IT; but the small businesses with no dedicated IT security staff really would be better off, from a security perspective, sending their IT systems to "the cloud."

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    6. Re:Defend its users? by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      I doubt you could even generate a similar load on your system. If it can't handle a small fraction of what we could easily handle over a decade ago, then something is really fucked up.

      Yes but he was talking about exchange not qmail... Plus we often times forget to "think of the hackers's" when we decide on minimum hardware requirements.

    7. Re:Defend its users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe, but a really small business is very unlikely to be something worthwhile to attack. The hosting decision is really more likely to get made based on budget - compare $50/mo for 10 users and no hassles to buying a server, learning to run the thing, eats up some portion of an employee that you need to be doing something else, etc. Even if Google is owned (probably is still owned, they just don't know it, or don't want to admit it), it probably won't matter to the small business owner as long as their mail keeps going.

    8. Re:Defend its users? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but a really small business is very unlikely to be something worthwhile to attack.

      You are absolutely wrong. I hope you're not responsible for anyone else's IT operations. Do you have an IP address? It is certain that you are worthwhile to attack.

      Big hosts like google and amazon will attract more attacks with more sophisticated methods, as I said, but no matter how small you are, you will be attacked. Constantly. Check your ssh and httpd logs if you don't believe me.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  6. Really it means... by Cornwallis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The objective is to better defend Google — and its users — from future attack.

    The objective is to better defend Google — and its users — from future attack by someone other than NSA and...

    1. Re:Really it means... by horza · · Score: 5, Funny

      It makes sense. I am having a professional burglar come around tomorrow to check my locks. I told him not to come around tonight as I won't be in.

      Phillip.

    2. Re:Really it means... by derGoldstein · · Score: 1

      Your new security system has been installed: Motion-activated cameras, access control/logging, fingerprint/retinal scanners, the works. Hmm? Satellite uplink? No no, that's just a large serial bowl -- it's a gift!

      --
      Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
    3. Re:Really it means... by MadKeithV · · Score: 4, Funny

      I prefer parallel bowls myself.

    4. Re:Really it means... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about Y bowls?

      http://www.cv.nrao.edu/course/astr534/images/VLA.jpg

  7. Shocked. Shocked, I Tell You. by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 4, Funny

    If anyone thinks this is the first collaboration between Google and the NSA, I've got a wall in China I want to sell you.

  8. How to calculate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if ( Evil( Google + NSA ) Evil( China ) ) then Allow( NSA );

    1. Re:How to calculate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      html filter fail :)

  9. IDK... by boneglorious · · Score: 1

    I find it hard to believe the NSA really has better computer experts than Google...the real question is, what is Google really getting out of this?

    --
    Can I mod something +1 Scary if it's true but I wish it weren't?
    1. Re:IDK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple, they save money having the NSA handle certain security issues. No problem for google, they can pay the NSA with YOUR private data, they never gave a f*ck about it anyway.

    2. Re:IDK... by Zen+Hash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The NSA has probably captured additional communications related to the attack, aside from what went through Google's network. I'd imagine they generally have far more extensive resources and experience than Google, when it comes to capturing/analyzing communications.

      --
      Here I sit, all broken hearted.
      Came to poop, but only farted.
    3. Re:IDK... by el_tedward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Google probably knows more than NSA when it comes to things like search, but when it comes to breaking into a computer that doesn't belong to you, you're not going to find anyone much more knowledgeable than the NSA.

    4. Re:IDK... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      If the NSA indexes the web, people would notice, track back, mess with bots.
      If google does it and then 'sells the NSA the web (all of it with the robot pages sorted too) its ok.
      US embassy staff mapping your streets? They would be followed in every city in the world.
      Google can do it and sells it back to the US gov.
      The US wants to track a phone, with NSA in the network, nobody uses a phone.
      With google location marketing, its just a pest, but the tech stays on as you walk.
      Google is more dual use, anything the US needs, a google can do around the world.
      The NSA listens, sorts and tracks as google collects.
      This just makes it legal and lets some of the top NSA type to to googles top people to make a few changes.
      When any spy agency talks to the private sector in the open, its going to get real evil, real soon.
      IBM in the 1940's should really be a lesson.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re:IDK... by wwfarch · · Score: 1

      I doubt the NSA has beet computer experts than Google but I would guess that while the security experts at each institution are top notch the NSA has a lot more of them than Google.

    6. Re:IDK... by muckracer · · Score: 1

      The corporate State considers that private enterprise in the sphere of production is the most effective and usefu [sic] instrument in the interest of the nation. In view of the fact that private organisation of production is a function of national concern, the organiser of the enterprise is responsible to the State for the direction given to production.

      State intervention in economic production arises only when private initiative is lacking or insufficient, or when the political interests of the State are involved. This intervention may take the form of control, assistance or direct management. (pp. 135-136)

      --Benito Mussolini, 1935, "Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions", Rome: 'Ardita' Publishers.

    7. Re:IDK... by mschirmer · · Score: 0

      what is Google really getting out of this?

      Public and official political backing from the U.S.

      This will put more pressure on China for threat of other multi-nationals pulling part or all of their business out of the communist state.

      At the moment the U.S. can't denounce the attacks officially because they don't have any connection other than a U.S. based business was supposedly attacked by Chinese operatives. By bringing in a U.S. government organization in to the mix, Google can put more pressure on the Chinese government for answers and immunity from future attacks.

      Saying all that, I'm sure that this communication band between the NSA and Google means nothing in the grand scheme of it all. China will continue to operate as it has in the past, regardless if Google pulls out of China or not, and I don't think it's going to affect any of the other multi-nationals operating in China. Money vs a bit of bad publicity from attacks or security breaches over a few years, most will take the money and deal with the circumstances when they arise. So I don't see anyone else following Google's footsteps if they do pull out.

    8. Re:IDK... by zill · · Score: 1

      I find it hard to believe the NSA really has better computer experts than Google..

      I don't have enough evidence to counter your assertion due to the shroud of top secret surrounding NSA. But I'd still like to point out two non-classified facts:

      1. NSA is the biggest employer of Mathematic PHDs in North America.

      2. In 1991, the "discovery" of differential cryptanalysis was publicly announced. But then people soon realized that the concept was already guarded against in IBM's DES cipher published back in 1976.

      In 1994, IBM publicly admits that it knew about differential cryptanalysis in as early as 1974, and that NSA was already well aware of the attack back then.

      In other words, NSA was at least 17 years ahead of academia (and thus the general public) in terms of cryptographic techniques. In hindsight this was no great surpise due to fact #1 above - for every researcher in academia, there's two more in NSA. The NSA knows everything the academia knows, but no one else has access to NSA's discoveries.

    9. Re:IDK... by budgenator · · Score: 1

      I find it hard to believe the NSA really has better computer experts than Google...the real question is, what is Google really getting out of this?

      Why is that? They done major linux developement in SELinux and have been using computers since hollerith cards and magnetic drum storage. Their own website talks about things like

      We develop the means to dominate the global computing and communications network. .... Imagine working with the most sophisticated tools available and over-the-horizon technologies that won't come into commercial mainstream use for many years. ... Today, our work takes us into the worlds of knowledge discovery, advanced mathematics, quantum computing, nanotechnology, networking technologies, and, of course, computer systems security. ... We especially need computer scientists, mathematicians, and engineers. Come see what we see. We think you will find a career at NSA to be engaging and challenging.

      Sounds like a computer geek's wetdream to me.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  10. simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google will save on security and the NSA will have more direct access to all the private information google handles, that's all. Neither care about you.

    1. Re:simple by AHuxley · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Neither care about you." then the NSA would be looking outward.
      They are building big time in the fly over states.
      Not Japan, Australia, the UK ect. .. near the bad people.
      They care about you a lot.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  11. some people move by kubitus · · Score: 1
    from the Backoffice

    to the FrontOffice

    We define whats evil!

  12. If Google Needs The N.S.A. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    then Google IS evil.

    Dear Google:

    If you become a subsidiary of the N.S.A., would you please
    restore the balance of the BushCo White Bunker e-mails not released as a result of the law suit.

    Yours In Astrakhan,
    K. Trout

  13. Stop using .. by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Microsoft?
    Does google need that in a powerpoint slide via someone from Rick's rolodex?
    Or does he only know CIA people

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  14. post chinese leaders' emails by peter303 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Chinese people would love to hear about their bribes and mistresses. The NSA must have these if they exist.

    1. Re:post chinese leaders' emails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The NSA must have these if they exist.

      We can neither confirm nor deny the existence of the NSA.

  15. Re:Here's an oldie... by hoggoth · · Score: 1

    Yeah that's an oldie alright.
    Asshat.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  16. Re:Here's an oldie... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ummmm, take a look at what he's wearing. The ONLY thing he's wearing right there on his left hand....
     
    It cannot be Sting because Sting does not wear a wedding ring BECAUSE STING IS NOT MARRIED.

  17. Block em for starters by Monoman · · Score: 1

    OK so part of me says well why don't all of us start off by blocking all IP addresses assigned to China ... oh wait isn't that what China wants to do anyway? Block their people from getting to the Internet ... kinda sorta.

    It might not be a bad idea for networks with no intention of communicating with China.

    --
    Keep the Classic Slashdot.
    1. Re:Block em for starters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Already did that... it doesn't work. China used a proxy in texas - rackspace. read.

      That will be all.

  18. Different Experts , but also deniability by gnieboer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've said it before, but if Google's investigation points to Chinese government IPs, they must tread on careful ground because they have employees in China that could go to gulag if Google gets too curious.

    Involving the NSA allows them a certain level of deniability/immunity, and let's face it, the NSA probably has been tracking Chinese Gov't IP's a lot longer than anyone, so I think it's not a question of 'better' experts, it more a question of experts experienced in doing what Google wants.

    I still believe that Google is still holding cards to their chest. I mean, how many other corporate hacks have occurred where the corporation has publicly requested the assistance of the NSA?? I'm not aware of any (though I'm sure someone will post a link showing how little I know!). So I think Google already has very good evidence that the Chinese Gov't was behind it, but is afraid to make that information public.

  19. Google can Read Your Mind... by netsharc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Google has always been able to use the things people are looking up for evil: if someone using Apple's IP googles a particular microchip's specs, you might infer from that that they might be thinking of using that chip soon.

    How about a Chinese IP googling "openssl 0.9.6 exploit".. especially if that IP was just visiting www.$SOMESITE.gov, where the HTTP-headers mention it's using "openssl-0.9.6". Or a Saudi Arabian IP googling for flight info inside the US, and a few seconds later, a Yemeni IP opening up the same URL (hmm, although without that site's cooperation, the NSA won't be able to see that, or are they..?)

    Such powers would be interesting, for the wielder. Not so much for victims of its inevitable abuse.

    --
    What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
    1. Re:Google can Read Your Mind... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy shit bro, all our base are belong to them!

  20. No evil by McGiraf · · Score: 4, Funny

    Do no evil, with a little help from Satan.

    1. Re:No evil by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The motto isn't "don't do evil", it's "don't BE evil". Not a human alive has lived without doing evil, although some of us try very hard to not do evil.

    2. Re:No evil by McGiraf · · Score: 1

      There is no evil.

    3. Re:No evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The motto isn't "don't do evil", it's "don't BE evil". Not a human alive has lived without doing evil, although some of us try very hard to not do evil.

      Some people might think that pedantic corrections are evil.

    4. Re:No evil by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      The whole “Don’t be evil” motto is a joke.
      It is factually impossible for a human to willingly do something that he thinks is evil.
      He will either justify it in some way, no matter what... Or he will say that something forced him, which takes him out of the responsibility.

      I think, subconsciously everybody who created that slogan, is perfectly aware of that, and did choose it because of that.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  21. Re:Shocked. Shocked, I Tell You. by muckracer · · Score: 1

    > If anyone thinks this is the first collaboration between Google and the NSA,
    > I've got a wall in China I want to sell you.

    You do? NICE!! PM me... :-)

  22. Anonymous Coward Trolls by happy_place · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Funny how this topic breeds anonymous coward trolls, and isn't it strangely coincidental that they're all of the same meme. Google is evil. US Government is a bad guy. China is a victim.

    I'm sure it's only a coincidence.

    --
    http://www.beanleafpress.com
    1. Re:Anonymous Coward Trolls by dintlu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The NSA and Google are in the same business: information.

      They may have different motivations and methods, but at their core they are both organizations that collect huge amounts of information and use that information as a means to an end.

      Google's "don't be evil" is a tacit acknowledgment of the power information wields, and seeing them team up with a disreputable organization like the NSA makes the parallels between the two very obvious, generating a flurry of AC comments to capitalize on the memetic opportunity.

    2. Re:Anonymous Coward Trolls by notrandom · · Score: 1

      actually...
      - google MAY not be evil but is certainly making it easy for evil to get up in your ass
      - the us govt. IS most certainly evil
      - the chinese people ARE victims indeed

    3. Re:Anonymous Coward Trolls by Knitebane · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interesting how the same people that keep saying how evil the US Government is are the same people that keep saying that the US Government ought to be in charge of our healthcare, our children's education, our financial sector and our retirement.

      --
      "...history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." --Ghandi
    4. Re:Anonymous Coward Trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You got it wrong.

      Google is evil.
      US Government is evil.
      China is a evil.

      Some are just more or less evil than others.

      It all comes down to one simple rule of thumb: humans with power usually tend to combine their power to gain more power over their fellow man, and that's the essence and root of all evil.

  23. So what by koan · · Score: 2, Informative

    ATT routes all (yes all) their traffic thru the NSA
    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2007/11/ex-att-employee-nsa-snooping-internet-traffic-too.ars

    This move from Google is more political the security oriented.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:So what by dbcad7 · · Score: 1

      I doubt that.. It's more like they can route anything they want to through it easily, splitting a stream copy. Yes I imagine they can monitor and search a large number of streams looking for something, it's the monitor everything part that I doubt. And in a small room in San Francisco.. You would need incredible storage capacity to save even 10 minutes of all the internet traffic on just AT&T's network.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    2. Re:So what by koan · · Score: 1

      By monitor I mean "filter" (and you can filter everything and store what trips the filters) in other words looking for specific things, but I'm no expert so I can't really say what they're doing.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    3. Re:So what by Zen+Hash · · Score: 1

      I doubt that.. It's more like they can route anything they want to through it easily, splitting a stream copy. Yes I imagine they can monitor and search a large number of streams looking for something, it's the monitor everything part that I doubt. And in a small room in San Francisco.. You would need incredible storage capacity to save even 10 minutes of all the internet traffic on just AT&T's network.

      They're not re-routing traffic through the NSA's secret room. If they were, the increase in latency alone would enable people to detect it. They are passively mirroring the circuits running through that facility, so that the communications are duplicated into the NSA's secret room. I would agree that it's not practical to store everything going into that room, but only certain people with the right authorization would know exactly what is being done with it at that point.

      --
      Here I sit, all broken hearted.
      Came to poop, but only farted.
    4. Re:So what by koan · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the clarification, re routing is the wrong term, mirroring is a better term.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  24. Re:Here's an oldie... by blackest_k · · Score: 4, Informative

    may i recommend detiny url expander a small add on for firefox https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/13140

    which expands the above link to http://web.archive.org/web/20001202200100/http://---www.goatse.cx/ (If you really want to click it you will have to go to the parent post)

  25. Strange... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...i thought Google is the NSA?

    Thanks, thans. Do try the salmon.

    (captcha, BTW is "specter" -- maybe Slashdot is the NSA after all. Head hurts)

  26. Re:Here's an oldie... by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

    Nice thank you

  27. Maybe the attack on Google... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...came from the NSA in the first place, just to get them to the point where they ask for cooperation?

  28. Security is NOT an issue with The Cloud. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wait a minute. I'm a manager, and I've been reading a lot of case studies and watching a lot of webcasts about The Cloud. Based on all of this glorious marketing literature, I, as a manager, have absolutely no reason to doubt the safety of any data put in The Cloud.

    The case studies all use words like "secure", "MD5", "RSS feeds" and "encryption" to describe the security of The Cloud. I don't know about you, but that sounds damn secure to me! Some Clouds even use SSL and HTTP. That's rock solid in my book.

    And don't forget that you have to use Web Services to access The Cloud. Nothing is more secure than SOA and Web Services, with the exception of perhaps SaaS. But I think that Cloud Services 2.0 will combine the tiers into an MVC-compliant stack that uses SaaS to increase the security and partitioning of the data.

    My main concern isn't with the security of The Cloud, but rather with getting my Indian team to learn all about it so we can deploy some first-generation The Cloud applications and Web Services to provide the ultimate platform upon which we can layer our business intelligence and reporting, because there are still a few verticals that we need to leverage before we can move to The Cloud 2.0.

    1. Re:Security is NOT an issue with The Cloud. by eigenstates · · Score: 1

      Mod parent hilarious for stark realism. RSS Feeds- still laughing.

      --
      quis custodiet ipsos custodes
    2. Re:Security is NOT an issue with The Cloud. by Lord+Ender · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh come on! You can't just throw terminology around like that without metrics to back it up! What does Gartner have to say about it? What magic quadrant is it in?

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    3. Re:Security is NOT an issue with The Cloud. by indi0144 · · Score: 1

      You make an advertising guy blush. Good job AC.

      That'll make a great Dilbert poster...

      **fires inkscape**

  29. My question is this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are we all being told to cut back and make do with less, when our leaders insist on taking more and spending more of our money?

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100204/ap_on_go_co/us_congress_debt_limit

    If you're too dumb to understand this basic inequality, then you have no business running for public office: if (money_in - money_out is less than 0) then (bad_things_happen). I keep wondering when China is going to cut up our credit card. Perhaps if we keep interfering with Taiwan?

  30. strategic advantage by e-scetic · · Score: 1

    The information gleaned from Google will probably give the US a little bit of an advantage in the coming cold war against China. Additionally, this kind of cooperation without divulging proprietary code or sacrificing anyone's privacy would serve as a much needed template for other US companies to share vital attack info with the US government. Right now every Chinese company probably gives the Chinese government full and unfettered access to their systems, a considerable advantage for the Chinese. Democracy/capitalism is probably to the US's considerable disadvantage when it comes to cyber warfare/security.

    Of course, we know the US telcos have sold their soul to the NSA but maybe the information gleaned by having all US telco communications on tap is of limited use. That kind of info isn't much help when Google (or any other company with offices in China) is attacked from within China, attacks enabled by inside Chinese employees doing their patriotic duty.

    This kind of issue is probably being very closely watched by any company with offices there - it probably goes without saying that if you keep your closely guarded proprietary code there, you might as well be giving it to the Chinese. I doubt they respect NDA's.

  31. why NSA hate? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The NSA are experts in systems security. We use their hardening guidelines to secure our servers. They really contribute good stuff to Linux security. They really do want to keep US systems secure. I don't think anyone has ever seen them doing something truly shady, like injecting backdoors into popular software. As far as I can tell, they break codes in one department, and help secure systems in another department. These are the good guys (unlike the FBI, who are media-whoring, civil-rights-abusing porno-police).

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    1. Re:why NSA hate? by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They wiretapped US citizens in the US without a warrant. That's illegal and immoral, and goes against their charter and policies.

      Some people may think that it is not a big deal, but really it is. First, it means (IMHO) that they think they can do anything they want. Based on the lack of political and legal fallout, apparently they are right. So, they have carte blanche to do whatever they want in terms of wiretapping, email reading, decrypting, etc. and there is nothing you can do about it. Second, even if they say they don't do X any more, you have no reason to believe that they do not do X any more.

      Yes, SELinux is great, thanks, we do appreciate it, but the betrayal of the laws of the US and the lack of control on this organization overwhelms it.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    2. Re:why NSA hate? by eigenstates · · Score: 1

      They let people in the NSA look at /. Who knew?

      Aside from that quip- 'the good guys' would probably want to do things in the open like the Linux community does. Sharing data and methodology and so on. I do not see a lot of that coming from the NSA. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

      --
      quis custodiet ipsos custodes
    3. Re:why NSA hate? by Webster9 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      These are the good guys

      Sure. As long as your definition of "Good Guys" includes domestic warrantless wiretapping.

    4. Re:why NSA hate? by Leebert · · Score: 2, Funny

      These are the good guys (unlike the FBI, who are media-whoring, civil-rights-abusing porno-police).

      Dick Gordon: National Security Agency.
      Martin Bishop: Ah. You're the guys I hear breathing on the other end of my phone.
      Dick Gordon: No, that's the FBI. We're not chartered for domestic surveillance.
      Martin Bishop: Oh, I see. You just overthrow governments. Set up friendly dictators.
      Dick Gordon: No, that's the CIA. We protect our government's communications, we try to break the other fella's codes. We're the good guys, Marty.
      Martin Bishop: Gee, I can't tell you what a relief that is... Dick.

      (shamelessly copied/pasted from IMDB...)

    5. Re:why NSA hate? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Sniffing Internet traffic is more like listening to radio signals than wire-tapping, in my opinion.

      It would be nice to have the laws regarding this stuff clarified, though.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    6. Re:why NSA hate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They really do want to keep US systems secure

      But not to the point where they can't get into these systems any more. And they want non-US systems to be insecure.

      I don't think anyone has ever seen them doing something truly shady, like injecting backdoors into popular software.

      NSAKEY has been mentioned, for example.

      And if they were only about security, why do they act with so much secrecy?

    7. Re:why NSA hate? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      When they are part of the local police force via fusion centres, its way more that just "Sniffing".
      http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2009/mar/14/fusion-center-data-draws-fire-over-assertions/
      Have a read of the "MIAC" report and understand who the NSA where to help target within the USA.
      Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr and Ron Paul supportes.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    8. Re:why NSA hate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They let people in the NSA look at /. Who knew?

      Did daily when I worked there...

      Aside from that quip- 'the good guys' would probably want to do things in the open like the Linux community does. Sharing data and methodology and so on. I do not see a lot of that coming from the NSA. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

      Well there are the NSA Security Configuration Guides that give you their recommended configurations of pretty much every major OS you might need good security guidelines for. There have been the countless submissions they've tried to make to the OSS community, such as SE Linux... NSA has contributed a ton to the high performance computing side of the house on everything from monitoring tools to improving open source compilers.

      Hmm, let's not forget that one time the NSA recommended changes to a common publicly used cipher. If I recall correctly, they had discovered a weakness which they could/would not disclose, but recommended the fix anyways. Everybody accused them of intentionally crippling the cipher and refused to follow the NSA's advice... until years later someone discovered the weakness and acknowledged that the NSA fix corrected it.

      But let's not let facts get in the way of our opinions.

    9. Re:why NSA hate? by Chili-71 · · Score: 1

      As a former member of NSA, I can assure you that domestic eves dropping is definitely not allowed. The NSA can (and do) listen to communications originating outside the USA. If an intercept triggers certain key words or phrases, then the channel is fully monitored. If the other end of the connection is inside the US, then so be it. The original intercept was targeted at a location external to the US.

      If you live inside the US and never make or receive calls overseas, you have absolute - repeat, ABSOLUTELY - nothing to fear from NSA. If you call Aunt Matilda down under and talk about kangaroo stew, you have ABSOLUTELY nothing to worry about from NSA. If you call some al qaeda stronghold and talk about a proposed terror attack on the US in the near future, you can bet your filthy ass you will be monitored.

  32. Re:Here's an oldie... by Rasperin · · Score: 1

    Or instead of another heavy plugin, you could just not click tinyurl links.

    --
    WTF Slashdot, why do I have to login 50 times to post?
  33. Re:Here's an oldie... by biryokumaru · · Score: 3, Informative

    I recommend ChromeMUSE for us Chrome folk.

    --
    When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
  34. Re:Here's an oldie... by Assembler · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can also turn on the tinyurl preview feature. http://tinyurl.com/preview.php

  35. Would China dare, though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they 'disappear' or outright arrest some of the employees of Google China, wouldn't that irreparably damage China's relations with other western tech companies?

  36. Re:Shocked. Shocked, I Tell You. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    wasn't their first cto or cso former head of nsa?

  37. Conspiracy theory #2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft saw that GMail was more secure than their systems, so they hired some Chinese guys to hack it, knowing that it would be in the news, though access to hotmale accounts never make the news (as it happens too often). Then as NSA used this as a excuse to get access to Google's data on "possible terrorists" all over the world, while they make sure not to let anyone know that they're selling all their data to NSA and others.

    EVIL!!!!!

    We shall all use Linux, and Linux only (or alternatively Plan 9).

    qmail, for those who don't want their data on cloudy 3rd party datacenters.
    Ads by Google

  38. Two towers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Two Towers" would be a fitting tag, no?

  39. Re:Shocked. Shocked, I Tell You. by mounthood · · Score: 1

    If anyone thinks this is the first collaboration between Google and the NSA, I've got a wall in China I want to sell you.

    I know you're joking but it's true, so really: The US has decided to publicly announce collaboration between Google and the NSA. It's Diplomacy by other means.

    --
    tomorrow who's gonna fuss
  40. Lets see the contract by dave562 · · Score: 1

    I wonder what the NSA's hourly rate is. Surely Google is going to be paying them, right? If the spooks are being paid by tax dollars and working for the public sector there is something shady going on there. I'm all for the NSA and Google working together to make Google a more profitable comapany... Wait, no I'm not! Given Google's current stock valuation, they can go right ahead and kick down some cash to the Treasury. We're facing a how many trillion dollar deficit?

    1. Re:Lets see the contract by zill · · Score: 1

      I bet NSA doesn't get paid with money (they can just sudo into Department of the Treasury's computer and print a few tons of Benjamins).

      I bet their hourly rate is 666 LoC worth of emails.

  41. Re:Here's an oldie... by mister_playboy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Why would you click on an a tinyurl link, especially from an AC?

    --
    Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
  42. Want a simple fact about privacy? by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

    "Want a simple fact about privacy? Privacy's Dead!" - Shepard Smith.

    --
    "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  43. Don't be evil.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [or else!]

    You may assume google's motto is "don't be evil", but it is actually a simple command. Who that command is directed at, and who defines what constitutes as "evil" remain unknown.

  44. Re:Here's an oldie... by dangitman · · Score: 1

    I recommend ChromeMUSE [google.com] for us Chrome folk.

    I thought you were called "Chromers."

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  45. Re:Here's an oldie... by Modern+Primate · · Score: 1

    Well, I never will again, that's for fucking sure.

  46. Govt. working for business? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NSA, I heard you are now securing businesses networks. Please come secure my networks. I manage small business networks and could use the help!

    WTF? Just another example of the U.S. govt. mainly working for big money, not for the people.

  47. Re:Here's an oldie... by eric-x · · Score: 1

    why is a question modded informative?