Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Judge Says You Can't Know If Google Spies For NSA

Posted by timothy on from the all-fibers-lead-to-maryland dept.

witherstaff writes "A federal judge has ordered that whether Google is spying for the National Security Agency or not, you have no right to know. EPIC, which brought the lawsuit, says the NSA can neither confirm nor deny any relationship with Google. EPIC is worried the 'NSA is developing technical standards that would enable greater surveillance of Internet users.'"

19 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. But don't worry by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

    After all, we're the good guys. We're just doing it to keep you safe from the red threat. Erh, the terrorists.

    Could someone FINALLY update my teleprompter, please?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:But don't worry by memyselfandeye · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The race is over. We won!

      When I was a teenager, after the wall fell down, a Russian scientist looking to hawk his invention moved in with my family. He was great, and taught me a lot, especially how to drink vodka. But one thing he said will always stick with me - "America and Russia always competed to see who was first. America built first nuclear submarine. Russia build first space rocket. America built first moon rocket. Eventually we had nothing to compete for, so we raced to see who spend money fastest. Russia won!"

    2. Re:But don't worry by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The sad irony is we won the cold war only to become the enemy by taking the absolute worst parts of their system!

      Now we have socialism, only unlike what the republicans want you to think it doesn't have shit to do with giving the poor anything. Instead it is socialism for the rich, where they can gamble like the market is Las Vegas and if they win? Massive profits they then won't pay taxes on by using tricks like the double dutch which is favored by Google btw, and if they lose? Well then they are "too big to fail" and We, the people get left holding holding the bag.

      Just as the Russians had we too have a small group of party elite, that through bribery, graft, and corruption shall always come out ahead no matter what happens to the country. Also like the Russians the will of the people is completely ignored, the military sucks down ever larger chunks of our GDP, and they can take you from the street and label you "an enemy of the people" and throw you down a hole and then forget about the hole or even have you executed without trial.

      That is why I truly believe that just like the Soviet system we are destined for our own little revolution, perhaps in the form of our very own Arab spring. it is obvious voting now might as well consist of a ballot with two slots "Check here to vote for graft and corruption" and "Let the guys in DC know how you feel...vote for graft and corruption!".

      And no matter what the people say, be it an end to the two wars (now three wars! Yay for the MIC! Extra hookers and blow this Xmas!), the securing of our borders and the tossing of those that entered illegally, the protection of medicare/caid and aid to the poor, legalization of pot, stopping of spying and abuses on Americans, increased taxes and the ends of loopholes for the top 5%, no matter what the people time and time and time again say they want they are repeatedly ignored by both parties for the desires of their cronies and those that can offer them bribes.

      When it came to the cold war history will most likely record America won the battle but lost the war, becoming as big of a corrupt cabal of insiders as the old USSR before finally collapsing under the weight of all the graft and desire of those at the top to ever enrich themselves at the cost of the people.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. Confirmed by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is Legal Speak for Confirmed.

    Thread Over.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  3. Misleading by camperdave · · Score: 5, Informative

    The National Security Agency does not have to disclose its relationship with Google amid press reports that the two partnered up after hackers in China launched a cyber attack on the U.S. government, a federal judge in Washington ruled.

    It's not that you don't have a right to know. Its that the NSA is under no obligation to tell you. There's a big difference.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:Misleading by erroneus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what a "right" is. That goes into huge and lengthy discussion, but to say that rights come from government is not it, especially not the US government. (Yes, we know the government people are ignoring the constitution and their limits of power.) The government comes from the people and exists to preserve people and to protect the rights of the same people it comes from.

      The freedom of information act formalizes the right to know. Often, FOIA requests are ignored or handled in bad faith... once again, people in government ignoring the law.

    2. Re:Misleading by katyngate · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How do we get all these rights as we are born?

    3. Re:Misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Jeebus, go read up on the philosophies produced during The Enlightment, especially Rousseau's concept of "Dignity of Man", and how those philosophies influenced the Founding Fathers as they set out to write the Constitution. Also look up the phrase "inalienable rights"

      Idiots like you are the reason we're losing more of our rights with each successive national election.

    4. Re:Misleading by wickerprints · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I interpreted the grandparent post as meaning that there is a distinction to be drawn between what information we, in principle, should have access to, versus the actual state of what we do have access to. In other words, we do have an intrinsic right to know--it is simply that this right is not recognized by the government.

      Not all "rights" are those that are defined and granted by law. The US Constitution attempts to be as broad as possible in codifying certain basic rights, but as we have seen throughout history, that doesn't mean every right we do have is actually allowed to be exercised in practice. That comes down to the subjective interpretations of nine fallible old people, many of whom are beholden to personal biases and political interests. And quite often, the way they rule does in fact deny people of their actual rights on a very fundamental level.

      As nice as it may sound to have a state that is of the people, by the people, for the people...that is not what the US actually is, nor has it ever been. The government has always been of itself, by itself, and for itself, and the people are merely a source of money and labor for the powerful to exploit. It's a lie on the same level of communist propaganda. All government exists to rob power from the individual to concentrate it for the few.

    5. Re:Misleading by bonch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not that you don't have a right to know. Its that the NSA is under no obligation to tell you. There's a big difference.

      You can't find out if they won't tell you. There is no difference.

      You're buying right into what they're doing. They're skirting around the issue of right to public knowledge by simply not saying anything. "Oh, it's not that you don't have a right to know. We just don't have to tell you when you ask. Therefore, we're not violating your right to know."

      That's complete bullshit.

  4. They do not need to confirm it by houghi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In times where people get grabbed at airports, wiretaps are done at almost random, why would the NSA NOT use and abuse google?

    US citizens: you have made your nest (by voting between two evils) now sleep in it.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:They do not need to confirm it by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Please. Don't even try to convince anyone here that "oh, it's not a two party dictatorship, anyone can run and become a candidate". Please. The US were a two party system from its very start. 200 years of two party system and you really want to tell me nobody bothered to try to crack that duopoly? Aside of a few desperate or dumb enough, only to find out that they couldn't even get close to winning a single state, let alone a national election? It's now almost 100 years since a "third" candidate in a president election came out in front of either party (1912 Roosevelt actually came out second in front of Taft), ever since the "third" candidates were mostly cute side effects with some entertaining value.

      Please stop perpetuating the myth that the US aren't a firmly entrenched two party system that ensures with its very system that nobody else can muscle in.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:They do not need to confirm it by bonch · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think it's odd that people are surprised by this at all. Eric Schmidt flat out stated that only people with something to hide care about privacy. That is your beloved Google, folks.

    3. Re:They do not need to confirm it by bonch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your third-party vote is a wasted vote.

      Also, that you ever believed Obama in the first place is funny. The man broke his promises right from the beginning when he didn't use public campaign funds like he said he would, so it was obvious that he was nothing but an empty celebrity politician riding a wave of hype. I'll never understand how former Obama supporters can be surprised about the current state of affairs when it was obvious from the beginning. His policies have damaged the economy so greatly and raised the debt so astronomically that it will take decades to recuperate.

  5. Sky=Falling by SomewhatRandom · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Short version = I think I speak for most individuals when I say, Duh.

    Long Version =

    The illusion of anonymity that is the Internet. Does anyone honestly believe you have any real expectation or right of anonymity online?

    When you hit a webserver... Logs are generated/stored
    When traffic you generate is either passed through or blocked at a firewall... Logs are generated/stored
    When you use a search engine from a company in the advertising industry (ex: google)... logs are generated/stored
    Rinse and repeat for just about anything you do online... and add in a dash of other miscellaneous things like tracking cookies, flash cookies, etc...

    In some cases logs are obfuscated, but not usually. I mean c'mon - legitimate advertising companies have gotten pretty good at targeting ads for users by datamining and trending data, do you honestly believe the NSA isn't doing this to a creepy scope and scale?

    Correlating data mined from multiple sources (logs, cookies, etc...). is an expensive process from a resource standpoint. Anonymity through obfuscation, apathy, and prohibitive costs may be seemingly effective, but it is not absolute.

  6. Re:Sooooo by erroneus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've said it before and I will say it again. Google is an advertising/marketing company and because of that, I only trust them to be what they are and act accordingly. They offer great candy to the people, but I am careful about which candy I will eat. No Chrome for me, thanks. I only run customized Android OS loads with a lot of crap removed. I use Google for searching. That's just about it. The social network? Yeah, not gonna play there.

  7. No Such Agency by lexsird · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have a bumper sticker for you; "It's a modern world; Surveillance Happens!"

    Our government has been eavesdropping on us since the telegraph. Accept it, get over it. I don't worry because I am a "good ole boy". If they watch the likes of me with an iota of interest, the world must indeed be safe and boring. 99.99999999% of us are boring as hell. Hence is why you have to automate this crap and search for key words, then individual vocal and speech patterns. I bet they have some sweet gear for listening in on us these days. If they don't, I am so seriously disappointed it makes me want to cry. If they don't, lets pitch in and get them something for Christmas, ok?

    On a slightly more somber note, I can't imagine what kind of monster computer these guys have. Seriously, what would YOU do with their computers if you were contracting for them and had access to them for a few hours. I would find a list of women who like middle aged fat guys. Make some serious raytraced animated porn? Or would you submit your "mind simulator" into it and see if you create a singularity? I think therefor I am? Or just get everyone in the building to get on a terminal and see what game everyone could play at once? Everyone log into WoW, make gnomes and storm Ironforge to be epically annoying?

    Eww! I know, one could steal back all the money and give it to the poor. They would just blow it and the rich would get it again, but it would make a grand holiday.

    Come on, people. It's the NSA, they are the weird uncle of the intelligence agencies as it is. They aren't worried about your mp3s, torrents, or your pron. 99.9999% of us are incapable of being weird enough to make their radar. Right? Besides, I am a Google fan, they stood up to China, and probably still are standing up to them. If the NSA is working with Google, that is cool. I bet they have some awesome apps for agents. "Google Agent"; I can see it now.

    Can't lick 'em, join 'em?

    --
    Take the Red Pill.
  8. Re:Sooooo by rmccoy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The NSA doesn't need google to watch all of your internet traffic. They are already on the backbones. Google can certainly add value to the spooks with their search-related technologies but do you really think any US corporation isn't going to role over when the guys-in-black come calling? We allowed the Patriot Act, among other forfeitures of our civil rights, what did you expect?

    So, google got big because they did it best. Isn't that what the market is supposed to do? They did it before there were high barriers to entry and when there actually was a little bit of free in that particular marketplace. Even now, when the barriers to entry to search are much higher, they are mostly technical barriers, not ones put up by lobbyists and lawyers. I can live with that. The next search engine should be one that comes up with something fundamentally new, not the one with the best patent portfolio.

    What irritates me most is people who are complaining about privacy who won't take any responsibility for protecting it. You can't expect privacy on the internet even if you don't use google. If you want privacy, start using encryption. There are free and open tools for every platform. Worried about traffic analysis? Wow, you must be doing something really interesting with your pron collection but, stil, there are tools for you to use to mask you traffic. Use them.

    Use the time spent complaining about your loss of privacy and take it back. Make a personal threat model and respond to it.

  9. Why is it confirmed? by Karljohan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't it legal speak for "hmmm... but... if we deny this, won't you just keep asking the same thing about all companies until we say that we can't comment?"