( James - Please don't write my privately off-list about on-list topics. )
James A. Donald:
> On 2013-05-22 7:59 PM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/04/telephone-calls-recorded-fbi-boston
>>
>
>>
> Yes: Recorded at the server, not at that the client, because the
> guys operating the server were fully cooperating.
>
Actually, we know that they do it on fiber backbones as much as 'at the
server' or in other places.
>>
>> You suggest that because we haven't seen it - it isn't happening.
>
> The level of competence revealed in the material that you linked to
> and quoted shows that if it was happening, we would have had not the
> slightest difficulty seeing it.
Between Mark Klein, Bill Binney, Thomas Drake, and the FBI agent
speaking about analyzing the phone calls of the Boston Bomber's wife,
what remains unseen? We've seen the block diagrams of the NSA fiber
splitters installed in San Francisco, we've seen ex-NSA people speaking
out and loudly, with lots of details; we even have ex-FBI agents
bragging on national television.
Are you saying that you're still having difficulty seeing these things?
>
>
>> We know that this spying happens and that it is rarely openly
>> discussed.
>
> We know this spying happens through big companies playing footsie
> with the government, not by the government cleverly hacking people's
> computer.
>
Did you even read the reports that I linked about companies like
FinFisher selling these tools directly to "governments" and "law
enforcement" by their own admission? Did you see that this malware is
found in dozens of countries, including the US?
>> Look at the wiretap statistics - the FBI had no trouble with
> cryptography in interception.
>
> Because Microsoft sets up the client and server so that there is no
> encryption at the server.
We're not just talking about Microsoft. I know a number of people who
have been targeted in the 20{10,11,12,13} time-frame. I should be in
those stats from what I know. I most certainly wasn't using Microsoft
products for my privacy needs.
>
>
>> This report was from a few years ago. They're getting that data
>> from
> the companies, from malware,
>
> If they were getting data from malware, we would have caught them.
Do you seriously assert that there is no data being gathered by
government (written, sponsored, purchased, deployed, supported, etc)
malware?
I mean, while I'd love to believe that
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Lantern_(software) has never
existed, we know that the US government has deployed software that
sounds similar in the case of Nicodemo Scarfo. We didn't need to catch
them, they admitted it in a court of law and used the product of that
malware to put someone in jail.
> These people have the technical competence of your mother.
>
You continue to speak about my mother and to degrade women in general
with such quips. The only thing you're really conveying to anyone at
this point is embarrassingly sad facts about yourself - both in reading
comprehension and in your general nature as a human. Perhaps you'll
consider stopping?
COABOCAD,
Jacob
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
