-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 11/21/2014 7:07 AM, Daniel Corbe wrote:
> > Paul Ferguson <fergdawgs...@mykolab.com> writes: > >> I'll apologize up front if this offends anyone's sensitivities as >> to what is relevant for list conversation... but one sentence in >> this Channel4 News story (from what I understand, Channel4 is a >> very popular news source in the UK) struck me as perhaps in >> violation of some sort of peering and/or transit agreement. Cable >> and Wireless: >> >> "...even went as far as providing traffic from a rival foreign >> communications company, handing information sent by millions of >> internet users worldwide over to spies." >> >> The entire article is here: >> >> http://www.channel4.com/news/spy-cable-revealed-how-telecoms-firm-worked-with-gchq >> >> >> My question is this: Do willful actions such as these violate peering, >> transit, and/or exchange agreements in any way? >> >> Thanks, >> >> - ferg > > Welcome to the modern age of communications. The privacy nuts and > tinfoil hat types turned out to be correct. Assume that you have > no privacy and encrypt everything you do. Or just stop caring > about privacy all together. Either way, not much has actually > changed. > Well, yes, of course I understand that you should encrypt any & every thing that you wish to protect, and believe me -- I (more than most) understand the long tug of war between telecommunications companies and national intelligence services. But you did not address my question... ;-) Cheers, - - ferg - -- Paul Ferguson VP Threat Intelligence, IID PGP Public Key ID: 0x54DC85B2 Key fingerprint: 19EC 2945 FEE8 D6C8 58A1 CE53 2896 AC75 54DC 85B2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlRvVnAACgkQKJasdVTchbIviwEAk1UQEY/sCwGi0Qua15lCzdPv NWHofFXWJkk+GEjGYMMA/RuOJcL4r+DCr526WsFU/8lGYk80M78pB7rhogN9pgs2 =Oxw/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----