On 2007-12-28, at 0555, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Too Guardster Team Juha-Matti
Heres the proof.
U.S. Calea law Sec. 103. ASSISTANCE CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS By
U.S. law any telecommunications carrier (thats you HushMail) that
does business in the U.S. shall ensure intercept of all wire
Man,
You should read a bit more. Comparing Calea to National Security Letters
is completely out to lunch. For one, Calea requires a court order,
enough evidence has to presented to a judge to convince him to write the
order, a NSL does not.
For another, telecommunications carrier refers to
]
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 3:55 AM
To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Re: Cryptome: NSA has real-time access to Hushmail servers
Too Guardster Team Juha-Matti
Heres the proof.
U.S. Calea law Sec. 103. ASSISTANCE CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS By U.S.
law any
Too Guardster Team Juha-Matti
Heres the proof.
U.S. Calea law Sec. 103. ASSISTANCE CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS By U.S. law any
telecommunications carrier (thats you HushMail) that does business in the U.S.
shall ensure intercept of all wire and electronic communications. So we have
two
Hushmail Team has posted its response on 29th Dec to Cryptome:
Hush Communications Corporation, the company that provides the Hushmail.com email
service, is not owned, wholly or in part, by any government agency.
Response from Safe-mail.net Team is the following:
1. We never had any contacts,
http://www.rsync.net/resources/notices/canary.txt
Not an ISP, but if your data resides on their server(s), ...
-Original Message-
From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 12:26 PM
To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Cryptome: NSA has real-time
Kurt Buff [EMAIL PROTECTED] top-posted:
Wasn't there an article or a post somewhere about an ISP that
maintained a canary web page with the statement we haven't been
served with an NSL and (I think) a date that was meant to be taken
down or perhaps merely not updated in such an event?
In the
Steve Shockley wrote:
Requred to lie, or just required to not disclose the cooperation?
We cannot confirm nor deny this term lie/(un)disclose at present time.
http://libraryjuicepress.com/blog/?p=291
--
J. Oquendo
SGFA #579 (FW+VPN
On Dec 26, 2007, at 4:33 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 14:02:18 +0200, Juha-Matti Laurio said:
Guardster Team has posted its response on 21st Dec to Cryptome:
We can assure you that we do not cooperate with the NSA or any other
government agency anywhere in the world. We
at all rather than make a public statement to
the contrary...
t
-Original Message-
From: Steve Shockley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 10:11 AM
To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Cryptome: NSA has real-time access to Hushmail servers
[EMAIL
partnerships and entities.
From: Steve Shockley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 28 December 2007 5:11 AM
To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Cryptome: NSA has real-time access to Hushmail servers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that if they had been
On Dec 27, 2007 10:11 AM, Steve Shockley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Requred to lie, or just required to not disclose the cooperation?
And the difference would be?
--
Rob
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that if they had been served with an NSL (National Security Letter),
they may be legally *required* to lie about it while cooperating. Actually
truthfully saying Yeah, an NSL showed up and we complied could land them
in jail
I don't think that they are
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 14:02:18 +0200, Juha-Matti Laurio said:
Guardster Team has posted its response on 21st Dec to Cryptome:
We can assure you that we do not cooperate with the NSA or any other
government agency anywhere in the world. We invite whomever is making this
statement to provide
Wasn't there an article or a post somewhere about an ISP that
maintained a canary web page with the statement we haven't been
served with an NSL and (I think) a date that was meant to be taken
down or perhaps merely not updated in such an event?
Cute idea, though I suppose they would also be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that if they had been served with an NSL (National Security Letter),
they may be legally *required* to lie about it while cooperating. Actually
truthfully saying Yeah, an NSL showed up and we complied could land them
in jail
Requred to lie, or just required
Guardster Team has posted its response on 21st Dec to Cryptome:
We can assure you that we do not cooperate with the NSA or any other
government agency anywhere in the world. We invite whomever is making this statement
to provide proof, rather than making a baseless accusation.
.
Link:
://xato.net/bl/2007/12/22/nsa-controls-internet/
Mark Burnett
-Original Message-
From: Jim Harrison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2007 11:41 AM
To: Juha-Matti Laurio; bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Subject: RE: Cryptome: NSA has real-time access to Hushmail servers
If you insist on sending these, can you at least save them for the first
calendar day in April or perhaps include a smiley or two? These claims rely
solely on loosely-associated data (not facts) and present little more than a
basic unicorn argument; the basis for any good conspiracy theory.
19 matches
Mail list logo
