nanog mailing list archives
Re: PRISM Update: NYT says WaPo a bit credulous
From: "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins () arbor net>
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2013 06:23:19 +0000
On Jun 8, 2013, at 10:11 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Well, ok, they don't actually *say* that, but it's the underlying idea behind their own piece, which says that the listed companies didn't really give NSA quite such unfettered access
There's another potential explanation: from <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/technology/tech-companies-bristling-concede-to-government-surveillance-efforts.html?pagewanted=all> ----- 'Tech companies might have also denied knowledge of the full scope of cooperation with national security officials because employees whose job it is to comply with FISA requests are not allowed to discuss the details even with others at the company, and in some cases have national security clearance, according to both a former senior government official and a lawyer representing a technology company.' ----- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins () arbor net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com> Luck is the residue of opportunity and design. -- John Milton
Current thread:
- PRISM Update: NYT says WaPo a bit credulous Jay Ashworth (Jun 07)
- Re: PRISM Update: NYT says WaPo a bit credulous Dobbins, Roland (Jun 07)
- Re: PRISM Update: NYT says WaPo a bit credulous Rich Kulawiec (Jun 08)
- Re: PRISM Update: NYT says WaPo a bit credulous Dobbins, Roland (Jun 07)