Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google and NSA Teaming Up

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the meet-my-big-brother dept.

Google 125

i_frame writes "The Washington Post reports that 'Under an agreement that is still being finalized, the National Security Agency would help Google analyze a major corporate espionage attack that the firm said originated in China and targeted its computer networks, according to cybersecurity experts familiar with the matter. The objective is to better defend Google — and its users — from future attack.'"

cancel ×

125 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Conversation between Google and NSA (5, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31021970)

NSA: We need complete access to your gmail system.

Google: Alright! This is to help us with the recent China break-in, right?

NSA: Um, sure...

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (3, Insightful)

biryokumaru (822262) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022018)

Nah, they prolly just left Google a post-it note [slashdot.org] .

Here's an oldie... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022244)

NSA Advertisement [tinyurl.com] ...the guy is Sting from The Police. The rest is self-explanatory. :\

Re:Here's an oldie... (1)

hoggoth (414195) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022426)

Yeah that's an oldie alright.
Asshat.

Re:Here's an oldie... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022504)

Ummmm, take a look at what he's wearing. The ONLY thing he's wearing right there on his left hand....
 
It cannot be Sting because Sting does not wear a wedding ring BECAUSE STING IS NOT MARRIED.

Re:Here's an oldie... (4, Informative)

blackest_k (761565) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022676)

may i recommend detiny url expander a small add on for firefox https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/13140 [mozilla.org]

which expands the above link to http://web.archive.org/web/20001202200100/http://---www.goatse.cx/ [archive.org] (If you really want to click it you will have to go to the parent post)

Re:Here's an oldie... (1)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022718)

Nice thank you

Re:Here's an oldie... (1)

Rasperin (1034758) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023626)

Or instead of another heavy plugin, you could just not click tinyurl links.

Re:Here's an oldie... (3, Informative)

biryokumaru (822262) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023706)

I recommend ChromeMUSE [google.com] for us Chrome folk.

Re:Here's an oldie... (2, Informative)

Assembler (151753) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023792)

You can also turn on the tinyurl preview feature. http://tinyurl.com/preview.php [tinyurl.com]

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31024994)

Dammit! If only we had known before, that it was that easy! Could have saved us all the work.

The Chinese Government.

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022042)

Pfft, I have long held that Google is just a front company for the NSA. Now it seems they are comfortable taking that relationship to the next level, out of the closet so to speak. (Adjusts his tin foil hat and returns to his regular viewing)

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022440)

Where could the NSA 'narus' off the clear text data?
Too far out and its still https.
Too far in and foreign staff might stumble over the 641A like room.
It's the rooms the NSA rejects that make the NSA the best :)

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023578)

I thought that Google was a front company for Microsoft, which in turn is a front company for the NSA. One to collect data on the desktop, and the other to sift through the cloud.

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (5, Funny)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022060)

    They running Windows on their desktops, the NSA already had access.

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022316)

I usually don't comment on mods - but holy shit how the hell is this insightful? There have been rumors (always denied) of "NSA backdoors" brought up by tinfoil hatters forever but most people take them for the silly rumors that they are. Insightful? For shame... Funny maybe.

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (4, Informative)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 4 years ago | (#31024656)

You could google on _NSAKEY or NSA_KEY or NSAKEY and find what some security researchers in Europe discovered and published. For instance http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/5/5263/1.html [heise.de]
A Microsoft officer offered to explain the presence of NSA_KEY, and indeed gave a partial clarification. Microsoft then declined to answer the follow-up questions which were asked, and refused to explain why they were not answering. http://cryptome.org/nsakey-ms-dc.htm [cryptome.org]
Read into this whatever you like - innocent, tinfoil hat, or otherwise. Here's the wikipedia story about it; feel free to vandalize^W improve it with your comprehensive knowledge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSAKEY [wikipedia.org]

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (1)

zill (1690130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31025578)

I wholeheartedly concur. All these NSA backdoor conspiracy theories are nonsense.

I mean, why does the NSA need a backdoor when the front door doesn't even have a lock on it?

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (1)

dave562 (969951) | more than 4 years ago | (#31025682)

I'm not trying to substantiate or refute any theories. Having said that, if it is well known that the front door doesn't have a lock on it, then one day some enterprising individual or organization come along with a business plan along the lines of...

1. Lock front door
2. Charge for lock
3. ??? (completely unnecessary ??? step)
4. Profit

Given that scenario, the NSA still has their back door into the system.

Wasn't ObaMao supposed to put a stop... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022190)

to things like this? I guess the idealism of campaign promises came crashing into the brick wall of reality...

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022352)

NSA: We need complete access to your gmail system.

Google: Alright! This is to help us with the recent China break-in, right?

NSA: Um, sure...

-----

Google: Well, we trust you and we like all the snappy salutes. Can you teach that to our workers?

NSA: You betcha.

Google: And we'll be your server farm of choice going forward?

NSA: Yea, why not.

Google: And we can print our own currency? With your picture on it?

NSA: We are so all over that. But bag the pics.

Google: Deal!

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (3, Informative)

vxice (1690200) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022368)

"The sources said the deal does not mean the NSA will be viewing users' searches or e-mail accounts or that Google will be sharing proprietary data. " RTFA, some people do take privacy seriously.

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (5, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022546)

Are those the same sources that used to say the NSA doesn't tap domestic phone calls--before a whistleblower outed them for doing exactly that?

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022566)

Just not the one at google.

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (3, Interesting)

bberens (965711) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022584)

Conspiracy theory #1: Google wouldn't let the NSA in (as much as NSA wanted). NSA makes it look like someone in China hacked Google. NSA comes to the rescue in exchange for protection money.

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023606)

One Hack in China to rule them all,
One Google to find them,
One NSA to bring them all and,
in the darkness bind them

Anonymous Coward Trolls (3, Insightful)

happy_place (632005) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022658)

Funny how this topic breeds anonymous coward trolls, and isn't it strangely coincidental that they're all of the same meme. Google is evil. US Government is a bad guy. China is a victim.

I'm sure it's only a coincidence.

Re:Anonymous Coward Trolls (2, Insightful)

dintlu (1171159) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023740)

The NSA and Google are in the same business: information.

They may have different motivations and methods, but at their core they are both organizations that collect huge amounts of information and use that information as a means to an end.

Google's "don't be evil" is a tacit acknowledgment of the power information wields, and seeing them team up with a disreputable organization like the NSA makes the parallels between the two very obvious, generating a flurry of AC comments to capitalize on the memetic opportunity.

Re:Anonymous Coward Trolls (1)

notrandom (993713) | more than 4 years ago | (#31024954)

actually...
- google MAY not be evil but is certainly making it easy for evil to get up in your ass
- the us govt. IS most certainly evil
- the chinese people ARE victims indeed

Re:Anonymous Coward Trolls (2, Interesting)

Knitebane (64590) | more than 4 years ago | (#31025204)

Interesting how the same people that keep saying how evil the US Government is are the same people that keep saying that the US Government ought to be in charge of our healthcare, our children's education, our financial sector and our retirement.

Re:Conversation between Google and NSA (1)

e2d2 (115622) | more than 4 years ago | (#31024524)

Why would they ask for something they already have?

Quid Pro Quo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022032)

Quid Pro Quo ... I wonder what the NSA could possibly want from a search engine the size of Google?

Could be worse... (1)

Kc_spot (1677970) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022034)

Google and the FCC could get in cahoooooooooooo crap hope I didn't give someone a bad idea...

Re:Could be worse... (2, Funny)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022908)

Schmidt: "I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship..."

joint-venture (5, Funny)

muckracer (1204794) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022038)

As part of the agreement a new slogan to be used jointly by both Google and the NSA has been implemented:

"No Such Evil" ...

Re:joint-venture (3, Funny)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022970)

I thought it'd be:
"Google/NSA: Your privacy is in good hands, with us."
or
"Google/NSA: Organizing the world's information; and more*."
or
"Google/NSA: Collaboration has a new meaning."

Re:joint-venture (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31023314)

gcollusion beta!

Defend its users? (4, Informative)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022074)

I can defend myself perfectly well, by using the correct tool for the job:

Self hosted mail server: Business, personal, anarchism.
Gmail: Fwding Lolcats.

Re:Defend its users? (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022232)

I've been considering setting up my own mail server...the service provided by my Domain Hoster (prouddomains) is fairly stable and rock solid, but I still like the idea of having complete control over my email.

I suppose the question is should I build a seperate box, or just incorporate it into a server I already have running as an archive and (non-HD) media streamer...it's already far overpowered for the task (Core 2 Duo E8400 and 4 gigs of ram), I doubt adding email duties to it would be too big of a deal.

Re:Defend its users? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022338)

Your "media streamer" system has 125 times the amount of memory, about 70 to 100 times the processing power, and probably several hundred times the storage space of the mail server I set up for a company with 40,000 users back in the late 1990s.

Thanks to Sun hardware and Solaris, that system handled the load just fine, and even did some rudimentary spam filtering. I doubt you could even generate a similar load on your system. If it can't handle a small fraction of what we could easily handle over a decade ago, then something is really fucked up.

Re:Defend its users? (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022462)

Like I said, it's already overpowered for the tasks given to it :-) But it's what I had laying around, so...

Re:Defend its users? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022522)

So stop writing about it here on Slashdot, and set it up as a goddamn mail server for crying out loud!

Re:Defend its users? (1)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023254)

I doubt you could even generate a similar load on your system. If it can't handle a small fraction of what we could easily handle over a decade ago, then something is really fucked up.

Yes but he was talking about exchange not qmail... Plus we often times forget to "think of the hackers's" when we decide on minimum hardware requirements.

Re:Defend its users? (4, Interesting)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022608)

Cloud computing has interesting security implications.

The IT security team protecting Gmail are better at security than the team protecting your average datacenter, and they are FAR better at security than your average small business or home user "IT security team."

But on the other hand, far more attackers are going to try far harder to get into gmail than to get into your small business mail server.

So how do these factors balance out? On the whole, I think medium-to-large businesses with dedicated IT security staff will provide better security than you would get by cloudsourced IT; but the small businesses with no dedicated IT security staff really would be better off, from a security perspective, sending their IT systems to "the cloud."

Security is NOT an issue with The Cloud. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022784)

Wait a minute. I'm a manager, and I've been reading a lot of case studies and watching a lot of webcasts about The Cloud. Based on all of this glorious marketing literature, I, as a manager, have absolutely no reason to doubt the safety of any data put in The Cloud.

The case studies all use words like "secure", "MD5", "RSS feeds" and "encryption" to describe the security of The Cloud. I don't know about you, but that sounds damn secure to me! Some Clouds even use SSL and HTTP. That's rock solid in my book.

And don't forget that you have to use Web Services to access The Cloud. Nothing is more secure than SOA and Web Services, with the exception of perhaps SaaS. But I think that Cloud Services 2.0 will combine the tiers into an MVC-compliant stack that uses SaaS to increase the security and partitioning of the data.

My main concern isn't with the security of The Cloud, but rather with getting my Indian team to learn all about it so we can deploy some first-generation The Cloud applications and Web Services to provide the ultimate platform upon which we can layer our business intelligence and reporting, because there are still a few verticals that we need to leverage before we can move to The Cloud 2.0.

Re:Security is NOT an issue with The Cloud. (1)

eigenstates (1364441) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023882)

Mod parent hilarious for stark realism. RSS Feeds- still laughing.

Re:Security is NOT an issue with The Cloud. (4, Funny)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 4 years ago | (#31024418)

Oh come on! You can't just throw terminology around like that without metrics to back it up! What does Gartner have to say about it? What magic quadrant is it in?

Really it means... (3, Insightful)

Cornwallis (1188489) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022110)

The objective is to better defend Google — and its users — from future attack.

The objective is to better defend Google — and its users — from future attack by someone other than NSA and...

Re:Really it means... (5, Funny)

horza (87255) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022332)

It makes sense. I am having a professional burglar come around tomorrow to check my locks. I told him not to come around tonight as I won't be in.

Phillip.

Re:Really it means... (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023078)

Your new security system has been installed: Motion-activated cameras, access control/logging, fingerprint/retinal scanners, the works. Hmm? Satellite uplink? No no, that's just a large serial bowl -- it's a gift!

Re:Really it means... (4, Funny)

MadKeithV (102058) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023312)

I prefer parallel bowls myself.

Shocked. Shocked, I Tell You. (4, Funny)

RobotRunAmok (595286) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022140)

If anyone thinks this is the first collaboration between Google and the NSA, I've got a wall in China I want to sell you.

Re:Shocked. Shocked, I Tell You. (1)

muckracer (1204794) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022630)

> If anyone thinks this is the first collaboration between Google and the NSA,
> I've got a wall in China I want to sell you.

You do? NICE!! PM me... :-)

Re:Shocked. Shocked, I Tell You. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31024304)

wasn't their first cto or cso former head of nsa?

Re:Shocked. Shocked, I Tell You. (1)

mounthood (993037) | more than 4 years ago | (#31024678)

If anyone thinks this is the first collaboration between Google and the NSA, I've got a wall in China I want to sell you.

I know you're joking but it's true, so really: The US has decided to publicly announce collaboration between Google and the NSA. It's Diplomacy by other means.

How to calculate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022204)

if ( Evil( Google + NSA ) Evil( China ) ) then Allow( NSA );

Re:How to calculate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022888)

html filter fail :)

IDK... (1)

boneglorious (718907) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022214)

I find it hard to believe the NSA really has better computer experts than Google...the real question is, what is Google really getting out of this?

Re:IDK... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022300)

Simple, they save money having the NSA handle certain security issues. No problem for google, they can pay the NSA with YOUR private data, they never gave a f*ck about it anyway.

Re:IDK... (4, Insightful)

el_tedward (1612093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022450)

Google probably knows more than NSA when it comes to things like search, but when it comes to breaking into a computer that doesn't belong to you, you're not going to find anyone much more knowledgeable than the NSA.

Re:IDK... (-1, Offtopic)

maciekzu (1737634) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022674)

True! Waterpik Shower Heads [waterpikshowerheads.info]

Re:IDK... (4, Insightful)

Zen Hash (1619759) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022436)

The NSA has probably captured additional communications related to the attack, aside from what went through Google's network. I'd imagine they generally have far more extensive resources and experience than Google, when it comes to capturing/analyzing communications.

Different Experts , but also deniability (5, Interesting)

gnieboer (1272482) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022554)

I've said it before, but if Google's investigation points to Chinese government IPs, they must tread on careful ground because they have employees in China that could go to gulag if Google gets too curious.

Involving the NSA allows them a certain level of deniability/immunity, and let's face it, the NSA probably has been tracking Chinese Gov't IP's a lot longer than anyone, so I think it's not a question of 'better' experts, it more a question of experts experienced in doing what Google wants.

I still believe that Google is still holding cards to their chest. I mean, how many other corporate hacks have occurred where the corporation has publicly requested the assistance of the NSA?? I'm not aware of any (though I'm sure someone will post a link showing how little I know!). So I think Google already has very good evidence that the Chinese Gov't was behind it, but is afraid to make that information public.

Would China dare, though? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31023928)

If they 'disappear' or outright arrest some of the employees of Google China, wouldn't that irreparably damage China's relations with other western tech companies?

Re:IDK... (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022600)

If the NSA indexes the web, people would notice, track back, mess with bots.
If google does it and then 'sells the NSA the web (all of it with the robot pages sorted too) its ok.
US embassy staff mapping your streets? They would be followed in every city in the world.
Google can do it and sells it back to the US gov.
The US wants to track a phone, with NSA in the network, nobody uses a phone.
With google location marketing, its just a pest, but the tech stays on as you walk.
Google is more dual use, anything the US needs, a google can do around the world.
The NSA listens, sorts and tracks as google collects.
This just makes it legal and lets some of the top NSA type to to googles top people to make a few changes.
When any spy agency talks to the private sector in the open, its going to get real evil, real soon.
IBM in the 1940's should really be a lesson.

Re:IDK... (1)

muckracer (1204794) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022728)

The corporate State considers that private enterprise in the sphere of production is the most effective and usefu [sic] instrument in the interest of the nation. In view of the fact that private organisation of production is a function of national concern, the organiser of the enterprise is responsible to the State for the direction given to production.

State intervention in economic production arises only when private initiative is lacking or insufficient, or when the political interests of the State are involved. This intervention may take the form of control, assistance or direct management. (pp. 135-136)

--Benito Mussolini, 1935, "Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions", Rome: 'Ardita' Publishers.

Re:IDK... (1)

wwfarch (1451799) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022604)

I doubt the NSA has beet computer experts than Google but I would guess that while the security experts at each institution are top notch the NSA has a lot more of them than Google.

Re:IDK... (1)

mschirmer (1619591) | more than 4 years ago | (#31024614)

what is Google really getting out of this?

Public and official political backing from the U.S.

This will put more pressure on China for threat of other multi-nationals pulling part or all of their business out of the communist state.

At the moment the U.S. can't denounce the attacks officially because they don't have any connection other than a U.S. based business was supposedly attacked by Chinese operatives. By bringing in a U.S. government organization in to the mix, Google can put more pressure on the Chinese government for answers and immunity from future attacks.

Saying all that, I'm sure that this communication band between the NSA and Google means nothing in the grand scheme of it all. China will continue to operate as it has in the past, regardless if Google pulls out of China or not, and I don't think it's going to affect any of the other multi-nationals operating in China. Money vs a bit of bad publicity from attacks or security breaches over a few years, most will take the money and deal with the circumstances when they arise. So I don't see anyone else following Google's footsteps if they do pull out.

simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022218)

Google will save on security and the NSA will have more direct access to all the private information google handles, that's all. Neither care about you.

Re:simple (2, Interesting)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022650)

"Neither care about you." then the NSA would be looking outward.
They are building big time in the fly over states.
Not Japan, Australia, the UK ect. .. near the bad people.
They care about you a lot.

some people move (1)

kubitus (927806) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022268)

from the Backoffice

to the FrontOffice

We define whats evil!

If Google Needs The N.S.A. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022334)

then Google IS evil.

Dear Google:

If you become a subsidiary of the N.S.A., would you please
restore the balance of the BushCo White Bunker e-mails not released as a result of the law suit.

Yours In Astrakhan,
K. Trout

Stop using .. (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022346)

Microsoft?
Does google need that in a powerpoint slide via someone from Rick's rolodex?
Or does he only know CIA people

post chinese leaders' emails (3, Interesting)

peter303 (12292) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022424)

The Chinese people would love to hear about their bribes and mistresses. The NSA must have these if they exist.

Re:post chinese leaders' emails (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31024222)

The NSA must have these if they exist.

We can neither confirm nor deny the existence of the NSA.

mod donwn (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022484)

Block em for starters (1)

Monoman (8745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022532)

OK so part of me says well why don't all of us start off by blocking all IP addresses assigned to China ... oh wait isn't that what China wants to do anyway? Block their people from getting to the Internet ... kinda sorta.

It might not be a bad idea for networks with no intention of communicating with China.

Re:Block em for starters (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022672)

Already did that... it doesn't work. China used a proxy in texas - rackspace. read. [wired.com]

That will be all.

Google can Read Your Mind... (4, Interesting)

netsharc (195805) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022576)

Google has always been able to use the things people are looking up for evil: if someone using Apple's IP googles a particular microchip's specs, you might infer from that that they might be thinking of using that chip soon.

How about a Chinese IP googling "openssl 0.9.6 exploit".. especially if that IP was just visiting www.$SOMESITE.gov, where the HTTP-headers mention it's using "openssl-0.9.6". Or a Saudi Arabian IP googling for flight info inside the US, and a few seconds later, a Yemeni IP opening up the same URL (hmm, although without that site's cooperation, the NSA won't be able to see that, or are they..?)

Such powers would be interesting, for the wielder. Not so much for victims of its inevitable abuse.

No evil (4, Funny)

McGiraf (196030) | more than 4 years ago | (#31022626)

Do no evil, with a little help from Satan.

Re:No evil (2, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023042)

The motto isn't "don't do evil", it's "don't BE evil". Not a human alive has lived without doing evil, although some of us try very hard to not do evil.

Re:No evil (1)

McGiraf (196030) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023220)

There is no evil.

Re:No evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31023256)

The motto isn't "don't do evil", it's "don't BE evil". Not a human alive has lived without doing evil, although some of us try very hard to not do evil.

Some people might think that pedantic corrections are evil.

Re:No evil (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31025080)

The whole “Don’t be evil” motto is a joke.
It is factually impossible for a human to willingly do something that he thinks is evil.
He will either justify it in some way, no matter what... Or he will say that something forced him, which takes him out of the responsibility.

I think, subconsciously everybody who created that slogan, is perfectly aware of that, and did choose it because of that.

Strange... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022706)

...i thought Google is the NSA?

Thanks, thans. Do try the salmon.

(captcha, BTW is "specter" -- maybe Slashdot is the NSA after all. Head hurts)

Maybe the attack on Google... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31022720)

...came from the NSA in the first place, just to get them to the point where they ask for cooperation?

My question is this: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31023000)

Why are we all being told to cut back and make do with less, when our leaders insist on taking more and spending more of our money?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100204/ap_on_go_co/us_congress_debt_limit [yahoo.com]

If you're too dumb to understand this basic inequality, then you have no business running for public office: if (money_in - money_out is less than 0) then (bad_things_happen). I keep wondering when China is going to cut up our credit card. Perhaps if we keep interfering with Taiwan?

strategic advantage (1)

e-scetic (1003976) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023144)

The information gleaned from Google will probably give the US a little bit of an advantage in the coming cold war against China. Additionally, this kind of cooperation without divulging proprietary code or sacrificing anyone's privacy would serve as a much needed template for other US companies to share vital attack info with the US government. Right now every Chinese company probably gives the Chinese government full and unfettered access to their systems, a considerable advantage for the Chinese. Democracy/capitalism is probably to the US's considerable disadvantage when it comes to cyber warfare/security.

Of course, we know the US telcos have sold their soul to the NSA but maybe the information gleaned by having all US telco communications on tap is of limited use. That kind of info isn't much help when Google (or any other company with offices in China) is attacked from within China, attacks enabled by inside Chinese employees doing their patriotic duty.

This kind of issue is probably being very closely watched by any company with offices there - it probably goes without saying that if you keep your closely guarded proprietary code there, you might as well be giving it to the Chinese. I doubt they respect NDA's.

why NSA hate? (1, Insightful)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023298)

The NSA are experts in systems security. We use their hardening guidelines to secure our servers. They really contribute good stuff to Linux security. They really do want to keep US systems secure. I don't think anyone has ever seen them doing something truly shady, like injecting backdoors into popular software. As far as I can tell, they break codes in one department, and help secure systems in another department. These are the good guys (unlike the FBI, who are media-whoring, civil-rights-abusing porno-police).

Re:why NSA hate? (2, Insightful)

Beezlebub33 (1220368) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023894)

They wiretapped US citizens in the US without a warrant. That's illegal and immoral, and goes against their charter and policies.

Some people may think that it is not a big deal, but really it is. First, it means (IMHO) that they think they can do anything they want. Based on the lack of political and legal fallout, apparently they are right. So, they have carte blanche to do whatever they want in terms of wiretapping, email reading, decrypting, etc. and there is nothing you can do about it. Second, even if they say they don't do X any more, you have no reason to believe that they do not do X any more.

Yes, SELinux is great, thanks, we do appreciate it, but the betrayal of the laws of the US and the lack of control on this organization overwhelms it.

Re:why NSA hate? (1)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 4 years ago | (#31025530)

Sniffing Internet traffic is more like listening to radio signals than wire-tapping, in my opinion.

It would be nice to have the laws regarding this stuff clarified, though.

Re:why NSA hate? (1)

eigenstates (1364441) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023934)

They let people in the NSA look at /. Who knew?

Aside from that quip- 'the good guys' would probably want to do things in the open like the Linux community does. Sharing data and methodology and so on. I do not see a lot of that coming from the NSA. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

Re:why NSA hate? (2, Insightful)

Webster9 (1156495) | more than 4 years ago | (#31023942)

These are the good guys

Sure. As long as your definition of "Good Guys" includes domestic warrantless wiretapping.

Re:why NSA hate? (2, Funny)

Leebert (1694) | more than 4 years ago | (#31024164)

These are the good guys (unlike the FBI, who are media-whoring, civil-rights-abusing porno-police).

Dick Gordon: National Security Agency.
Martin Bishop: Ah. You're the guys I hear breathing on the other end of my phone.
Dick Gordon: No, that's the FBI. We're not chartered for domestic surveillance.
Martin Bishop: Oh, I see. You just overthrow governments. Set up friendly dictators.
Dick Gordon: No, that's the CIA. We protect our government's communications, we try to break the other fella's codes. We're the good guys, Marty.
Martin Bishop: Gee, I can't tell you what a relief that is... Dick.

(shamelessly copied/pasted from IMDB...)

Conspiracy theory #2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31024382)

Microsoft saw that GMail was more secure than their systems, so they hired some Chinese guys to hack it, knowing that it would be in the news, though access to hotmale accounts never make the news (as it happens too often). Then as NSA used this as a excuse to get access to Google's data on "possible terrorists" all over the world, while they make sure not to let anyone know that they're selling all their data to NSA and others.

EVIL!!!!!

We shall all use Linux, and Linux only (or alternatively Plan 9).

qmail [qmail.org] , for those who don't want their data on cloudy 3rd party datacenters.
Ads by Google

Two towers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31024632)

"Two Towers" would be a fitting tag, no?

mod 0p (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31025606)

this mistake 0r can be like

Lets see the contract (1)

dave562 (969951) | more than 4 years ago | (#31025812)

I wonder what the NSA's hourly rate is. Surely Google is going to be paying them, right? If the spooks are being paid by tax dollars and working for the public sector there is something shady going on there. I'm all for the NSA and Google working together to make Google a more profitable comapany... Wait, no I'm not! Given Google's current stock valuation, they can go right ahead and kick down some cash to the Treasury. We're facing a how many trillion dollar deficit?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?