Snowdon is a dummy

This has been brought up early in this thread.

Poor Frank willing to sell the bill of rights with special note of the right to privacy for the claimed needs to deal with a few middle east terrorists.

Not even understanding that the rest of the world is not going to be buying into the massive spying on them by the US government, even if somehow the American people can be sold that bills of goods/bullshit.

The net will go dark as a results see the projects already well underway and American firms will be greatly harm as not even Americans will trust Americans firms to not allowed almost random access to their data by the US government.

Google is taking another step towards an internet that can stand up to snooping from the NSA.

Today, the company released the source code for a new web browser plugin that encrypts your email messages before they’re sent across the net. Dubbed End-to-End, the plugin aims to prevent interlopers from reading messages even if they gain access to the computer servers that drive your web email service of choice. So, if you’re using Googles’s Gmail, it could thwart the NSA and other snoopers even if they have access to Google’s network.

Yup...and those dummies at the NSA will never be able to figure out a way to defeat these new methods.

Well, you could have at least named the law suits. But whatever.

Quote:

Yup...and those dummies at the NSA will never be able to figure out a way to defeat these new methods.

If you knew anything at all concerning the art and the technical of state of the art ciphers you would know that with a billions times the computer power that is currently under the command of the NSA messages can not be broken in the life time of the universe by any known or likely means.

If some undream of weaknesses are found however in them that made them a billion times easier to break , it hardly would be enough to do massive code breaking of the information flowing over the net and at the very best would allow target spying not massive spying

But then you Frank do not know a damn thing about the subject just falling back on a almost religious faith in NSA.

NSA who was not able to protected their own secrets from someone who did not even have a college degree.

Because I am not an expert does not mean that I do not know a damn thing about the subject.

Quote:

Because I am not an expert does not mean that I do not know a damn thing about the subject.

Oh? So without looking it up you can tell us what is the differences between CDC compare to ECB modes?

Or without looking it up what cipher engine is now being used in AES?

Tell us all what is a hash function and what does it mean to salt a hash function?

So come on Frank show us all in your own words how you had some basic understanding on the subject in question.

Frank, I will even pitch you a very very slow ball by asking what is the only method of encrypting that there is not even in theory a means of breaking?

The method name have three words in it and one of the words is pad.

Frank you are in the same position of a monkey typing away at random trying to write a novel as far as the chances of your completely uneducated opinions on this subject having any truth to them.

Yet you hold those opinions to be on the same level as experts in the field that I had quoted here more then once.

You are indeed pitiful....................

Where did I say that, Bill?

Quote:

Where did I say that, Bill?

More then once my silly friend with special note of when the CEOs of major internet/computers firms stated that the government spying will prove very harmful to the economic.

I ask again: Where did I say that, Bill?

Quote:

I ask again: Where did I say that, Bill?

On this thread somewhere in the eight thousands or so postings.

Why does it not surprise me that among your many others charming traits is not standing behind your posts.

Bet you just love the fact that google does a **** poor job of indexing able2know postings................

But you do not have the ethical wherewithal to simply acknowledge that you were wrong.

William—

It’s been one year.

Technology has been a liberating force in our lives. It allows us to create and share the experiences that make us human, effortlessly. But in secret, our very own government—one bound by the Constitution and its Bill of Rights—has reverse-engineered something beautiful into a tool of mass surveillance and oppression. The government right now can easily monitor whom you call, whom you associate with, what you read, what you buy, and where you go online and offline, and they do it to all of us, all the time.

Today, our most intimate private records are being indiscriminately seized in secret, without regard for whether we are actually suspected of wrongdoing. When these capabilities fall into the wrong hands, they can destroy the very freedoms that technology should be nurturing, not extinguishing. Surveillance, without regard to the rule of law or our basic human dignity, creates societies that fear free expression and dissent, the very values that make America strong.

In the long, dark shadow cast by the security state, a free society cannot thrive.

That’s why one year ago I brought evidence of these irresponsible activities to the public—to spark the very discussion the U.S. government didn’t want the American people to have. With every revelation, more and more light coursed through a National Security Agency that had grown too comfortable operating in the dark and without public consent. Soon incredible things began occurring that would have been unimaginable years ago. A federal judge in open court called an NSA mass surveillance program likely unconstitutional and “almost Orwellian.” Congress and President Obama have called for an end to the dragnet collection of the intimate details of our lives. Today legislation to begin rolling back the surveillance state is moving in Congress after more than a decade of impasse.

I am humbled by our collective successes so far. When the Guardian and The Washington Post began reporting on the NSA’s project to make privacy a thing of the past, I worried the risks I took to get the public the information it deserved would be met with collective indifference.

One year later, I realize that my fears were unwarranted.

Americans, like you, still believe the Constitution is the highest law of the land, which cannot be violated in secret in the name of a false security. Some say I’m a man without a country, but that’s not true. America has always been an ideal, and though I’m far away, I’ve never felt as connected to it as I do now, watching the necessary debate unfold as I hoped it would. America, after all, is always at our fingertips; that is the power of the Internet.

But now it’s time to keep the momentum for serious reform going so the conversation does not die prematurely.

Only then will we get the legislative reform that truly reins in the NSA and puts the government back in its constitutional place. Only then will we get the secure technologies we need to communicate without fear that silently in the background, our very own government is collecting, collating, and crunching the data that allows unelected bureaucrats to intrude into our most private spaces, analyzing our hopes and fears. Until then, every American who jealously guards their rights must do their best to engage in digital self-defense and proactively protect their electronic devices and communications. Every step we can take to secure ourselves from a government that no longer respects our privacy is a patriotic act.

We’ve come a long way, but there’s more to be done.


Edward J. Snowden, American

P.S. Check out and share the ACLU’s new video about the last year in the surveillance debate, “They knew our secrets. One year later, we know theirs.”

Quote:

But you do not have the ethical wherewithal to simply acknowledge that you were wrong.

Not wrong at all and I am fairly sure that not a few of the thousands of readers of this thread also remember those postings of your and therefore can and will draw their own conclusions over how honest you are.