Wow! I work in the Network Security business and this piece blows me away.

[trumad]

I know RSA very well and have worked with the product discussed in this piece. When you compromise a company that is supposed to protect you from being compromised, well then--- everyone is compromised.

Oh and thank you Ed Snowden.

Exclusive: Secret contract tied NSA and security industry pioneer

(Reuters) - As a key part of a campaign to embed encryption software that it could crack into widely used computer products, the U.S. National Security Agency arranged a secret $10 million contract with RSA, one of the most influential firms in the computer security industry, Reuters has learned.

Documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden show that the NSA created and promulgated a flawed formula for generating random numbers to create a "back door" in encryption products, the New York Times reported in September. Reuters later reported that RSA became the most important distributor of that formula by rolling it into a software tool called Bsafe that is used to enhance security in personal computers and many other products.

<snip>
The earlier disclosures of RSA's entanglement with the NSA already had shocked some in the close-knit world of computer security experts. The company had a long history of championing privacy and security, and it played a leading role in blocking a 1990s effort by the NSA to require a special chip to enable spying on a wide range of computer and communications products.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/20/us-usa-security-rsa-idUSBRE9BJ1C220131220

[woo me with science]

1. Corrupt beyond measure.

There is no spinning this level of rank corruption and criminality away.

[cantbeserious]

9. +1

eom

[woo me with science]

2. For some reason, I am unable to rec this post.

The page just reloads without a rec.

Will try again in a bit.

[trumad]

3. NSA?

[woo me with science]

6. Heh heh.

I slipped a rec through. Distracted them with my morning emails.

Clearing cache and cookies may have helped, too.

[Enthusiast]

20. It isn't outside the realm of possibilities.

[woo me with science]

32. With this level of corruption and criminality,

nothing is outside the range of possibilities.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

4. well, clearly the NSA is unhappy about it...

however, I was able to get the DU REC to work... perhaps a glitch in the page refresh. it does show two rec's now...

sP

[woo me with science]

7. Clearing cache and cookies did the trick.

But I do believe the NSA is not happy with trumad.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

10. i cleared cookies this morning, too

christmas cookies... off a plate

my wife and kids and their friends went cookie-insane last night (let's put it this way, Santa has his work cut out for him so i am just doing my part to help out) and now i am all hopped-up on sugar and gingerbread...

ok, TMI... have an NSA-free day!

sP

[woo me with science]

17. I like your cookies better than my cookies.

I don't think it's possible to have an NSA-free day anymore.

[840high]

91. Same here.

[surrealAmerican]

5. That really is messed up.

k & r

[cantbeserious]

8. With This Revelation In Mind - Consider That The Whole Edifice Of Government Is Corrupted

Trust - Government - Never Again

[reformist2]

18. We have a lot of work ahead of us to clean up this mess - it may take a lifetime.

A generation or two of complacency, combined with the tendency for power to corrupt, has brought us to the current state of affairs.

[loudsue]

37. The bush crime family set a whole new standard of corruption in America. We may

never recover from the republican mess we have found ourselves in. They have infiltrated the democratic party, and own the supreme court. Republicans are a cancer on the world.

[woo me with science]

40. It is Obama's surveillance state now. nt

[rhett o rick]

50. I agree with everything you say except it seems you want to blame Republicans.

The scourge is bigger than the Republicans. Whoever is in power transcends parties. While we are watching the REpublicans, corrupt Democrats are picking our pockets. IMO it's possible that Pres Obama is truly working to help the lower classes, but he may be severely restricted in what he can do. That appears especially true in the area of the intelligence agencies.

[truedelphi]

71. Funny But I somehow don't remember George W

Denouncing Ed Snowden.

Or spending Tuesday afternoons deciding which brown-skinned people our drones should fall on.

[Recursion]

108. We sure dodged a bullet when we didn't get single payer! (nt)

[cantbeserious]

113. Right You Are Since What We Have Is Insurance Reform - So Much For Hope And Change

eom

[hobbit709]

11. One of the reasons I keep no sensitive data on a computer that connects to the outside world.

[jtuck004]

14. Or a phone or on any computer in the world that may have information about us

and is not under our control...

You know, when I heard there was a guy who kept a list about who was naughty and nice, I thought, "We are in deep shit"

Now I find that these people, along with a lot of others, have a list too...and it bothers me much, much more.

[hobbit709]

15. Anything I truly don't want anyone to know about is kept in the safest location of all

Inside my skull.

[jtuck004]

19. Ha. That's kinda what I was thinking. One hopes. n/t

[Romulox]

22. That makes no difference. All your sensitive data is on computers, and they are all spied on.

Ever do your taxes? Do you have a driver's license? A bank account?

You haven't kept your sensitive data from anyone, and you have a false sense of security.

[hobbit709]

23. That's not the stuff I worry about.

I've always assumed that is data they know about. Anything they know about is no longer secret.

[Romulox]

25. You likely have an idiosyncratic definition of "sensitive data" then.

I couldn't begin to imagine what "secrets" you store in your offline computer (or why you'd announce the same here on a public forum,) but rest assured all the "sensitive data" that they care to know--SS#, bank accounts, medical history, educational history, etc-- they already have.

[hobbit709]

28. Those are matters of public knowledge.

Once you get a SS# you are in the government database. Same with bank accounts, etc.
I expect no privacy from any of that. As long as that data isn't obtained by non need to know people to use for their own ends. Even if someone got my financial data, they wouldn't get far with what little there is in my accounts.
We don't have an actual thought police yet so my mind is still secure.

[Romulox]

29. You are spouting absolute gibberish, of course. SS#, Bank accounts "public knowledge"?

You are obviously deflecting away from the NSA spying scandal, as if that could possibly work.

I'll leave you to your inviolable "secrets"...

[hobbit709]

30. those items are available if you know where and how to look.

I'm not deflecting from the NSA. I would be perfectly happy if it was abolished, along with about half the Pentagon.

you obviously half a false sense of security about your data-I have no such illusions.

[Romulox]

31. Right. That place is the bank's encrypted database. With an NSA backdoor key.

I have no interest in further "debating" these nonsense points with you.

[woo me with science]

34. But you're not bothered if it stays?

"I would be perfectly happy if..."

That was a very odd way of phrasing an opinion about an abusive, criminal governmental surveillance machine.

[hobbit709]

35. If I would be perfectly happy if it's gone, the opposite holds if it stays.

[woo me with science]

41. Why?

So far your comments here suggest that you see no big problem... that people just need to keep their data offline.

What do you think about the criminality and corruption here?

[YOHABLO]

89. I am more worried about a extreme power shift politically to the right .. and what they're

capable of doing with this information on U.S. citizens ... the Nazis used IBM to track down ''dissidents'' and Jews and what have you. Say it ain't so Joe. We never thought the U.S. would turn into a police state .. but proof is in the pudding.

[JDPriestly]

79. I buy stuff and earned money in public places. I don't just drive in my back yard.

I drive around town. So I don't care if the government knows my tax data, my driver's license information or the status of my bank account.

I don't want them taking notes on how many times I call my mom, my husband, my kids, my friends, my doctor, my lawyer, etc.

The biggest problem is with the NSA observing who calls which lawyers. That's where our most basic rights, the rights that we rely on when we think we might have a serious problem, divorce, a dispute at work, a car accident, a dispute about a bill, perhaps a drunk driving charge, a drug charge if not against ourselves, against someone we know or care about, maybe a family member or even a worse legal problem, we want privacy. The NSA should not be looking at who is calling their lawyer and who is not. So you call your lawyer and then you call some friend. That should not be the NSA's business.

Same with your calls to your doctor, your pastor, any person to whom you turn when you have a problem. That's the information the NSA should not be getting.

[Romulox]

116. Phone calls cross the public spectrum. So why care if the gov't listens? Where's the distinction?

The biggest problem is with the NSA observing who calls which lawyers. That's where our most basic rights, the rights that we rely on when we think we might have a serious problem, divorce, a dispute at work, a car accident, a dispute about a bill, perhaps a drunk driving charge, a drug charge if not against ourselves, against someone we know or care about, maybe a family member or even a worse legal problem, we want privacy. The NSA should not be looking at who is calling their lawyer and who is not. So you call your lawyer and then you call some friend. That should not be the NSA's business.

But if they physically followed you to your lawyer's office, it's fine? Again, I fail to see any logical distinction.

[JDPriestly]

120. They don't physically follow you to your lawyer's office. It would be too obvious.

They are too sneaky and underhanded for that.

Phone calls are a private means of communication. I do care if the government listens.

We used to care about the fact that the East German government listened to its citizens' phone calls. Ditto for the Russian government.

Suddenly, because it's the US government doing it and it's only the metadata (which crunched in a computer reveals unbelievable amounts of our personal information and thinking), we think it's OK?

Not me. It simply is not OK. It never will be.

It's just repugnant.

It's wrong.

[JDPriestly]

122. If someone physically followed me to my lawyer's office, I would go to court and get a restraining

order. They would then have to show specific cause as to why they were following me. I have a right to privacy even on the street.

A person who follows another person can expect to be called to court and have a restraining order issued against them. That is precisely what should happen to the NSA when it follows us online or collects our private communications information.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

38. Now they will be intrigued to know

what you keep offline!

[ucrdem]

12. As best as I can make out, RSA said no to Clinton, yes to Bush in 2006,

and now, in Obama time, a Carlyle "leaker" leaks the predictable news. Per the Reuters link.

Sorry but I'm not feelin' the outrage.

[Maedhros]

68. You should.

The NSA and RSA are both guilty of consumer fraud.

The NSA encouraged, and paid, RSA to offer a product that was specifically designed NOT to perform as advertised.

You're OK with government agencies colluding with the private sector to defraud consumers?

I suppose I can't convince you to care. What is really strange is your perceived need to come into this thread and dissuade others from caring.

[ucrdem]

69. and in other news, Inspector Renault is shocked to find gambling going at Rick's place. nt

[Maedhros]

70. Again - why is is so important to you to discourage people from paying attention

to abuses by the NSA?

Maybe it's old news to you, but "you" aren't "everyone." Others can learn from our discussion, and that can only be a good thing in a democracy.

[Hissyspit]

74. It's not old news to the poster. It's just rationalization in his/her part.

There are all kinds of details coming out that are important that we haven't known about. And even if suspected, confirmation makes a difference.

[quakerboy]

99. Its a fun game they have going

If anyone publicly states their suspicions about something wrong happening/about to happen, then they are just "concerned" and to be ignored because its all just fantasy's they are making up.

And once the proof comes out, its old news, stuff everyone already knew anyway.

[ucrdem]

80. Who's should-ing whom?

I posted my analysis of the article. You popped in to correct my thinking. Fine, it's a discussion board, but where are you getting that I'm trying to discourage anyone from basking in their 15 minutes?

[Maedhros]

81. You dismiss the importance of the OP

because of the timing of the release and because it came from a Carlyle leak. Both irrelevant to the issue: the NSA conspired with RSA to commit consumer fraud.

"Sorry, not feeling the outrage" reads as a passive-aggressive swipe at those who express concerns about this problem.

[ucrdem]

82. I read the link and clarified the timeline. You're welcome. nt

[Maedhros]

83. As I said, the timeline is not important.

Why focus on that, instead of the wrongdoing on the part of the NSA?

[ucrdem]

84. Well, that was honest. nt

[bemildred]

13. Doesn't surprise me at all.

I didn't know the means, but I was pretty sure they had whatever they wanted. We are a corrupt, decadent imperial power in steep decline, we kissed lawfuilness off some time back, and we never gave it much respect.

I followed Zimmerman's crusade back in the 90s, and I have never believed the spooks would accept any limits on their powers to watch everybody all the time.

Hand-rolled high-grade open-source encryption is the only thing I have much faith in.

[myrna minx]

16. K&R - This is chilling. n/t

[sabrina 1]

21. More criminal activity from a government agency that nothing will be done about.

Thanks again Edward Snowden.

At least people know they are being spied on now. No longer can they be called CTs about anything regarding their Government.

[shireen]

24. this is disgusting!

I understand the need for some level of surveillance for the sake of national security, but the NSA has totally been abusing their position. Heads need to roll for this!

[Laelth]

26. k&r for exposure. n/t

-Laelth

[mother earth]

27. And to think there is far more yet to be revealed, it's beyond corrupt. nt

[johnnyreb]

33. Thank you Reuters!!

Reuters also recently reported the Pentagon's unaccounted 8.5 TRillion. GOOD JOB, y'all!

Behind the Pentagon’s doctored ledgers, a running tally of epic waste
November 18, 2013
(....)
That means that the $8.5 trillion in taxpayer money doled out by Congress to the Pentagon since 1996, the first year it was supposed to be audited, has never been accounted for.
http://www.reuters.com/investigates/pentagon/#article/part2

[woo me with science]

36. +1 The few remaining investigative journalists deserve high praise

as do the sources who dare to speak to them in this climate of government surveillance and intimidation.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

39. Large tail wagging dog

[DireStrike]

42. Free software is the answer.

It's the only way we have a shot at keeping the internet safe from malicious governments and private companies.

[randome]

46. And safe for child pornographers and human traffickers. Think it through.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[DireStrike]

48. Ok, let's ban anything that a criminal can use. Think it through.

[rhett o rick]

51. You appear to choose security over liberty. nm

[randome]

54. Only when there is no alternative.

Would you allow child pornographers to be able to encrypt the contents of their crimes? How would we ever get evidence to use against them?

Law enforcement decryption measures have been in force since at least the 90s.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[rhett o rick]

56. There is always a choice. If The Powers To Be gave you the choice of eliminating child pornography

if you gave up all your Constitutional rights, would you go for it?

If security is what you want over all else, prison is the place for you.

[trumad]

62. Yes they have

and they use that tool when a judge allows them to use that tool.

As we know---the NSA does what they want.

[mike_c]

64. it's for your own good....

That's ALWAYS the justification for totalitarianism. Yes, I would rather preserve personal privacy that might be abused, than make everyone maximally safe by utterly eliminating privacy.

[eggplant]

52. So is food.

Should we ban food?

[randome]

55. I don't understand your point.

I'm not calling for banning anything. I'm saying law enforcement has put decryption in place since at least the 90s, as I linked below.

I don't see how we would ever get evidence of crimes if child pornographers or human traffickers could keep the contents of their communications safe.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[eggplant]

66. I don't know where to begin.

Are you suggesting that people shouldn't (or don't) have the right to use publicly verifiable unbreakable (for the moment) encryption? People who haven't been accused or convicted of any crime? That somehow the existence and availability of such tools is inherently bad?

Do you honestly think that it is the security of the encryption that causes people traffic in child porn or slaves? *That's* what's keeping us from catching them? Really? Do you really think that if unbreakable encryption is made illegal, that this would in any way affect the behavior of people who traffic in such things?

Why not require that all physical locks be pickable? That houses can't have curtains? That the titles of the books I choose to read be made available without a warrant?

The fifth amendment gives us the right to not self-incriminate. If I am forced to use encryption with known flaws, then I lose the right to private communication, which could be incriminating. I shouldn't have to demonstrate that I'm not using it for bad things by making it freely readable by others.

[joshcryer]

97. Not really.

Security only goes so far. There's also behavior. 99% of people aren't going to be equipped to be completely immune from investigative actions if they are seen as a threat.

[cprise]

107. "Not really."

People are not islands unto themselves, connected only by the panopticon. The ones who are equipped to investigate can inform others.

Security is also not a black-and-white, yes-or-no matter.

With open source, there is a much better chance the average user will find out about problems through the press, social media, etc, and there is a whole class of technicians who are empowered to rectify problems in the OS even if a vendor won't.

[joshcryer]

112. The poster was saying you couldn't get caught.

I think that's demonstrably false as simply decrypting stuff and spying on people isn't all investigators have at their disposal.

[cprise]

115. My bad. I thought you replied to #42. n/t

[joshcryer]

117. No worries.

I thought I'd replied to #42 when I re-read the subthread, DU's threading is weird.

Anyway I just wanted to say that anonymity isn't the end all, people make mistakes, word analysis is easily achieved, personal details worked out. It's why that one guy sending death threats over Tor got arrested. Tor, which btw the NSA has yet to hack because it's that good and it will only get better. That guy who used Tor just was questioned, as were all the other Tor users in the school, about 60 of them, and he was found out just by interviewing him and doing basic behavior analysis.

So, no, you don't need to get rid of anonymity to catch criminals.

You need to do your job.

[cprise]

118. Anonymity tools are still necessary

And the more people that use them, the better. Of course, one also expects the state of the art will get better over time (no doubt, the NSA + DEA have an even harder time against I2P). When people start using this kind of networking by default, they gain at least some control over their online identity and privacy.

This is important today because our establishment has decided to pursue a goal of total access to private information, so I don't think its going overboard to suggest everyone start using I2P (Tor, I have reservations about).

You make a good point about real investigation, one that I think got lost when it comes to today's policy makers.

[joshcryer]

119. Absolutely!

Sorry if I wasn't clear there. It's just that anonymous tools don't stop them from doing their job. The Silk Road, ran on Tor, was taken down because the idiot who set it up used his real name the very first time he advertised it. They literally caught him by using ... Google.

[cprise]

110. Check out Qubes OS

http://www.qubes-os.org

It has some excellent security features.

[progressoid]

43. "The NSA declined to comment."

Maybe 60 Minutes could take care of that.

[closeupready]

75. Right, Lara Logan is probably on it. :-D

[TBF]

44. My rec worked -

I think the NSA has given up all hope and just ignores me ...

[randome]

45. As I pointed out in one of the other threads on this...

They are, I believe, currently working with Microsoft for much the same thing. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/04/microsoft-gives/

You cannot have 100% secure communications because that opens the door very widely for criminal organizations -including pornographers, human trafficking operations, and, yes, terrorists- to operate with absolutely no fear of detection.

Law enforcement has always worked toward this. Even back in the 90s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_Law_Enforcement_Act

And for anyone who thinks we should have 100% secure communications, be so kind as to tell us how you would stop the organizations I listed above.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Major Hogwash]

67. Great post!!

However, the maddening crowd doesn't care, they want to scream and holler.

What I want to know is, who is going to play Snowden in the upcoming movie.
I've heard that Matt Damon already turned down the part.

I know that Greenwald is going to be portrayed as a cross between Superman and Batman, complete with a super secret Batcave, but I don't know who they would get to play his part, either.

The "movie company" that will make the movie will probably be something like what Jerome Corsi has, an ad hoc film company that is thrown together just for this purpose.

[randome]

93. Like the Composite Superman?

Snowden would be a kind of Composite Robin.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[closeupready]

77. You were asked above (and declined to answer, interestingly) if

if you would be willing to surrender all your Constitutional rights in order to stop child pornography.

Please be so kind as to answer that question here.

[randome]

92. I don't see that it's a pertinent question.

No one is asking anyone to surrender all our Constitutional rights. And I asked a question, too. How would law enforcement be able to produce evidence of child pornography or human trafficking if encryption was fool proof?

There is always a fine line to be tread between freedom and privacy. Always.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[cprise]

106. Skype joined NSA PRISM just weeks after MS bought them. n/t

[hootinholler]

47. Son of a bitch!

There are a lot of people around here owe me an apology!

They told me in June I was nuts to even think that RSA could be compromised! 256 bits! Impossible to crack! They didn't want to hear that a subtle flaw in the random number generation could allow keys to be deduced.

Vindication!

[NealK]

49. What a bunch of scumbags!

[Poll_Blind]

53. This is, indeed, a BIG fucking deal. nt

PB

[Egalitarian Thug]

57. You say you work in "the Network Security business", but this "blows you away"?

Thanks for bringing it up, I doubt many will even understand the implications, let alone break away from the perpetual soap opera long enough to object.

[trumad]

61. It blows me away because...

we sell RSA to secure networks---but yet they're (RSA) doing secret deals with Big Gov to undue that security.

Basically RSA has given the NSA the keys to their castle--- and as we all know---the NSA can't keep their own shit secure.

[Hissyspit]

76. No, it's just a "soap opera!"

[joshcryer]

98. NIST recently disowned Dual EC DRBG.

NIST got's egg on its face.

And any good secure networking guy would've been informed not to use Dual EC DRBG. I feel for you if you used any secure networks without being aware of it.

Bruce Schneier called out as far back as 2007 when it was originally proposed: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/11/the_strange_sto.html

OpenSSL has never used it (in fact, because of the clever 'bug' in their implementation no version of OpenSSL has ever used it since no one discovered it was intentionally non-compliant until recently): http://marc.info/?l=openssl-announce&m=138747119822324&w=2

[AAO]

104. I happen to have some knowledge in this area also

And what the NSA has done is unfortunately not surprising, but the RSA is used at my company to access our internal networks, and the same can be said for thousands more. I am very angry at RSA for betraying the trust of so many. There should be convictions, but it probably won't happen.

[Corruption Inc]

58. Rec'd, no surprise

We live in a country with torture camps, huge propaganda networks, paid for elections, rigged markets and for-profit wars, of course they're spying on everyone and lying about it every step of the way.

[WillyT]

59. K & R !!!

[jsr]

60. This is a must read.

[DeSwiss]

63. K&R

[sulphurdunn]

65. Nothing new here.

"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people."
Theodore Roosevelt

The difference now is that the real government is becoming confident enough to step out of the shadows.

[Th1onein]

72. So, let me get this straight.....

RSA sells security software and they sold to the NSA the right to build a backdoor in their security software.

If that's correct, they are going to be subject to a lot of lawsuits.

[Yavapai]

73. Don't be so hard on the NSA,

Because the NSA is the only US government agency the actually listens to the people!

[Solly Mack]

78. K&R

[Warren Stupidity]

85. Steven Levy strongly hinted that the NSA had already done in public key crypto back in 2001.

[OnyxCollie]

86. Where are those who will say they don't care because it's a Dem administration?

I would like to know who is so intellectually shallow that they would excuse this. And I would like to laugh at them.

[riderinthestorm]

88. Oh a couple of the usual have shown up.

Its pretty amazing how hard they're working to downplay this.

[neverforget]

95. Loyalty to the party is more important than loyalty

to the Constitution. They can justify any wrongdoing with "it's old news" to "yeah but..."," he's Libertarian" and "the judge was a Bush appointee." It's rationalizing wrongdoing for the sake of the party.

[RKP5637]

87. Pretty clear this is assbackwards, NSA needs to be under high surveillance. The threats

come from within by runaway agencies like the NSA that even presidents don't know the full extent of WTF is going on, and presidents come and go, these agencies stay, growing more and more powerful.

[jimlup]

90. If you are a real programmer you would never trust a package "random" number generator

... just say'n

[Recursion]

111. I still have a hardware RNG PCMCIA card

Unfortunately I can't find any laptops with PCMCIA slots anymore...

[me b zola]

94. K&R

[joshcryer]

96. Fortunately the open crypto community didn't adopt it.

[Renew Deal]

100. I don't believe that there is any encryption publically available that the gov't can't crack.

Just my opinion

[Kablooie]

102. There is an audit going on for True Crypt, an open source encryption program.

It is supposed to be secure.
Reportedly there was a drive with supposedly illegal material on it that the FBI tried to open for months but couldn't do it.

The audit examines all the algorithms in the software to see if they are what they are supposed to be.
Since this is open source the audit can be double checked by anyone who has the training.

If the audit proves it to be what it is supposed to be it can make data extremely secure.
So secure that they don't expect it to be crackable anytime in the near future.

[Recursion]

109. I trust both serpent and twofish

Those were developed in a completely open manner.

[Warpy]

101. Exactly, the more that comes to light, the more we have to thank Snowden for

We always suspected nothing was particularly secure except some of our mail. Now we know it was even worse than we suspected.

The problem with the NSA is that it no longer had a mission when the USSR fell. It should have been defunded right then.

Instead, it was allowed to search for a mission, and that meant us.

[WillyT]

105. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! - K & R !!!

[Midnight Writer]

103. Danny Casolaro reported on this in 1990

He was working on a book called "The Octopus" about the U. S. government distributing software to foreign and domestic agencies ( The Inslaw case) that included a backdoor access that our intelligence agencies could use to monitor their data.

Danny was found dead in a motel bathtub and the files and notes for his book were missing.

Of course, this is all just conspiracy theory bullshit, so feel free to ignore it.

[Doctor_J]

114. I think people are just confused about who/what constitute "the government"

It sure as hell ain't rank and file voters, and it ain't our "elected officials" either. It's the Cock Brothers, the BFEE, and a handful of others you've never heard of.

[woo me with science]

121. kick