“Larry Page and Mark Zuckerberg sharply deny knowledge of Prism until Thursday even as Obama confirms program’s existence!”
Facebook follows Google, Microsoft in asking permission to disclose how many FISA requests it receives
- No CEO of ANY company would, or even can, admit to knowing about the program – most likely license rights to “public” bandwidth and wireless transmission was leverage for a common good argument preventing them from denying this access.
- FISA is the only check against the NSA and the Executive branch. If that seems broken, it is.
- Using the “home field advantage” argument is just a horrible way to describe the state of business
- This is a carry over policy the entire US Government approved of from the 9/11 era
I bring this up for one critical reason. Change of context and information repositories. Read my previous post here: [Old Post]
The key point is that once a government has information it can choose how to use it. Worse is how it might share it. This powerful resource in the wrong hands, and our Government could turn against us, would be devastating taken out of context or fabricated. With no equitable check or balance you are letting the Government position itself to be the Judge and Jury of your digital persona. Knowing that this is all top secret now, there is no way evidence will be admissible in a court of law due to secrecy rules. This will create huge problems for people who honestly did nothing wrong but can’t produce any records to refute the claims.
Imagine this one of two possible events.
1) You are arrested on suspicion and this secret information is used against you
2) The secret information is already accumulated and prepared. Your defense can’t get the information, or you are required to accumulate your own data set, which in most cases you can’t due to technology time or rules by the same providers who gave it over in the first place
If these things happen, and it’s out of context, you are damaged forever if not permanently . Make this an out of context problem. Say, it was perfectly legal to suggest you like to make bombs as a hobby. Tomorrow a rule is passed (not a law) that classifies that speech as dangerous. You are then targeted as a suspect and your pattern defines you as a danger. The context before was fine. The new context you are guilty. You had nothing to hide, so you were not concerned.
I don’t want to raise false alarm bells or create hits on my blog for this topical subject, but you should be fully aware of this potential and how it might impact you and everyone you know when you vote, act, or participate in government. Sadly, I had voted against what I thought would happen. Yet, it still has. Sorry Mr. President, you have fallen below my expectations, and Mr. McCain, you are perfectly inline with them.
The only irony in this would be the leak was really Chinese cracking* that released our secret information trying to deflect it’s own cracking* efforts.
*I see myself as a hacker not a cracker.