[Troy Tiscareno]

NSA Google Yahoo Data Center Breach? Director Gen. Keith Alexander Live Interview Denies Infiltration Claims [VIDEO]

This is what Snowden was talking about, and it wasn't voluntary. As the article notes, Google was furious about this, and has since changed their servers to keep everything encrypted even while in storage, whereas before it was only encrypted once it left Google's internal systems.

[lift]

NSA Google Yahoo Data Center Breach? Director Gen. Keith Alexander Live Interview Denies Infiltration Claims [VIDEO]

This is what Snowden was talking about, and it wasn't voluntary. As the article notes, Google was furious about this, and has since changed their servers to keep everything encrypted even while in storage, whereas before it was only encrypted once it left Google's internal systems.

Right. Don't you get it. They want to keep all the heaps of data they collect from everyone for themselves and will only SELL it to the NSA.

[Cozz4ever]

NSA Google Yahoo Data Center Breach? Director Gen. Keith Alexander Live Interview Denies Infiltration Claims [VIDEO]

This is what Snowden was talking about, and it wasn't voluntary. As the article notes, Google was furious about this, and has since changed their servers to keep everything encrypted even while in storage, whereas before it was only encrypted once it left Google's internal systems.

Then I wonder why YAHOO was going to be fined $$$$$$ per day until they released user information when the NSA already had excess.

Posted via CB10

[Septembersrain]

Then I wonder why YAHOO was going to be fined $$$$$$ per day until they released user information when the NSA already had excess.

Posted via CB10

I can't see the NSA wanting to share all their data. I think that could be a security breach?


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk!

[Elephant_Canyon]

Just gonna leave these here:
Apple - Privacy
Apple - Privacy - Privacy Built In
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303 (Note that device backups are, indeed, encrypted.)

[Fidel Mercado]

Lol

[Cozz4ever]

I can't see the NSA wanting to share all their data. I think that could be a security breach?


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...40e_story.html

Posted via CB10

[W1ck3D86]

Nothing is secure, not even BlackBerry, u can say whatever. Everything connected to the Internet isn't secure.

Posted via CB10

[wincyUt]

Nothing is secure, not even BlackBerry, u can say whatever. Everything connected to the Internet isn't secure.

Posted via CB10

I concur.

[Marcin Dabrowsky]

I would agree with that.

Posted via Silver Passport.

[crackbrry fan]

When you talk about a search engine, of COURSE Google has had much more interaction with the government than other companies - Google Search is, by far, the largest search engine, so of course, they're going to be the prime target and get most of the request.

And as far as Google developing the framework on how the requests are made, again, this makes sense - Google wants to retain as much control as possible and not give the government carte blanche, and given how many requests they get from various agencies (far more than anyone else, given their market position), is it any surprise that they've developed the format and framework for these requests?

The implication is that Google anxiously gives away your data to the government, when in fact, Google has dozens of lawyers on staff and works with EFF and others to do their very best to protect their users' data, while still complying with the law. The government is routinely upset by Google rejecting their requests, or demanding that more information is given before the data is handed over. Just the fact that they have these processes in place tells you that they aren't just hooking up a line to the NSA to allow them to peruse Google's user data at their leisure, as many seem to believe.

As I said, every big company gets these requests. Google is the one who pushed for as much openness as possible, and got the concession that at least allows them to publish the number of request they get from the government for various types of information (though the concession only allows them to give the number within 1,000, so they can say they had "between 7000-8000 requests" of a given type in a year). BB didn't ask for that, and neither did Apple or Microsoft or AT&T or Verizon.

Believe me, I'm not saying Google is perfect, by any means, but many would characterize them as being in a secret cabal with the government leak your porn-watching habits and Home Depot purchases, or whatever. It's simply not true, and it reflect the fact that many people have never owned or ran a business, and have never had to deal with the various rules, regulations, and ordinances that you have to deal with when doing so. No company in Google's position, or even BB's position, is immune from such.

No , they are a parasitic organization . Eventually as with everything else ,advocates of Google ,now known as Alphabet ,will see the err of their ways. As for them "not willingly " giving out information, I must LOL, that point is moot as there is something called PRISM(SIGAD US-984XN)/ FISA, in addition to all the back doors, that they, (Google) leave open. "App" arently you also never heard of the "Patriot Act "which essentially makes any rules, laws, rights etc useless. Indeed ,even after the act expired ,they were given a reprieve under the "Freedom Act " with respect to meta data collection. But hey! we have nothing to hide!

Posted via CB10

[TgeekB]

No , they are a parasitic organization . Eventually as with everything else ,advocates of Google ,now known as Alphabet ,will see the err of their ways. As for them "not willingly " giving out information, I must LOL, that point is moot as there is something called PRISM(SIGAD US-984XN)/ FISA, in addition to all the back doors, that they, (Google) leave open. "App" arently you also never heard of the "Patriot Act "which essentially makes any rules, laws, rights etc useless. Indeed ,even after the act expired ,they were given a reprieve under the "Freedom Act " with respect to meta data collection. But hey! we have nothing to hide!

Posted via CB10

Not being argumentative, just adding my opinion. My life has not changed in any way because of the above. I refuse to allow someone else's actions to affect my short stay on this planet. JMHO though.

[crackbrry fan]

Not being argumentative, just adding my opinion. My life has not changed in any way because of the above. I refuse to allow someone else's actions to affect my short stay on this planet. JMHO though.

One should be concerned.

Posted via CB10

[TgeekB]

One should be concerned.

Posted via CB10

I certainly don't see anything wrong with discussing it. I just don't think it's something we should over worry about.

[glamrlama]

You can use Google on your laptop to search for a product and your Android cellphone will know what you're looking for as well.

How exactly? My laptop and cellphone have no idea that the other exists.

[Cozz4ever]

How exactly? My laptop and cellphone have no idea that the other exists.

Log into Google, do a search on a product either on the phone or laptop. Now go to your other device and go through Web pages, Google advertising will give related products.

Posted via CB10

[hoonigan99]

Data mining has always been a fact.

Back in the 90s I worked for a credit card company where we ran massive data mining clusters. All to figure out better ways to market and advertise. Ever wonder why some companies print different versions of the same catalog? They used this data to target the catalog to the consumer and get you to spend more.

What about that incident from a few years ago where a father tried to sue Target for giving his teenage daughter a coupon for a home pregnancy kit? You know, they based that coupon off two purchases she made. Turns out she needed the coupon.

Or the statistical sampling of Nielsen families?

Loyalty and reward cards?

Etc, etc, etc.

Fact is we've always been the product. Always.

I very much agree with you, however, there is a distinct difference between optional programs like a loyalty reward card and an agency which monitors all the activity in your life.

I will happily use a loyalty program as it offers me coupons or information on products that are relevant to me, that is a great service and I would appreciate it even without the monetary incentives, simply because my shopping would be made easier.

Having a tech company datamine everything I search for, every place I go, communications I have with public entities or private conversations, purchases I make, and the types of information or content I pursue on the Internet; now that is a different story.
Google offers me nothing by doing this, it is only benefiting them and government agencies. The so called benefits I have received from Google doing this? Specific ads for things I recently bought online, not attachments or accessories for those items, no, they want to sell me the thing I have bought already.

So what am I allowing Google all this data for? Why are they technically capable of making an entire profile of who I am based on essentially spying on all of my activities? I don't care how historically inaccurate many of these profiles have been proven to be, it exists and the capability for it to be a painfully accurate reflection of who I am exists.

There are aspects of my behavior I will happily share, purchasing habits, brands I am interested in, technology I am interested in, products that attract my attention, and types of media (music, movies, shows) that I enjoy. I will happily allow that information to be known, because I can recognize the benefits these data marketing tools can provide. But I do not want the GPS tracking every single place I go, I do not want to see ads for stuff based on an email I sent to a friend, I do not want record of who I talk to, how often and topics, I do not want much of my browsing history collected, whether it's looking up a silly video or a slang term I don't know, identifying a celebrity in a show, looking at news articles or reviews, browsing and posting to forums or the unsavory sites we all occasionally visit. These things do not need to be tracked, compiled, stored and or sold, it offers no benefits to the user and creates a threat of exposure. A Tech company should not know more intimate details of your life than your family or significant other does, and in some cases even things you have not yet realized about yourself.

You may tell me to remove, or replace my tin foil hat. I know that laws exist to limit these things, and I know that the purpose is not to create a super profile of every single person for the government or ad agencies. But the fact remains that the technology exists and the capability to extort all people exists, the capability to build these broad and accurate profiles is real. Whether or not you choose to believe in it, or see it as a threat is based on your own beliefs and or being naive. I just believe that we the consumers, who are being turned into an asset, should have a say in what is collected and monitored, and what is not.





BB for Life

[glamrlama]

Log into Google, do a search on a product either on the phone or laptop. Now go to your other device and go through Web pages, Google advertising will give related products.

Posted via CB10

I NEVER log into Google. Easy Peasy

[Cozz4ever]

I NEVER log into Google. Easy Peasy

You will if you use some of their popular services.

Posted via CB10

[The Big Picture]

iOS gets a pass because Tim cook says so:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-DGB-37722

Now I'll buy a priv for anyone who can show me the same statement being said by google.

BlackBerry and apple have completely different business models to google.

Google's core business is data and information. To which they use to sell ads, and it's the majority of their revenue.

Blackberry and apple either sell hardware or software services.

GO FIGURE as it is what it is.

Posted via CB10

[Prem WatsApp]

Log into Google, do a search on a product either on the phone or laptop. Now go to your other device and go through Web pages, Google advertising will give related products.

Posted via CB10

Same wifi hotspot.

Wife searched for a topic on her Ubuntu laptop (script enabled browser in that case), I get the ads on my Passport. I think it was domain names or webspace or something...

I hollered across the hallway, "are you searching for [...] ? "

Lol :-D

�   Ahoy, Privateers...! :-)   �

[Prem WatsApp]

Same wifi hotspot.

Wife searched for a topic on her Ubuntu laptop (script enabled browser in that case), I get the ads on my Passport. I think it was domain names or webspace or something...

I hollered across the hallway, "are you searching for [...] ? "

Lol :-D

�   Ahoy, Privateers...! :-)   �

Interfamiliar privacy... haha!

:-)

What if she searched for something I shouldn't know about, ...?

�   Ahoy, Privateers...! :-)   �

[FlashFlare11]

iOS gets a pass because Tim cook says so:

Apple CEO Tim Cook: Your Data Is Not Our Business - Digits - WSJ

Now I'll buy a priv for anyone who can show me the same statement being said by google.

BlackBerry and apple have completely different business models to google.

Google's core business is data and information. To which they use to sell ads, and it's the majority of their revenue.

Blackberry and apple either sell hardware or software services.

GO FIGURE as it is what it is.

Posted via CB10

�Our business is not based on having information about you. You�re not our product...�
-Tim Cook

Should close the door on this argument.

[acovey]

With all this talk of the Blackberry Venice running Android. All I here on these forums are people bashing Google, calling it a 'data miner'. Wasn't Apple also culpable in giving user data to the NSA? Why is it that Google gets all the bad publicity and Apple gets away unscathed?

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

Nobody is putting iOS on a Blackberry. But who knows what's next maybe Windows 10?