The Most Striking Thing About the WikiLeaks CIA Data Dump Is How Little Most People Cared (qz.com) 308
Last week, WikiLeaks released a trove of web pages describing sophisticated software tools and techniques used by the C.I.A to break into smartphones, computers, and IoT devices including smart TVs. Despite the initial media coverage, it appears normal people don't really care much about it, reports Quartz. An anonymous reader shares the report: There's also one other big difference between now and 2013. Snowden's NSA revelations sent shockwaves around the world. Despite WikiLeaks' best efforts at theatrics -- distributing an encrypted folder and tweeting the password "SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds" -- the Vault 7 leak has elicited little more than a shrug from the media and the public, even if the spooks are seriously worried. Maybe it's because we already assume the government can listen to everything.
Because most people already assume the worst (Score:5, Interesting)
Most people with half-a-brain already assumed that the CIA, NSA, and FBI were doing stuff like this. This merely confirmed our suspicions.
Re:Because most people already assume the worst (Score:5, Interesting)
To put it another way, what was shocking about the Snowden revelations wasn't that the NSA spied, it was the bulk and indiscriminate nature thereof. We have no problem when the CIA is hacking the phones or computers of some ISIS or Al Qaeda bad guy or some North Korean/etc general. What bothers us is when they start vacuuming up everyone's calls/emails/etc including ours.
If anything, the reports were actually fairly reassuring, because what it shows is that encryption works. They couldn't break it, and had to instead compromise the end device, because if your system is pwned then nothing you do on that system (phone, computer, etc) is secret from the guy who pwned it.
Re:Because most people already assume the worst (Score:4, Insightful)
Came here to say this. The CIA seems like its actually doing its job. "Shocking" would be spying on US citizens on US soil, NSA-style; otherwise, carry on!
Re:Because most people already assume the worst (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you really so naive as to think they're only using these tools against non-Americans?
Re:Because most people already assume the worst (Score:5, Insightful)
Well if you want me to be shocked and outraged then you need to show me them using them against Americans. I didn't see anything like that in Vault 7 (so far). The most terrible thing in Vault 7 was their pathetic meme folder. And harboring of bronies.
Now what did bother me about Vault 7 is the CIA hoarding exploits instead of informing software and device makers so they could fix them. The (alleged) purpose of the US military and intelligence apparatus is to defend the people of the United States. They're taking my tax dollars, and I'm not as pissed off about it as I could be because it's supposed to be going towards efforts to defend me from attack. Instead they're using it to attack others. No no no. Defend me first. That's what I'm paying you fuckers for.
But that's not really a concept most of the public thinks or cares about. They cared about the NSA because they were hoovering up their dick pics. Once CIA is revealed to be hoarding dick pics then people will care.
Re: (Score:2)
Now what did bother me about Vault 7 is the CIA hoarding exploits instead of informing software and device makers so they could fix them.
I would agree with this, especially since they were ostensibly directed to release these things to the manufacturers. But I guess they get to play the "necessary for national security" card.
As far as getting worked up about it goes, though... were any of these exploits functional as mass surveillance tools? They all seem to be stuff the CIA could use to target one individual. Whether that individual is an American or a non-American - isn't this exactly how we want it to work? Isn't the reason the Snowden re
Re: (Score:2)
Have a look at the Automated Implant Branch (AIB).
Re: (Score:3)
Well if you want me to be shocked and outraged then you need to show me them using them against Americans.
Are you going to need a smoking gun before you believe the journalists who are reporting that they each have several intelligence sources confirming that the CIA is using it against domestic targets?
The trouble with not believing that bombs are falling until you see a smoking crater is that sometimes you're at the bottom of one.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you going to need a smoking gun
A body would be enough. There's nothing to even suggest they've used these tools against domestic targets. You might as well point to a tank and tell me to be shocked and outraged because the US Army is crushing little American babies under its treads.
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing less credible in the modern world than a journalist claiming anonymous sources. Oh, I can totally believe there's some petty domestic spying that goes on, of the "spy on your girlfriend" sort, maybe even a group trying to take down a president, as happened to Nixon, but spying beyond such abuse by individual agents? I assume the CIA has enough work to keep it busy abroad.
Re: (Score:2)
Or they could not spend the half a million dollars. But you don't get to take my money to "defend" me...and then not defend me.
Re: (Score:2)
keep our Nation safe
Doesn't really say anything about protecting people
Wat.
Re: (Score:2)
Naive? Nope. FBI and other agencies would be very angry if the CIA did stuff they aren't authorized to do. And of course CIA do use those tools against US citizens, they are allowed to and required to do so in some circumstances.
Re: (Score:3)
That is what Church Committee worked on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Recall Operation CHAOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] ?
Project MERRIMAC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Project RESISTANCE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
"Files on Illegal Spying Show C.I.A. Skeletons From Cold War" (JUNE 27, 2007)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06... [nytimes.com]
"... provide new details ab
Re: (Score:2)
Are you really so naive as to think they're only using these tools against non-Americans?
The problem is that we don't have "American" TVs and computers and phone and routers, and "non-American" ones used by those of other countries. Yes yes, there are regional differences, but they're mild. Americans use the same computers, the same TVs, the same phones, the same devices as folks in other countries. That means if the CIA/NSA can hack the devices of foreigners, by necessary they can do the exact same with Americans. Whether or not they abuse this or not, the ability is unsettling, and power cree
Hacking tools and using these tools against ... (Score:2)
Are you really so naive as to think they're only using these tools against non-Americans?
Having hacking tools and using these tools against Americans are two very different things. The former is what was leaked and its exactly the sort of tools the CIA is expect to have in order to perform its mission. If and when the later is shown the public will show greater interest, as they did with the 2013 revelations.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you really so naive as to think they're only using these tools against non-Americans?
Did the report detail who was being targeted? If not, then what is the shocking part?
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't read through all 8000+ pages of the latest dump, but I couldn't find anything that outlined specific programs, plans or even intentions to use these tools on American citizens on American soil. Can we assume that someone will misuse the tools to spy on their ex? Probably. But that's just an assumption.
Until we have some evidence to prove otherwise, all we're left with is CIA doing CIA shit. They're a spy organization building spy tools. Color me shocked.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course not, AMERICANS can be traitors; too.
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can't you take a joke?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure all acts of espionage are classed as treason. So, anyone providing classified information to ,well anyone , outside of those who have a need to know is considered guilty of treason.
https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure all acts of espionage are classed as treason.
"Pretty sure" is pretty weak.
The "classes" of treason are what I cited above, directly from the Constitution, and explains precisely why Edward Snowden could not be charged with treason.
He did not declare war against the United States. The last time that happened was the Civil War.
He did not aid any enemies because the United States has no list of enemies. The last list was WWII.
Edward Snowden is charged with, among other things, espionage [washingtonpost.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Hey listen, moderator, I didn't make that claim up. A representative of the President went on TV and suggested Trump was spied on by his TV or microwave, largely because the claim said President made about Obama ordering his phones be tapped was, to put it bluntly, a stinking steaming pile of bullshit based on claims that a radio shock jock invented, and Breitbart, that paragon on journalism, picked up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure what a microwave would report back. "Hmmm, he heated something at high for two minutes. Ah ha, now we know he made popcorn!"
Well, now that Spicer is basically abandoning the whole claim that Obama ordered Trump spied on, I guess I can walk away from this too, other than to say that Trump's penchant for saying absurd and obviously false things very loudly is killing his credibility, and while the Republicans, at least for now, need him around to guarantee his signature on some key bills, these a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
This.. I'd mod you up if I didn't feel compelled to reply myself. I EXPECT and WANT our government to have these tools.
You want your government to hand them out to mercenary contractors who inevitably sells them on the black market before they finally leak to wikileaks? Because that was the issue here. CIA is contracting out their attacks and handing this stuff over to contractors. It was already on the black market and used by criminals when leaked to wikileaks, and still CIA kept it "secret".
Re:Because most people already assume the worst (Score:4, Insightful)
Here is another not-so-secret revelation that will one day come out in full: The CIA and NSA are using false rape/pedophilia/sexual harassment/etc. charges to character assassinate people who threaten or cross the U.S. Julian Assange, Dominique Strauss Kahn, and Jacob Appelbaum are three of the most famous cases of this, but there are many others. So you might want to be careful about letting strange women into your hotel room if you're revealing U.S. secrets, challenging the supremacy of the U.S. Dollar, or getting in the way of attempts to put a backdoor in Tor.
Re: (Score:3)
There's no need to assassinate the character of Mr. Assange, he is doing a swell job himself with all lying, backstabbing behavior etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Jacob Applebaum? Lol.
Re: (Score:2)
I think at this point we know we are bent over and being reamed by the three letter agencies, not to mention the ISPs.
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like it is around 90% of people who know about government spying , 50% of are angry about it and 50% of it think it is a good thing.
http://www.pewinternet.org/201... [pewinternet.org]
http://www.pewresearch.org/fac... [pewresearch.org]
http://www.pewinternet.org/201... [pewinternet.org]
Re: (Score:2)
In part because they're hosted in Russia.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Because most people already assume the worst (Score:5, Insightful)
How can one assume that this is not totally normal? The CIA is a spy agency. That means they spy on people. That would be like saying we should be shocked that Burger King makes hamburgers.
The NSA was a shock mainly because they were spying domestically when they clearly aren't supposed to. So long as the CIA isn't spying domestically, I personally don't care what means they use. Furthermore, the fact that CIA tactics are more analogous to a fishing line than a dragnet (like the NSA prism program was) then they aren't doing anything wrong, and indeed this particular leak is doing a disservice to the US, whereas the Snowden leak was being productive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know why the medias only give this news a single paragraph in their "IT News" section... This says a lot about freedom of press. Usually, journalists are utterly against spying on people. But right now they just STFU.
My guess is that most journalists don't understand the implications of this, and/or think it sounds too much like 1984 to actually be true. Nobody wants to come across as a tin foil hat wearing nut-case. It's typically not good for your career.
Re: (Score:2)
Where your guess is off is in assuming the existence of journalists.
The business model of "news," is to attract eyeballs.
Those eyeballs belong to you and me.
We're way more interested in a pregnant woman's parody of a pregnant giraffe [wthr.com].
All eyes continue to be on April the giraffe. Everyone is waiting for her to give birth. Video of the giraffe, who is at the Animal Adventure Park in New York, went viral last week as millions of people stayed glued to her story.
Actual journalism doesn't sell.
Re: (Score:2)
The media found out the CIA was spying on journalists and they didn't seem to give a shit about that. How much less they're spying on others?
Re: (Score:3)
The media found out the CIA was spying on journalists and they didn't seem to give a shit about that.
Two predominant reasons: First, some journalists are partisan cheerleaders for one political party and/or a particular ideological/political agenda.
Second, they're all aware that Michael Hastings was killed and the story revealed in the manner it was in order to set an example for other journalists of what happens to the extremely "bothersome" journalists, and they also know they're all being monitored.
The pressure as an average journalist to just keep your head down and your mouth shut, write the 'safe' st
They don't want you to know (Score:4, Insightful)
These were things the Obama admin were in charge of. The press doesn't want to cover it
Re: (Score:2)
No, they correctly know that people who understand what it is the CIA does don't CARE who the president is or was.
Seriously nothing has come out that isn't expressly in the CIA's charter. This toolset is like pointing to a plumber's oxytorch and ladder and shouting "See! Be outraged!"
If you insist about partisanship then at least point at Roosevelt who created the agency. But then none of the subsequent red presidents abolished it either.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the problem. This crap is bipartisan.
You are wrong (Score:4, Informative)
EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON. I. KNOW. has commented on Vault#7
It is simply not being reported.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Wow, all three of the people in your bubble commented on it?!
Re: (Score:2)
It is simply not being reported.
Yeah, definitely the most non-reported story [google.com] of 2017.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON. I. KNOW. has commented on Vault#7
It is simply not being reported.
That's empirically false, as others have noted.
I think the explanation is vastly simpler than that: Hark back to the Last Week Tonight show when John Oliver warned the world that the NSA could see their dick pics. It was a magisterial take down.
What he didn't count on, though, was that the majority of the population is actually okay with total strangers seeing their dick pics. The thing that makes them nervous, uncomfortable and afraid is when their family and friends see their dick pics. The NSA so far has
This "leak" concerns expected activity (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The leak was about these tools being given to third parties who leak and sell them.. Are you sure it is legal for mercenaries to do this? And two why do you think CIA needs mercenaries? Could it be to get around their limitation of not being allowed to spy on Americans themselves?
Re: (Score:2)
And overly broad access to data and/or tools, again nothing new as Manley and Snowden demonstrate.
Re: (Score:2)
Enemy of the State (Score:2, Interesting)
It was fiction in 1998... and now it appears to be all too real.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120660
The only question that remains is how autocratic are those in power to manipulate these capabilities to their benefit and at the expense of the public welfare.
Sure, we all knew... (Score:2)
But I do not think that's the reason no one really cares. I think most people don't trust wikileaks.
Julian is clearly a complete and total fuck head with a political agenda.
Personally, I would have a hard time believing anything released by that jack ass has not been carefully cherry picked.
At this stage, everyone knows the US government is spying on the everything they do. Most people just don't care. Everyone also knows that wikileaks guy is a fart muffin. So... they also don't care.
Re: (Score:3)
I think most people don't trust wikileaks.
Only hyper-partisan leftists. Nothing WikiLeaks has ever released has been shown to be false.
Re: (Score:2)
'Collateral murder' was edited in a very dishonest way. It wasn't CGIed, but the conclusion they pushed was clearly false.
Re: (Score:2)
In what way?
Re: (Score:2)
Editing out the heavily armed men and fire fight on the ground.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess it's been awhile since I saw it. I remembered that stuff being in there. Maybe I watched the unedited version?
Re: (Score:2)
Only hyper-partisan leftists. Nothing WikiLeaks has ever released has been shown to be false.
I'm a hyper-anti-partisan ultra-leftist and I don't strictly trust Wikileaks. I trust that most of what they release will be genuine. I don't trust that they don't have an agenda. I don't decide how to feel about their releases until other sources have gone through them and made intelligent commentary.
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone has an agenda. Anyone telling you they don't have an agenda is lying to you. Or lying to themselves.
But there's no reason not to trust that something WikiLeaks releases is genuine. No one even credibly refutes WikiLeak's releases. They just attack the source.
The instant WikiLeaks releases something that's shown to be false I'll stop trusting them. In the meantime I find myself shaking my head in disbelief at Slashdotters trusting the CIA more than WikiLeaks. Jesus Christ what a difference and elect
Re: (Score:2)
So you hate wikileaks because ... it revealed your guy was dirty?
Stop rooting for your favorite team, and start rooting for a less corrupt government.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't one need to be retarded to think the CIA wouldn't do their job? Really...
Most people haven't heard about it (Score:2, Interesting)
Most "normal" people the summary refers to have never heard of the Wikileaks release concerning the CIA. In fact, I am pretty sure if I took an informal poll of friends and family most of them (8/10 at least) wouldn't have any idea what Wikileaks is.
The majority of people do not consider whether they are being spied on, it doesn't occur to them at all. It's not necessarily that they don't care, but they are simply unaware it's an option. If you don't follow tech news this is not something that comes up on p
No it's not because we assumed they already do (Score:2)
I'ts because nearly everything in the release was already known ancient exploits or techniques. None of this is new.
And because WikiLeaks, while it had potential at one time, is irrevocably tainted by the a-hole in charge.
Geeks have known for years ... (Score:2)
We've known for years that any wired device connected to the net is vulnerable. Changing the end use of the device does not change a thing regards security.
The majority of us also know the what comes out of his mouth is complete bullshit.
What exactly are people going to do? (Score:2)
So you are angry whats the next step? write an angry post? go on a protest? what is that going to achieve at best they will say they are going to stop doing it and go on doing the same thing in secret. Maybe a few people will lose there jobs, but they will be replaced by others that are just as unethical.
Until people stop having irrational fears of terrorist, communist, immigrants, homosexuals, witches, ... (pick your favorite group that is going to "destroy" civilization) we will allow agencies the CIA to
Is it apathy? Or helplessness? (Score:5, Insightful)
What are we supposed to do about it?
The real issue isn't the fact that the CIA/NSA/ [insert bureau here] can do these things. The issue is that they can't be held accountable for it.
We saw this in the financial crash of '08 (albeit in the private sector) as well: no one who is actually responsible for these things will ever see jail time. This won't end anyone's career. There's just not much the American people can do about it, and I think there's a sense among the general populace that they know this, even if only on a subconscious level. It's not apathy. It's a helpless resignation.
Re: (Score:3)
Under the SHEEPLE system, govt would have TAXED YOUR ASS INTO POVERTY
uhmmm, no. Poor people don't pay much taxes because they don't have much money, that is why they are poor. What kills is high living expenses. Housing pricing more and more people out (i.e. lots more sleeping in cars and under bridges). Good healthy food much more expensive than unhealthy junk food. And damned if you get ill medical expenses can bankrupt you. The election theme was to "take back the government and give that power to the people." Yeah right, put a bunch of billionaires as if they will do any
Re: (Score:3)
I appreciate the sentiment of this. I truly do.
Self-sustaining, anarchistic self-governance sounds fantastic.
As long as the whole world moves to it.
The problem with anarchy is (paradoxically) that governments are a necessary evil because other governments exist. The moment America descends into chaotic anarchy or ascends into a utopian anarchy, every other nation on earth will see it as weakness and attack. Russia will take out a century of cold war hostilities. China. Iran. ISIS. North Korea might even tak
I don't mean to alarm you, but... (Score:2)
The US military can call in a strike on any position in the world, with 1 meter accuracy, and deliver a deadly payload in less than 6 hours. 2 hours to most populated areas. They can wipe out an entire city in a day, even without nukes. They have nearly invisible fortresses both above and below the water all over the globe. They have aircraft which carry nuclear weapons which are nearly invisible to radar and can circumnavigate the globe without ever having to land.
That's insane. And yet we don't react when
Re: (Score:2)
Also, if they have physical access to your Samsung TV (for the USB based hack), they could add their own microphones throughout the body, wired into a battery so unplugging it doesn't turn it off.
Alarm fatigue - People just don't care any more (Score:4, Insightful)
It's mostly alarm fatigue. Constantly we're berated with news about how our rights are eroding and the government is working against us. While much of it is very true, until it extends to the point of interfering with the common citizens daily life, they won't care.
People are sheep. You can shave their coats and even pick off a few to slaughter, as long as the heard is large enough to feel anonymous, they really have no reaction. It's not until the sheep feel like they're the next in line do they care.
Whay should I? (Score:2)
Is it a shock that our covert HUMINT foreign intelligence agency has a pile of tools for covertly gathering human intelligence? No. I'd be more surprised if they didn't have stuff like this. These tools are useful for the kind of targeted, one-off, POI-focused surveillance that we want our spies to be doing, rather than the sweeping, rights-trampling dragnets we've been seeing from the FBI and NSA.
I'm mostly upset that this stuff was mishandled and leaked, not that it exists.
So am I upset that our spies
Re: (Score:2)
Never re use the codes.
That will get your privacy back.
When US brands tell you their hardware and software is safe don't trust them.
Re 'These tools are useful for the kind of targeted,"
The Automated Implant Branch (AIB) work is not "focused", "one-off". Thats malware.
Re: (Score:2)
No i'm not fucking explaining and arguing it to you, you lazy bastard,
This release, and Wikileaks "recent" release about the CIA "infiltrating" French elections are transparent ploys by the attention-seeking Assange to focus news on his possible eviction from the Ecuador embassy, which both remaining Ecuadorian candidates have promised to do.
This release has had all kinds of editorialized end-of-the-world dystopian future headlines, including falsely smearing quality apps like Signal with nothing to back it up besides a link to a giant dump of data. For all of Assange's preac
I care. (Score:2)
I care a lot.
I'm waiting to see what will be done about it, by the new sheriff. Maybe nothing, maybe little, but... Wait and see.
We get to vote them out again in a little while.
Here's a theory (Score:2)
Most people don't care. They never did, not even back in 2013.
The difference now is back in 2013 the media needed headlines. Now they're more focused on Trumps spelling mistakes in his tweets.
Fault of the biased media? (Score:2)
Maybe there are 'more interesting' things going on, but in the last week have asked more then a few of my non - tech industry friends if they have heard about the new wiki leaks drop and non of them have. Frankly it just isn't being reported. That is one of the problems with our modern media, they serve as a filter for what is important but are driven by political ideology even more so then what sells and certainly have no real way of determine or interest in what is and isn't important to people. Many p
Gee (Score:2)
I see the media is in full-out damage control.
Targets matter (Score:2)
People cared about Snowden because NSA overreach affected virtually every US citizen. What NSA was caught doing is ILLEGAL.
Everyone assumes CIA hoards 0-days to be used for espionage purposes against OTHER countries. This is why CIA exists. CIA brass has been publically talking about the cooption of smart* products for such purposes for a number of years.
If there is evidence in one of these leaks of CIA spying on US citizens without a warrant this would be certainly be worthy of more attention.
If CIA was
It's their job... (Score:2)
Nobody cares, because the intelligence community is supposed to be able to get information that the "bad dudes" want to keep from them.
Only in America, Baby... (Score:2)
It wasn't on a Private Email Server. (Score:2)
If the leak had been about a Totally Illegal Private Email Server, then people would have chanted to "Lock Her Up"
False Assumptions (Score:2)
More importantly, who feels empowered to make a difference?
Declaring "victory" early is a tactic, not reality (Score:2)
Similar things were said about Snowden's revelations which continue to bear fruit for the world. Don't be fooled into believing the unexamined belief the /. headline wants you to believe—that "most people" don't care. The Democrats are sore that they lost the US presidential election, a majority of state governerships, and control over Congress. They're still pushing this undefended Russophobic idea that the Russians somehow "hacked" (to use their language) the US election. They even chummed up with t
/. playing both sides of the fence (Score:2)
What "most people care" about is not only not represented by mainstream corporate so-called journalists (stenographers to power, really) but that doesn't even jibe with telling people encryption works [slashdot.org].
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
look if you Russians are going to astroturf at least have the decency to create an account.
People don't care because the source is suspect. Now lay off all that clinton nonsense (and whatever else you're smoking in your gulag)
Re: (Score:2)
All rape and no recourse.
That's because he's hiding in the Ecuadorian embassy
Re: (Score:2)
In China and Saudi Arabia, the government doesn't just control the media, it is the media.
Re: (Score:2)
If the CIA can do this, then I guarantee that China, Russia, India, Israel, and many of the EU countries can as well. False flag tactics have been a thing for centuries, and IMHO is a key component in counter intelligence activities.
On a personal note, it's also why I have a very hard time integrating "definitive proof" that this group or that group were responsible for a hack, doc, swat, or DDOS attack. Even the ones where politicians claim they initiated the action...
Re: (Score:2)
Not wanting people to find out it was CIA is not equal to framing another state. Most of it has to do with simple code reuse and developer efficiency by re-appropriating existing or stolen malware.
Confidence in who did what in terms of state-backed hacking is already bordering on impossible. Nobody really knows who did Stuxnet, for example, except for the fact that the US and Israel practically brag about it every chance they get and that its target was Iran.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem for the CIA is the "The young" are all over social media and any can buy all the years of social media data from the private sector.
A US person entering the State department might be on some type of social media. Its hard to hide their skill set and place CIA deep in an embassy if the other nation has counter surveillance.
So the CIA has to follow the NSA into nations digitally. When a computer collects data domestically it not illegal domestic
Re: (Score:2)
New brands with smarter staff will secure their new brands hardware and software and offer strong crypto.
The "average user" will then have options.
Buy into a few more decades of US brands that offered the CIA a way in? Or support a new brand thats more secure as the hired skilled IT professionals?
Stay with the brands that lost control of their hardware and software or try a brand that can secure thei