Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Liberal advocates of a police state turn savagely against Edward Snowden [View all]BeyondGeography
(41,151 posts)40. Wake up already...Even The Guardian has walked back Greenwald's (and Snowden's)
original interpretation of that slide.
The Guardian understands that the NSA approached those companies and asked them to enable a "dropbox" system whereby legally requested data could be copied from their own server out to an NSA-owned system. That has allowed the companies to deny that there is "direct or indirect" NSA access, to deny that there is a "back door" to their systems, and that they only comply with "legal" requests while not explaining the scope of that access.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/12/microsoft-twitter-rivals-nsa-requests
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/12/microsoft-twitter-rivals-nsa-requests
Greenwald, meantime, steadfastly refuses to comment.
Why hasnt Greenwald clarified his direct access to servers language from last weeks PRISM report?
Multiple other news outlets have provided information debunking the notion that the NSA had unfettered back door access to servers belonging to the various tech giants named in the PRISM slides. The New York Times described a process whereby the various tech companies, after receiving a FISA court approved request from the NSA and vetting it through their legal departments, gather the information and post it in a virtual mailbox for the NSA to retrieve: It is not sent automatically or in bulk, and the government does not have full access to company servers. Instead, they said, it is a more secure and efficient way to hand over the data.
You know what this is? It sounds like an FTP server to me, not unlike Dropbox. This is how many of us transfer digital files that are too large for email. The NSA apparently doesnt enjoy a free pass to directly grab up server data at will instead, it merely downloads it from an FTP server (or similar) after its been placed there by the tech company that set it up for them. Again, this undercuts one of the most outrage-inducing aspects of Greenwalds story, not to mention the initial Washington Post reporting as well. The NSA doesnt have direct access to anything other than an innocuous file transfer mailbox. But direct access sounds sexier and therefore feeds the outrage agenda.
http://thedailybanter.com/2013/06/greenwald-sticks-with-his-story-in-spite-of-growing-questions/
You know what this is? It sounds like an FTP server to me, not unlike Dropbox. This is how many of us transfer digital files that are too large for email. The NSA apparently doesnt enjoy a free pass to directly grab up server data at will instead, it merely downloads it from an FTP server (or similar) after its been placed there by the tech company that set it up for them. Again, this undercuts one of the most outrage-inducing aspects of Greenwalds story, not to mention the initial Washington Post reporting as well. The NSA doesnt have direct access to anything other than an innocuous file transfer mailbox. But direct access sounds sexier and therefore feeds the outrage agenda.
http://thedailybanter.com/2013/06/greenwald-sticks-with-his-story-in-spite-of-growing-questions/
Direct access to an FTP server...hell, even I have that.
This kind of shitbag due diligence will continue. Sorry.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
114 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Liberal advocates of a police state turn savagely against Edward Snowden [View all]
Catherina
Jun 2013
OP
One more thing. The Avaaz petition is gaining signatures rapidly. Please sign it
Catherina
Jun 2013
#1
What the rich and thieving really hate is that people like Snowden Can NOT be bought
fasttense
Jun 2013
#3
+1000. If liberal progressive leftists are really concerned about the erosion of our civil liberties
baldguy
Jun 2013
#24
Looks like they are rallying around Ari Fleischer, Peter 'we count the votes' King and Republican
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#110
Well Paul is a Republican and we are not particularly fond of Republicans. Except all the
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#69
I was going to mention that because they are neo-liberals as you said (very different than liberals)
Dragonfli
Jun 2013
#102
Your fellow 'shitbag' DUers would be more than happy to believe anything Snowden says...
randome
Jun 2013
#15
Wake up already...Even The Guardian has walked back Greenwald's (and Snowden's)
BeyondGeography
Jun 2013
#40
There is no indication in the article that the requested "dropbox" system is the same
Luminous Animal
Jun 2013
#68
Exactly. So did the original article. That Greenwald made any kind of claims is a lie.
Luminous Animal
Jun 2013
#71
There are no liberal advocates of a police/security state because such a police/security state
TheKentuckian
Jun 2013
#74
817k on petition and growing fast..people worldwide are fed up with this bs..nt
xiamiam
Jun 2013
#84
Well to be fair, as soon as his name came out, people were calling him a hero
treestar
Jun 2013
#114