Talk:National Security Agency: Difference between revisions
→Relevance: Reply |
→Relevance: Clipper, etc. |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
:::I wouldn't count their direct intelligence collection in this, as that's just what they do, and to my knowledge they're not selling any of that. Whether they should be doing that or not is a civil rights issue. If they'd stepped in a few years back and said 'no, you're not allowed to use https://!, That would have had a major effect on consumers and would have been a consumer rights issue. | :::I wouldn't count their direct intelligence collection in this, as that's just what they do, and to my knowledge they're not selling any of that. Whether they should be doing that or not is a civil rights issue. If they'd stepped in a few years back and said 'no, you're not allowed to use https://!, That would have had a major effect on consumers and would have been a consumer rights issue. | ||
:::Right now, I think the page is at the appropriate level of detail. Any addition to this page would probably be overkill unless it directly made reference to consumer things. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 15:24, 12 October 2025 (UTC) | :::Right now, I think the page is at the appropriate level of detail. Any addition to this page would probably be overkill unless it directly made reference to consumer things. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 15:24, 12 October 2025 (UTC) | ||
::::@[[User:Keith|Keith]] What about the clipper chip, all the publicity, furor about that? The development of PGP, etc. in response. That seems to me an obvious case where the NSA actively worked on/had impact on consumer goods. Developed by the NSA, using algorithms that they developed and kept secret. That would have put backdoor for law enforcement (and others) in telecom gear for consumers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip gives a brief summary, but there was a lot of news and advocacy (EFF, CPSR, ACLU, Privacy rights clearinghouse.) | |||
::::Maybe you missed my mention of it above? If you don't think it qualifies for inclusion, I would like to understand why? | |||
::::I haven't kept up with this area more recently, but tools and programs revealed by Snowden showed things like NSA malware programs (e.g. TURBINE), various products that infected and modified consumer devices (e.g., cell phones), using web bugs for tracking. | |||
::::I don't understand this: | |||
::::"I wouldn't count their direct intelligence collection in this, as that's just what they do, and to my knowledge they're not selling any of that." | |||
::::Is selling information the only thing of concern here? I am sure they "share" it with other parties as part of their business operation. Whether they get payment, or quid pro quo, or trade. (I would be surprised if they don't sell some of it, that is just how people work.) Why is that important to purposes of the wiki. | |||
::::How is this different than a big data company, like facebook? Collecting/creating profiles of people is "just what they do." Should we not talk about advertisers using web bugs to track people, just as we shouldn't talk about the NSA using the same technique to track people? Seems like a distinction without a difference. | |||
::::(I am not especially interested in this area, so on a practical level, I don't plan to markedly expand coverage of the NSA. I have been struggling to understand the editorial stance here.) I am just not following what the important differences are. [[User:Drakeula|Drakeula]] ([[User talk:Drakeula|talk]]) 19:23, 17 October 2025 (UTC) | |||