Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #70801 > unrolled thread

CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices'

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-10 17:48 +0000
    Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Electric Comet <electric-comet@mail.invalid> - 2015-03-10 16:57 -0700
      Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-10 18:07 -0700
        Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2015-03-10 18:26 -0700
          Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2015-03-10 18:31 -0700
            Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2015-03-10 21:41 -0700
              Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-03-12 01:54 -0400
                Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2015-03-12 06:49 -0700
                Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2015-03-12 08:43 -0700
                Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-03-12 19:03 -0400
            Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> - 2015-03-12 13:22 -0700
              Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-12 22:30 +0000
                Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-12 23:04 +0000
                  Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-03-13 01:28 +0000
                Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-03-13 01:28 +0000
                Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-03-13 01:56 +0000
                  Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-13 02:12 +0000
                    Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2015-03-12 20:14 -0700
                      Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-03-13 00:30 -0400
                        Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-03-13 09:11 -0400
                        Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-13 14:00 +0000
                          Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' "M. John Matlaw" <nouser@invalid.com> - 2015-03-13 16:17 -0400
                            Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-13 21:06 +0000
                              Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' "M. John Matlaw" <nouser@invalid.com> - 2015-03-14 14:02 -0400
                                Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-14 19:48 +0000
                                  Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' "M. John Matlaw" <nouser@invalid.com> - 2015-03-14 17:02 -0400
        Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2015-03-10 21:12 -0700
          Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Electric Comet <electric-comet@mail.invalid> - 2015-03-16 08:44 -0700
    Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-12 19:49 -0500
      Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-13 01:14 +0000
        Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Leonard Oglesby <email@domain.com> - 2015-03-12 21:49 -0700
          Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-03-13 01:58 -0400
          Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-13 14:02 +0000
          Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2015-03-13 18:43 -0500
      Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Me, myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> - 2015-03-13 08:14 +0100
        Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-13 14:03 +0000
          Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> - 2015-03-13 07:27 -0700
          Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Me, myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> - 2015-03-13 15:55 +0100
            Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-13 15:11 +0000
              Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Me, myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> - 2015-03-14 12:38 +0100
                Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-14 12:46 +0000
                  Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2015-03-14 23:01 -0700
                    Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Electric Comet <electric-comet@mail.invalid> - 2015-03-16 08:53 -0700
                Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-14 16:01 +0000
            Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-13 12:20 -0400
              Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-13 16:36 +0000
        Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-13 17:25 +0000
          Re: CIA 'tried to crack security of Apple devices' tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> - 2015-03-16 12:36 -0700

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#70962

On 2015-03-13, Davoud <star@sky.net> wrote:
> Don Bruder:
>> Unfortunately, there's no way to *REALLY* know if such a hole exists, in 
>> whatever cryptosystem is being discussed, or if it does, if it's been 
>> discovered (or perhaps even installed...) by the TLAs. Anybody who 
>> thinks the TLAs would admit they know of such a hole is a fool. Anybody 
>> who thinks they wouldn't exploit it if they could is even more a fool. 
>> But since it's all we've got at the moment, you either have to trust it 
>> (however reluctantly) or leave your secrets "in the clear".
>
>> Either that, or build a new tinfoil hat and hope for the best...
>
> The Intelligence Community (IC) does what is required of it by law. For
> an agency to admit this or that would be a violation of the espionage
> laws. Not going to happen.

It's a good thing we have people like Snowden who are willing to open
things up a bit so the average American citizen can be aware of the abuse
that is happening right under our noses.

> I don't know why it is so difficult for people to understand that the
> NSA is not looking for, or reading, the communications of the average
> American or ally.

The fact is their dragnet includes most average American communications.
And the way they link people's communications to each other to make
associations allows them to gather the records of thousands of
individual Americans when they target just one. For instance, if the
person they target happened to call a business that you happened to have
called, BINGO, your communications are automatically in the net as well.
And there are few real limits to what agents can do with the troves of
information they have on hand. The potential for abuse is vast, and
there are few checks and balances beyond the "you'll just have to trust
us" kind. Agents have been caught (mostly because they had guilty
consciences and came clean, or were so brazen about it they blabbed to
others) reading communications of average citizens:

<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/23/nsa-officers-sometimes-spy-on-love-interests/>

> SIGINT collection and processing are incredibly labor intensive, and
> there are never enough people, especially those skilled in the hard
> languages, to cover the legitimate targets.

There are also not enough people to monitor them to make sure they aren't
abusing their power, which is the real problem.

> Anyone who thinks they have the time, the inclination, or the mandate
> to entertain themselves with John Q. Public's personal communications
> is delusional and really does need that tinfoil hat.

Anyone who thinks that human beings won't abuse their power hasn't
learned one of life's great lessons. Human beings with this much power
need proper supervision, and without it, and with this many human beings
being handed this much power, what we already know is abuse of that
power is probable and has happened. Yet we are told we should just trust
the very people abusing their power.

> I would sincerely hope that there are no publicly available cipher
> systems that the IC cannot read. That would do nothing to protect the
> average citizen because the average citizen does not need such
> protection, but it would be a boon to the enemies of civilization.

If encryption can be broken by the TLAs, it can be broken by others who
have the ability to invest the time and energy into breaking it for
whatever nefarious purposes they have in mind. And if the TLAs keep
these security holes to themselves, those holes are left gaping open for
others to use for whatever nefarious purposes they wish, with the
average American non the wiser, which means *anything* relying on that
encryption is available to *anyone* with the means to exploit it for
their own gain. That is the opposite of ensuring our security.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70975

On 3/13/15 10:00 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2015-03-13, Davoud <star@sky.net> wrote:
>> Don Bruder:
>>> Unfortunately, there's no way to *REALLY* know if such a hole exists, in
>>> whatever cryptosystem is being discussed, or if it does, if it's been
>>> discovered (or perhaps even installed...) by the TLAs. Anybody who
>>> thinks the TLAs would admit they know of such a hole is a fool. Anybody
>>> who thinks they wouldn't exploit it if they could is even more a fool.
>>> But since it's all we've got at the moment, you either have to trust it
>>> (however reluctantly) or leave your secrets "in the clear".
>>
>>> Either that, or build a new tinfoil hat and hope for the best...
>>
>> The Intelligence Community (IC) does what is required of it by law. For
>> an agency to admit this or that would be a violation of the espionage
>> laws. Not going to happen.
>
> It's a good thing we have people like Snowden who are willing to open
> things up a bit so the average American citizen can be aware of the abuse
> that is happening right under our noses.
>
>> I don't know why it is so difficult for people to understand that the
>> NSA is not looking for, or reading, the communications of the average
>> American or ally.
>
> The fact is their dragnet includes most average American communications.
> And the way they link people's communications to each other to make
> associations allows them to gather the records of thousands of
> individual Americans when they target just one. For instance, if the
> person they target happened to call a business that you happened to have
> called, BINGO, your communications are automatically in the net as well.
> And there are few real limits to what agents can do with the troves of
> information they have on hand. The potential for abuse is vast, and
> there are few checks and balances beyond the "you'll just have to trust
> us" kind. Agents have been caught (mostly because they had guilty
> consciences and came clean, or were so brazen about it they blabbed to
> others) reading communications of average citizens:
>
> <http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/23/nsa-officers-sometimes-spy-on-love-interests/>
>
>> SIGINT collection and processing are incredibly labor intensive, and
>> there are never enough people, especially those skilled in the hard
>> languages, to cover the legitimate targets.
>
> There are also not enough people to monitor them to make sure they aren't
> abusing their power, which is the real problem.
>
>> Anyone who thinks they have the time, the inclination, or the mandate
>> to entertain themselves with John Q. Public's personal communications
>> is delusional and really does need that tinfoil hat.
>
> Anyone who thinks that human beings won't abuse their power hasn't
> learned one of life's great lessons. Human beings with this much power
> need proper supervision, and without it, and with this many human beings
> being handed this much power, what we already know is abuse of that
> power is probable and has happened. Yet we are told we should just trust
> the very people abusing their power.
>
>> I would sincerely hope that there are no publicly available cipher
>> systems that the IC cannot read. That would do nothing to protect the
>> average citizen because the average citizen does not need such
>> protection, but it would be a boon to the enemies of civilization.
>
> If encryption can be broken by the TLAs, it can be broken by others who
> have the ability to invest the time and energy into breaking it for
> whatever nefarious purposes they have in mind. And if the TLAs keep
> these security holes to themselves, those holes are left gaping open for
> others to use for whatever nefarious purposes they wish, with the
> average American non the wiser, which means *anything* relying on that
> encryption is available to *anyone* with the means to exploit it for
> their own gain. That is the opposite of ensuring our security.
>
For you and others - just say the documentary CitizenFour last night 
about Snowden, Glenwald and Poitras and recommend it highly.  Took my 
breath away when, towards the end, it was mentioned that the various 
Federal Security apparati were keeping tabs on 1.2 Americans.  Granted, 
that's only about a third of a percent of the population but it's still 
a heck of a lot of people.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70976

On 2015-03-13, M. John Matlaw <nouser@invalid.com> wrote:
>
> For you and others - just say the documentary CitizenFour last night 
> about Snowden, Glenwald and Poitras and recommend it highly.  Took my 
> breath away when, towards the end, it was mentioned that the various 
> Federal Security apparati were keeping tabs on 1.2 Americans.  Granted, 
> that's only about a third of a percent of the population but it's still 
> a heck of a lot of people.

It's not available on Netflix streaming at the moment; but hopefully
will make it there at some point. I'll be on the lookout for it. Thanks,
John. : )

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71040

On 3/13/15 5:06 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2015-03-13, M. John Matlaw <nouser@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>> For you and others - just say the documentary CitizenFour last night
>> about Snowden, Glenwald and Poitras and recommend it highly.  Took my
>> breath away when, towards the end, it was mentioned that the various
>> Federal Security apparati were keeping tabs on 1.2 Americans.  Granted,
>> that's only about a third of a percent of the population but it's still
>> a heck of a lot of people.
>
> It's not available on Netflix streaming at the moment; but hopefully
> will make it there at some point. I'll be on the lookout for it. Thanks,
> John. : )
>
Son of a gun.  Coulda streamed it for free.  Googled and found this:

<http://www.techhive.com/article/2896573/films-you-should-stream-this-weekend-include-the-oscar-winning-citizenfour.html> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71046

On 2015-03-14, M. John Matlaw <nouser@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 3/13/15 5:06 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2015-03-13, M. John Matlaw <nouser@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> For you and others - just say the documentary CitizenFour last night
>>> about Snowden, Glenwald and Poitras and recommend it highly.  Took my
>>> breath away when, towards the end, it was mentioned that the various
>>> Federal Security apparati were keeping tabs on 1.2 Americans.  Granted,
>>> that's only about a third of a percent of the population but it's still
>>> a heck of a lot of people.
>>
>> It's not available on Netflix streaming at the moment; but hopefully
>> will make it there at some point. I'll be on the lookout for it. Thanks,
>> John. : )
>>
> Son of a gun.  Coulda streamed it for free.  Googled and found this:
>
><http://www.techhive.com/article/2896573/films-you-should-stream-this-weekend-include-the-oscar-winning-citizenfour.html> 
>

Terrific! Thanks for passing this along. 

Now all I need is some popcorn. : )

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71056

On 3/14/15 3:48 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2015-03-14, M. John Matlaw <nouser@invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 3/13/15 5:06 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> On 2015-03-13, M. John Matlaw <nouser@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For you and others - just say the documentary CitizenFour last night
>>>> about Snowden, Glenwald and Poitras and recommend it highly.  Took my
>>>> breath away when, towards the end, it was mentioned that the various
>>>> Federal Security apparati were keeping tabs on 1.2 Americans.  Granted,
>>>> that's only about a third of a percent of the population but it's still
>>>> a heck of a lot of people.
>>>
>>> It's not available on Netflix streaming at the moment; but hopefully
>>> will make it there at some point. I'll be on the lookout for it. Thanks,
>>> John. : )
>>>
>> Son of a gun.  Coulda streamed it for free.  Googled and found this:
>>
>> <http://www.techhive.com/article/2896573/films-you-should-stream-this-weekend-include-the-oscar-winning-citizenfour.html>
>>
>
> Terrific! Thanks for passing this along.
>
> Now all I need is some popcorn. : )
>
Can't help with that - sorry.  I'm inclined to agree with the

"It’s essential viewing, but after you see it, you might need some other 
movies to temporarily get your mind off of it."

Not a movie but

http://www.theonion.com/articles/evangelical-scientists-refute-gravity-with-new-int,1778/ 


might help lighten up the mood.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70852

In article <100320151807038081%michelle@michelle.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <mdo0mj$od8$1@dont-email.me>, Electric Comet
> <electric-comet@mail.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > On 10 Mar 2015 17:48:41 GMT
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Fuckers.
> > > 
> > >
> > > <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-secu
> > > ri
> > > ty-of-apple-devies>
> > 
> > Why would they need to crack it or anything else? The backdoors in
> > software is endless. Hardware as well.
> 
> They tried to crack it because there aren't any backdoors that they, or
> anyone else, can find.
> 
> > Most smart people knew/know that crypto hardware was and still is
> > compromised.
> 
> Thus far, not these Apple devices.
> 
> > Some of the backdoors are getting closed nowadays but it's just
> > like closing the barn door when the horse is already running
> 
> Can't close something that wasn't there to be opened in the first place.
> 
> > yeah the TLA tried and failed, nothing to see here, move along
> 
> That failure is plenty enough to see.

It doesn't say that they failed.

Last time I checked, there were still public exploits for Apple devices.  
Governments seem to be about 2 to 5 years ahead of security researchers 
when finding exploits, so figure that every exploit exposed in the next 
2-5 years is already available to a few people.

-- 
I will not see posts from astraweb, theremailer, dizum, or google
because they host Usenet flooders.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71260

On Tue, 10 Mar 2015 21:12:26 -0700
Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:

> It doesn't say that they failed.
> 
> Last time I checked, there were still public exploits for Apple
> devices. Governments seem to be about 2 to 5 years ahead of security
> researchers when finding exploits, so figure that every exploit
> exposed in the next 2-5 years is already available to a few people.

Or a lot more than 2-5 if you recall the bash exploit, (was it
shellshock?), was 25 years old.

the target space for that was/is very, very large

But I just see the reporting and fixing of these things as theater
The state protects itself so no doubt the next gen of exploits is
(or has been) in place. Not to mention the tech. that most people
have no idea even exists and probably can't even imagine


So one has to hop, skip and jump ahead, at least mentally to
extrapolate where the state is now

maybe an orthogonal example, maybe not, but nano tech. seems to
have been getting a lot of Dept. 'O Defense $$$

heaven help us












 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70941

On 3/10/15 12:48 PM, in article cm8p3oFojh5U2@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> Fuckers.
> 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-security
> -of-apple-devices>

That's your Government. And everybody thought Bush was threatening our Civil
Rights.

DOWN BOY!!! I KNOW you are gonna call me some disrespectful adjective nouns
and such - but just stop and think about where we are now.

Back to our regular programming...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70942

On 2015-03-13, George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 3/10/15 12:48 PM, in article cm8p3oFojh5U2@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
> Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> Fuckers.
>> 
>> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-security
>> -of-apple-devices>
>
> That's your Government. And everybody thought Bush was threatening our Civil
> Rights.

This may come as news to you, but Bush was a rather crucial part of this
government for a substantial amount of time, and during the time when
the Patriot Act was passed. Bush threatened our civil rights just as
many others who have done so.

> DOWN BOY!!! I KNOW you are gonna call me some disrespectful adjective nouns
> and such

You're wrong. 

Unlike other fools, I haven't been fooled into believing either of the
two parties that have been in control of this government are any better
than the other or any less responsible for where we are today than the
other.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70951

On 2015-03-13 01:14:36 +0000, Jolly Roger said:

> On 2015-03-13, George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 3/10/15 12:48 PM, in article cm8p3oFojh5U2@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
>> Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Fuckers.
>>> 
>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-security
>>> -of-apple-devices>
>> 
>> That's your Government. And everybody thought Bush was threatening our Civil
>> Rights.
> 
> This may come as news to you, but Bush was a rather crucial part of this
> government for a substantial amount of time, and during the time when
> the Patriot Act was passed. Bush threatened our civil rights just as
> many others who have done so.

GW might have been a tad saner without the influence of Cheney, 
Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, Krystol, Rove, & Rumsfeldt.

>> DOWN BOY!!! I KNOW you are gonna call me some disrespectful adjective nouns
>> and such
> 
> You're wrong.
> 
> Unlike other fools, I haven't been fooled into believing either of the
> two parties that have been in control of this government are any better
> than the other or any less responsible for where we are today than the
> other.


-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70954

Leonard Oglesby:
> GW might have been a tad saner without the influence of Cheney, 
> Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, Krystol, Rove, & Rumsfeldt.

GW had aught to do with it all. They picked him to be nominal president
because he was harmless, incurious, unquestioning.
Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz: the *real* Axis of Evil.

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70963

On 2015-03-13, Leonard Oglesby <email@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2015-03-13 01:14:36 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>
>> On 2015-03-13, George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 3/10/15 12:48 PM, in article cm8p3oFojh5U2@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
>>> Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Fuckers.
>>>> 
>>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-security
>>>> -of-apple-devices>
>>> 
>>> That's your Government. And everybody thought Bush was threatening our Civil
>>> Rights.
>> 
>> This may come as news to you, but Bush was a rather crucial part of this
>> government for a substantial amount of time, and during the time when
>> the Patriot Act was passed. Bush threatened our civil rights just as
>> many others who have done so.
>
> GW might have been a tad saner without the influence of Cheney, 
> Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, Krystol, Rove, & Rumsfeldt.

I did say, "just as many others who have done". ; )

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70991

On Thu, 12 Mar 2015 21:49:20 -0700, Leonard Oglesby <email@domain.com> 
wrote:
>
> GW might have been a tad saner without the influence of Cheney, 
> Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, Krystol, Rove, & Rumsfeldt.

At least you can rest assured that the same crack team will be around to 
assist the next Republican president.  These are the real guys in power 
in Republican administrations, most of them getting their start in the 
Nixon Administration.  Presidents come and go, middle management stays 
the same.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70958

On 2015-03-13 00:49:28 +0000, George Kerby said:

> On 3/10/15 12:48 PM, in article cm8p3oFojh5U2@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
> Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
>> Fuckers.
>> 
>> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-security
>> -of-apple-devices>
> 
> That's your Government. And everybody thought Bush was threatening our Civil
> Rights.
> 
> DOWN BOY!!! I KNOW you are gonna call me some disrespectful adjective nouns
> and such - but just stop and think about where we are now.
> 
> Back to our regular programming...

My guess is that Apple is all too willing to provide backdoors for NSA.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70964

On 2015-03-13, Me  myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> On 2015-03-13 00:49:28 +0000, George Kerby said:
>
>> On 3/10/15 12:48 PM, in article cm8p3oFojh5U2@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
>> Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Fuckers.
>>> 
>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-security
>>> -of-apple-devices>
>> 
>> That's your Government. And everybody thought Bush was threatening our Civil
>> Rights.
>> 
>> DOWN BOY!!! I KNOW you are gonna call me some disrespectful adjective nouns
>> and such - but just stop and think about where we are now.
>> 
>> Back to our regular programming...
>
> My guess is that Apple is all too willing to provide backdoors for NSA.

You'd be wrong.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70965

On 3/13/15 7:03 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2015-03-13, Me  myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> On 2015-03-13 00:49:28 +0000, George Kerby said:
>>
>>> On 3/10/15 12:48 PM, in article cm8p3oFojh5U2@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
>>> Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fuckers.
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-security
>>>> -of-apple-devices>
>>>
>>> That's your Government. And everybody thought Bush was threatening our Civil
>>> Rights.
>>>
>>> DOWN BOY!!! I KNOW you are gonna call me some disrespectful adjective nouns
>>> and such - but just stop and think about where we are now.
>>>
>>> Back to our regular programming...
>>
>> My guess is that Apple is all too willing to provide backdoors for NSA.
>
> You'd be wrong.
>

Agreed - if anything Tim C has been giving NSA the middle finger.

-- 
"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if 
they are genuine."
   - Abraham Lincoln

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70966

On 2015-03-13 14:03:04 +0000, Jolly Roger said:

> On 2015-03-13, Me  myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> On 2015-03-13 00:49:28 +0000, George Kerby said:
>> 
>>> On 3/10/15 12:48 PM, in article cm8p3oFojh5U2@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
>>> Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Fuckers.
>>>> 
>>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-security
>>>> -of-apple-devices>
>>> 
>>> That's your Government. And everybody thought Bush was threatening our Civil
>>> Rights.
>>> 
>>> DOWN BOY!!! I KNOW you are gonna call me some disrespectful adjective nouns
>>> and such - but just stop and think about where we are now.
>>> 
>>> Back to our regular programming...
>> 
>> My guess is that Apple is all too willing to provide backdoors for NSA.
> 
> You'd be wrong.

You work for Apple, I assume?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70967

On 2015-03-13, Me  myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> On 2015-03-13 14:03:04 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>
>> On 2015-03-13, Me  myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>> On 2015-03-13 00:49:28 +0000, George Kerby said:
>>> 
>>>> On 3/10/15 12:48 PM, in article cm8p3oFojh5U2@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
>>>> Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Fuckers.
>>>>> 
>>>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-security
>>>>> -of-apple-devices>
>>>> 
>>>> That's your Government. And everybody thought Bush was threatening our Civil
>>>> Rights.
>>>> 
>>>> DOWN BOY!!! I KNOW you are gonna call me some disrespectful adjective nouns
>>>> and such - but just stop and think about where we are now.
>>>> 
>>>> Back to our regular programming...
>>> 
>>> My guess is that Apple is all too willing to provide backdoors for NSA.
>> 
>> You'd be wrong.
>
> You work for Apple, I assume?

If I did, I wouldn't tell you. : ) I will tell you I have coworkers,
friends, and relatives who work with and for Apple, and know enough
about Apple culture to know the last thing they will do is provide back
door access to anyone.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#71021

On 2015-03-13 15:11:04 +0000, Jolly Roger said:

> On 2015-03-13, Me  myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> On 2015-03-13 14:03:04 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>> 
>>> On 2015-03-13, Me  myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>>> On 2015-03-13 00:49:28 +0000, George Kerby said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 3/10/15 12:48 PM, in article cm8p3oFojh5U2@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
>>>>> Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Fuckers.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/10/cia-tried-to-crack-security
>>>>>> -of-apple-devices>
>>>>> 
>>>>> That's your Government. And everybody thought Bush was threatening our Civil
>>>>> Rights.
>>>>> 
>>>>> DOWN BOY!!! I KNOW you are gonna call me some disrespectful adjective nouns
>>>>> and such - but just stop and think about where we are now.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Back to our regular programming...
>>>> 
>>>> My guess is that Apple is all too willing to provide backdoors for NSA.
>>> 
>>> You'd be wrong.
>> 
>> You work for Apple, I assume?
> 
> If I did, I wouldn't tell you. : ) I will tell you I have coworkers,
> friends, and relatives who work with and for Apple, and know enough
> about Apple culture to know the last thing they will do is provide back
> door access to anyone.

The last thing they would do, if they did, to tell you.
Steve Jobs made a secret deal with homeland security.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web