Previously:
They aren't handing data to NSA? Show us, how? The executive doesn't take their agenda from 'Highlands Forum' ? Show us, that you don't. The pipes between data centers are encrypted by keys that aren't being leaked -- where's the evidence? Your CSO doesn't have a phone in his shoe? Let’s see!
Hmmm… proving negatives. Does that have something to do with quantum entanglement?
No, it has to do with good old fashioned integrity, openness and
honesty with the public. People can spot that, or lack thereof,
from miles away.
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Tom Mitchell
I might also note that there has not been (yet?) a Snowden event disclosing bad behaviour initiated by Google.
Consensus is that the very first Snodwn release, the PRISM slides and language therein, indicated some form of bilateral partnership with a large number of internet companies. Plus the AT&T tap room thing, and other known early parts of the storyline. It is unreasonable to assume that there is a strictly arms length, Judge signed, per transaction basis going on there. Where you have any relationship at all, loose buddy relationships develop to various degrees.
The international nature of Google puts them in a much harder place than a TLA as serious blunders could roll up the business and give them no place to hide.
Google is an American company. Companies and govts don't generally wish or extend their secret jewels to offshore risk. Though occaisionally embassies and corps do get caught off guard or are bound by certain rules.
The reality I suspect is: Google protects its data with more care than most federal agencies.
Data protection regimen is separate from what you elect to do with that data. Good regimen makes it easier to control and manage your plans, ie: classification. This is not to say these things are true, but that there is less and/or unconvincing evidence that they are not, and at least resonable cause to consider that they are. On innocence... Why are the Boards, CEO's, Officers and staff of these companies not speaking up and saying they had and have no non judicially forced role in the spying of Snowdens revelations? On resistance... QWEST (Nacchio) tried to stand up, for a few minutes at least till resigning and later jailed. Replaced by, AT&T's (Notebaert). Lavabit (Levison) stood up, and closed. We're now seeing some companies doing "good things" in this space. But that doesn't address the original question of innocence or guilt. On guilt... Or maybe they're not speaking up because... like the US refuses to disclose any of the credible terror plots and bad guys they claim to be rolling up as mass spying result... maybe its because they have a bit of a problem with their story there. Who knows. But if you're clean and can back it, and are in the middle of a hot mess, keeping silent is a pretty dumb thing to do for your reputation. Needs more openness.