-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org wrote:

Apple will have its Snowden.

That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJW7GQdAAoJEAKK33RTsEsV3mQQAJpT3cdXDQZDE9Mla+C4yL71 ZepV3D+7f51AVbGgtZu/1+NkTqbRZvrtq9IjFyZdWH4FTM7xUbJmhaHw4048gSwu VupTP0TvQTADLzsEdabsCJSPk3yfZfMqOXeNxhORtuDI6xOLIbeKIx1iMiFvNjnl ETd5NDImtk99A/P7EddPqFEfwy2FwLv6Y6JydXhTyo/UFzzSIjbbx0TDLNvVLma6 3/QNPPF5d3ITVKmmz5kCtrNcVUmqVc7ZwDGdtyC/W8l1HWnG3swjeB+TNJNUdalp 9KPCpWs3ioV2ExhxjxWXuZFECsIzwSPa4yYaNsIYKwbMzQaJasSn+nz65ltEXiRf uPJ9f91DFhmZbhzA3ofqhp4YKUHUWhXhg7GzvU7NdqFcTi2N3EEToKa4f5bA9I3w gVvEAITNJ3YiCHm3MuwiceXNyxNCfeUNBl3c2WiPStmiUHtYNttvUWF66kLsSqwu U2QRJRMZ6+zhheFNgdIWWbgM78YVRPb79plSI44DDAzqORArz7HysA3UJyNQz3Ux wSldYb8VrXBqplMz0vFWgSAfeXUHWGA5jXHfm4sXuKOs54mqDmxolZl5xNuJHqxa vCb+81oyd3OWYO5WxYu7iQ+5YG6DpWa8YnF1ULHx7md2BGRMqZURyCJ4GkC6tl7q 4XUOORuyLRNRFwWeQaHX =zySL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 03/18/2016 03:35 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Anthony Papillion mailto:anthony@cajuntechie.org> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512

On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org mailto:dan@geer.org wrote:

...

Apple will have its Snowden.

That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft?

Or, just playing devils' advocate, perhaps we haven't seen any Snowdens from Microsoft because there's nothing to be leaked? Perhaps, instead of demanding cooperation from vendors and risking getting caught, the government focuses on building the capability to exploit bugs and opsec failures on the part of their targets.

That /could/ be true. But why should we believe that they wouldn't have enlisted the cooperation of Microsoft prior to the dates on the Snowden leaks? The NSA has been cooperating with companies since the 1970's (and got in a lot of trouble about it). Why would they ignore a company that has 90%+ of the desktop market worldwide? Possible but unlikely IMHO. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJW7GcUAAoJEAKK33RTsEsVVZIQAKly2eCxgmAHgkyhz1/patK9 IapaxW1dMJk9BJ+pxB9x4IQIEIN29tegapgyWT1FKU9hGhBG2ByWWKLS4GlqAy3n Xhsd+zJIdxP+jilDYZ/np6IyzeOXi9iab7uu6UmNw0nCoFrJnu0t8edDPvGNuDc7 SIrSK8ZQjR66yom2tiZj+AaOzfLcJQVPijNajoidov47+GyPqmXtYU2wr+wgLS0H xCCz8eyK/TAPa+vJjiAXSAW2I1FtRVoRZ+hkRdp/U7F/lkgsu+IKG7K5dZjUYNtB 8Ga26au/TXHJT9wowdpGDEkcXxj2MapJKG3hjMfr0fx0te+TjntAfohwJWxmXAzn giGnIV1RyTp3pGdMCJksQmg4p3xDbULKYUjwe3jaHMOtrszMKhMThb0i3hz5+5Q9 tKkLJlyTbP+ivwJ4t/ZyPhDNqyoKjx7y6926YPAN7kAGO5tjDupgEtKiu6X2u6s6 jyBBEfRC+0T2Qo9kBFjqPl/RjQRkcZoupZ4/ja2mVEXPnSTqdPqoY4IngMUIC5ey dIRX52XReaZkT039zpSx7ZR2ZW7ELp3r8I+TqPvpOIrWinnW4eSQ1jO6kfwxaPq2 ch8hhCw6VnNyapSbpgDkb4vCpEHxEsy3XdOg4jf2Y/RSsjFqHH+/F3yshBF/ITBv BFBPXl/5NkqUzh0gMTEr =L+Pi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 03/18/2016 04:18 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Anthony Papillion mailto:anthony@cajuntechie.org> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512

On 03/18/2016 03:35 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:

...

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Anthony Papillion mailto:anthony@cajuntechie.org

mailto:anthony@cajuntechie.org>> wrote:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512

On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org mailto:dan@geer.org

mailto:dan@geer.org> wrote:

...

...

Apple will have its Snowden.

That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft?

Or, just playing devils' advocate, perhaps we haven't seen any Snowdens from Microsoft because there's nothing to be leaked? Perhaps, instead of demanding cooperation from vendors and risking getting caught, the government focuses on building the capability to exploit bugs and opsec failures on the part of their targets.

That /could/ be true. But why should we believe that they wouldn't have enlisted the cooperation of Microsoft prior to the dates on the Snowden leaks? The NSA has been cooperating with companies since the 1970's (and got in a lot of trouble about it). Why would they ignore a company that has 90%+ of the desktop market worldwide? Possible but unlikely IMHO.

Just Occam's Razor. Why bother getting cooperation when the software is not secure to begin with? There are too many ways to gain access to Windows that aren't vulnerable to leaks. And we know for sure this is true and has been for a long time; just look at the thousands of exploit kits out there, most of which have been made by people without much in the way of resources or experience. If that's what the script kiddies can do, imagine what an agency with a $50B budget can do.

You bring up good points. It not only saves money but also allows them to hide their true capabilities. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJW7HMIAAoJEAKK33RTsEsVD9wQAJzd8z5s7/qrlaR9S9l+e7Yo 8w6drsQvpn4XaR9kzCAz7i1xl+MEzCdqbaIKFNw0Kf5JoAeqRhJ6/pgfMjs6SS9L 1zolofmybjezMmh5d6USvExsDZivvikt6BtsO1o6x33FsMczZrBSfQ1zdA2qsvQY ch/Ms0jZt92iXsefvaxHMZEuGLvZViiB5v1mgU0eBc+GEKiFN469wunPmOXuihWi ngkKZCIJHWd+T/Qtcl8DW9mrNlICs9qmIcTn4mMvl6aJWIj7UenK8Rg33M0/Lv2+ ccyGanXt9kZbsz77PKrZGDcRQ0N0c+37fZaysmY6s9ywwZKKpj1L2BQO40QA4yTC LbUl9hrhu19TE4LZglemlfQXHdZgQYFsz5c6hriyK36oJBi01iEXB1vo30yKIx98 /es0j0xRGCBgbHmQWi+86y4QHhgp+FiRiy9UBv4o5kwV1mPGnZyh7dvX2+i0Eg2a Zr2xPIUBWou+7aL0xv2b+HoiwMzBlNSkyXQ+HxfNqXIKHXq03Liwkel0uiEl7NHg AKhYFm5edtKPlRmzwIBavAQRiVrmilBRT3XBcYfz1Fu4SlLf08SUs5qWAycIOVGN fMDBlXEssQz7xGYK++zw+gi7ejTOdN9/UOzHnYyvP/WO4IMww8pQxxfWH7Qfjl9p bzmWceCXS5QT6UDGujs0 =BmuW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 15:25:01 -0500 Anthony Papillion wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512

On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org wrote:

...

Apple will have its Snowden.

That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft.

Is this message for real? Trolling? Or what.

Dnia piątek, 18 marca 2016 15:25:01 Anthony Papillion pisze:

On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org wrote:

...

Apple will have its Snowden.

That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft?

Caspar Bowden. Not a "technical" Snowden, but a whistleblower (that has gone ignored, by most) nonetheless. -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147

At 02:02 PM 3/18/2016, you wrote:

Apple will have its Snowden.

--dan

Marc Zwillinger, top tech lawyer for Apple in several cases, is an ex-DoJ top tech lawyer. Several of the Apple and amici lawyers are ex-USG, a stepping onto the golden stone -- a la Snowden Inc. -- to higher public service of just-us legally empowered spy-technoids rewards. All sharks are dual-hatted officers of the court, government agents and spies, with privileged access to ex parte, sealed, classified, in camera, judge's chambers, bar associations, commissions, panels, perks-comped and liquid-and-teen-sex fueled retreats and sojourns (flyaways from top law perches to hottie climates), ghost-writing, talking-heads, media advisors, why, momma mia, jumping the sharks is the lawful spying profession's motto. Engineers are not only dual-hatted, but verily Methusalaic with cascading, fast-changing head gear to fit the opportunities to engineer the fuck out of the public with godawful PR-slathered technology, science, math, human experiments, climate trashing, harmful environmental remediation, and, ah ha, literally grandmotherfucking encryption and cybersecurity not worth shit. Pardon our don't give a fuck for Job's protege >1% Tim Cook is so cocksure mouthing in chorus with his duplicitously greedy sharks, venal managerial engineers and advertising geniuses are glossing "on behalf of the public's right to privacy" (except from predatory USG, Apple and amici conspiring to keep secrets and sealings from the iYokels).

At 02:02 PM 3/18/2016, you wrote:

Apple will have its Snowden.

--dan

We are players in this drama, not observers. If you think someone at Apple should leak sensitive documents in the public interest, why don't you drive over to Cupertino and encourage your contacts there to leak? Evil men take power when good men do nothing. Which are you? jmp

On 3/19/16, John Young wrote:

Marc Zwillinger, top tech lawyer for Apple in several cases, is an ex-DoJ top tech lawyer.

Several of the Apple and amici lawyers are ex-USG, a stepping onto

All sharks are dual-hatted officers

http://fortune.com/2016/03/18/apple-hires-corporate-security-chief/ Apple just hired Stathakopoulos (Amazon, Microsoft) as EVP of internal corporate infosec. If these seemingly principled battles grow, expect corps to be going in deep on candidates with their own SSBI-like anal probes.

On 3/21/16, The Doctor wrote:

On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 21:26:52 -0400 grarpamp wrote:

...

If these seemingly principled battles grow, expect corps to be going in deep on candidates with their own SSBI-like anal probes.

They already have what amounts to an internal counter-intelligence unit that occasionally runs mole hunts looking for employees that leak information on upcoming products or projects to the news media. I'm kind of surprised they're not doing this already.

Maybe before Snowden corps never thought govts would be in heavy conflict with the corp-customer relationship, essentially attacking one of its essential foundations... crypto, (others being features, price, usability, apps, brand, quality, etc). ie: Previously known govt activities were relagated to tax / structure / employment / trade / safety regulation etc which didn't directly impact users. Too bad corps were just starting to recognize advertise and capitilize on the crypto relationship, with market / user awareness results starting to develop. Which is why Apple must win and be given every possible support from everyone in doing so... to reject clipper v2 forever.

On 3/22/16, juan wrote:

Furthermore, it's possible for [...]

In this game everything is possible, even possibly probable. Game on.