Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by monocasa 2304 days ago
The NSA's slides disagree with you.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/01/pr...

2 comments

The NSA's slides disagree with you. Here is the slide explaining how the data flows. https://imgur.com/setOJIm

PRISM is simply a data integration system that gets data from the FBI's Data Intercept Technology Unit, which is the group that handles Internet communication wiretaps on specific individuals under investigation.

> No, Google isn't part of PRISM.

The slides literally list Google as a data provider as part of the PRISM program.

If you paint with that broad brush, the users whose data PRISM consumes are also part of the PRISM program. That's a fairly useless definition. What people are interested when talking about PRISM is whom the NSA integrates with.
End users didn't build automated systems to comply with government requests and integrate with the PRISM program.

End users also aren't listed in NSA documentation as collaborators.

Google also isn't listed in NSA documentation as collaborators.

Google also didn't integrate with the PRISM program.

Same.

Edit (responding too fast):

> Literally page five lists the companies

Page 5 doesn't say they are "collaborators."

> and page six lists the per company agreement dates

Page 6 doesn't say there was an "agreement" with those companies. It simply lists the dates that the FBI made data they have from these companies available for ingestion.

Stop pretending words exist in the documents that don't. That's conspiracy theory nonsense by the exact same method as Pizzagate.

Nothing in those slides substantiates your claim.
The slides literally list Google as a data provider as part of the PRISM program.
No, they list Google as one of the PRISM data sources. It doesn't say if Google was breached or if Google volunteered.

Again:

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/googl...

The PRISM slides list per company agreement dates spanning over five years. Microsoft started first in 2007, Google was added in 2009, with Apple being one of the last in 2012. If it was a system that was simply ingesting FBI data, why would it wait until 2012, unless you're suggesting that Apple didn't respond to FBI requests at all until late 2012?

Just because the NSA had a program to exceed even what had been negotiated via PRISM, doesn't mean that PRISM didn't involve collaboration.