Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 8th Jun 2013 14:57 UTC
Legal And yes, the PRISM scandal is far, far from over. More and more information keeps leaking out, and the more gets out, the worse it gets. The companies involved have sent out official statements - often by mouth of their CEOs - and what's interesting is that not only are these official statements eerily similar to each other, using the same terms clearly designed by lawyers, they also directly contradict new reports from The New York Times. So, who is lying?
Thread beginning with comment 564138
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Article on Ars
by WorknMan on Sat 8th Jun 2013 20:07 UTC
Member since:

Google: 'we cannot say this more clearly,' no government access to servers

Reply Score: 2

RE: Article on Ars
by UltraZelda64 on Sun 9th Jun 2013 00:54 in reply to "Article on Ars"
UltraZelda64 Member since:

I would love to believe that, and sure--it's a comforting thought. It damn well better be, because that's their business on the line... and they're already on the receiving end of trust issues. But, were there any more top-secret court orders that require the kind of complete silence that Verizon is forced to comply with?

More needs to be found out about this PRISM operation and Google's (as well as the other companies' involvements) with it. Why, if they really did, did they join for one thing. How are we supposed to believe that Google or any of the others are not ordered to keep silent when they apparently already willfully joined this PRISM crap?

There's a lot to be explained; until then, their trust is shattered as far as I'm concerned.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Article on Ars
by Morgan on Sun 9th Jun 2013 03:16 in reply to "RE: Article on Ars"
Morgan Member since:

If Google (and the other companies involved) really want to tell the truth without getting in trouble with gag orders, they can say something like "We are unable to confirm any allegations of collusion with the government regarding access to our data stores". That sends the message that yes, we are compromised, and no, we can't tell you about it.

But they won't do that because they would bleed customers like a severed artery.

Reply Parent Score: 5