PRISM Update: NYT says WaPo a bit credulous

Sat Jun 8 06:23:19 UTC 2013

On Jun 8, 2013, at 10:11 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:

> Well, ok, they don't actually *say* that, but it's the underlying idea behind their own piece, which says that the listed companies didn't really give NSA quite such unfettered access

There's another potential explanation:

from <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/technology/tech-companies-bristling-concede-to-government-surveillance-efforts.html?pagewanted=all>

-----

'Tech companies might have also denied knowledge of the full scope of cooperation with national security officials because employees whose job it is to comply with FISA requests are not allowed to discuss the details even with others at the company, and in some cases have national security clearance, according to both a former senior government official and a lawyer representing a technology company.'

-----

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins at arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>

	  Luck is the residue of opportunity and design.

		       -- John Milton