Anyone see a game changer here?
ge at linuxbox.org
Sun Jan 24 05:49:18 UTC 2010
On 1/24/10 7:20 AM, Gadi Evron wrote:
> On 1/24/10 6:37 AM, Damian Menscher wrote:
>> So... you're taking incomplete information hyped up by "tech"
>> reporters operating based on leaks from people tangential to an
>> investigation as fact, and deciding that if Google doesn't tell you
>> the details of an ongoing criminal investigation that you'll assume
>> they broke the law.
> No. I write there's incomplete information, mention what possibly
> happened, what alternatives exist, and ask for more data.
To illustrate, you quoted:
"While reporting is vague, Google has supposedly broken into a server in
Taiwan (unless information of working through Taiwanese authorities, or
that someone else has done this for Google, becomes available)."
The paragraph continues, with:
"If this happened, ..."
I hope this solves any misunderstanding.
More information about the NANOG