Eric Schmidt, Jared Cohen Say Google Data Now Protected From Gov't Spying 155
An anonymous reader writes "Google's Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen were [part of a] wide-ranging session at SXSW today and they revealed that Google's data is now safely protected from the prying eyes of government organizations. In the last few days Google upgraded its security measure following revelations that Britain's GCHQ had intercepted data being transmitted between Google datacenters, Schmidt said that his company's upgrades following the incident left him 'pretty sure that information within Google is now safe from any government's prying eyes.'"
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah right (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously is there anyone that would actually believe such a statement?
Re:Liar (Score:3, Insightful)
That's being a little harsh.
He says what the letters from Obama tell him to say.
Nonsense (Score:4, Insightful)
>"they revealed that Google's data is now safely protected from the prying eyes of government organizations. "
That is nonsense. The NSA could probably STILL access the information if they want to (and likely will) or Google can be compelled to reveal it with a super secret demand order, or even a regular warrant.
No information that is ever collected is ever "safe" from prying eyes. And even Google having the information is certainly nothing to be comfortable about. They have ENOUGH information about consumers already... certainly enough to be creepy.
Re:Safe just from prying eyes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, the data might be safe from a government's prying eyes, but will it be safe from a government who kindly pays for the data, with the company acquiescing between it wants to maintain its lucrative business links with the authorities?
FTFY
...that also has the power to jail anyone, including corporate executives, for undisclosed national security reasons and undisclosed duration if they fail to cooperate?
"Pretty sure"? Why should we believe this? (Score:4, Insightful)
and they revealed that Google's data is now safely protected from the prying eyes of government organizations.
Does anyone actually believe this? First off we know that all the government has to do is issue a National Security Letter [wikipedia.org] and Google will fold like a dish cloth. Eric Schmidt isn't about to go to jail to protect you. Second, he has every reason to publicly proclaim our data is "safely protected" in order to protect his business regardless of whether it is true. Third, he cannot possibly promise that even if he genuinely believes it because he can't prove it. Fourth, even if he could somehow be sure he's keeping the government snoops out, he won't provide anyone the access necessary to verify it.
There are things they could say that I would believe but him being "pretty sure" that our data is safe just isn't really credible.
Re:Liar (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a very broken, hazy line between marketing and lying.
I thought they were synonyms...
Re:"Pretty sure"? Why should we believe this? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not a fan of Google's, but I'm not sure why people are unwilling to recognize this is a significant step in the right direction.
Before Google took the steps necessary to ensure communications between data centers was secured, the government could (and apparently did) just slurp up everything and troll for information. Now, at least they'll need some sort of court order, which means they'll need at least a modicum of an idea what they are targeting.
The entire government system is still deeply - maybe even fatally - flawed. Even if Obama's reforms actually take place, there's still far too much power left in the hands of the secret courts and the spy agencies. But fixing this horrible, unconstitutional mess will take time and effort. Correcting (or, in this case, interfering with) even one aspect of it is welcome news.