Microsoft Putting Servers In Germany To Keep User Data Away From US Intelligence (techcrunch.com) 173
An anonymous reader writes: Ever since the Snowden leaks, people and businesses in foreign countries have been wary about hosting sensitive data on U.S. soil for fear intelligence agencies would be able to comb through it at their leisure. Microsoft has announced a plan to combat those worries, saying they will host infrastructure for Azure, Office 365, and Dynamics CRM at data centers in Germany. In addition, the data centers themselves will not be run by Microsoft, but by a subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom, which eliminates more legal avenues for U.S. agencies to access the data stored there. "The two data centers will be based in Magdeburg and Frankfurt am Main, with Microsoft stressing this 'data trustee' model means it will not have any access to customer data without the consent of the trustee, and that it cannot therefore be compelled — 'even by a third party' — to hand over customer data."
From one Lion's Den into another (Score:4, Informative)
This just in... German authorities access data on behalf of USA in accordance with intel sharing agreements.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Don't pay much attention to the news, do you?
https://www.rt.com/news/256729... [rt.com]
Re:From one Lion's Den into another (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't pay much attention to the news, do you?
https://www.rt.com/news/256729... [rt.com]
Oh, we've been paying attention. Question is, how much of these "anti" monitoring actions being taken are we supposed to believe are legitimate?
Hmmm, look what I found in TFA:
"However, the BND will continue to garner telephone calls and fax messages for Washington as this service falls under a different agreement."
So, requests merely hitting the BND in a different fucking format are a loophole big enough to drive a fleet of Mack trucks through. Gee, why am I not fucking surprised...
Behind our backs is where they've been illegally operating for years. Why the hell ignorant citizens of any country think governments will actually grow ethics and morals out of this is beyond even common sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
When it is not talking about Russia or Russian interests abroad. Outside of those areas, RT is not that bad.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Since when is RT considered news?
Since I gave up reading the MSM newspapers and listening to the BBC, because I realised that their foreign news coverage - and much of their domestic news - was a bunch of lies.
I am a British history graduate and a member of Mensa, with a strong interest in history and human affairs in general. I am careful to read widely and compare sources. On that basis, during the two years I have been following RT, I have not seen any obvious lies or distortion - about Russia or anything else.
On the other hand, if I wa
Re: (Score:2)
So, you are a British history graduate and a member of Mensa and yet an idiot if you truly believe any Russian news agency is more trustworthy than the BBC. Sorry.
Re: From one Lion's Den into another (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
As it happens, I came quite close to studying for a PhD in Russian history. Nowadays, I wish I had. So I do know a little about that country, its history, and how its people think. (Even though I used to enjoy Tom Clancy's melodramas about the wicked communists, before his writing became flabby and stereotyped).
You say that RT "are beholden to different masters". Different, I take it, from the masters of our own Western media. Whatever the official story, the BBC is just as government-controlled as RT. For
Re: (Score:3)
See, as one example among thousands, this story (by an American writer):
http://www.counterpunch.org/20... [counterpunch.org]
You will not see any of the awkward facts highlighted in that article anywhere in the Western MSM - ever. Journalists know better than to write such stories, and if they did editors would spike them. Should such a story ever get published, the proprietor would snuff out the careers of journalist and editor alike.
If you read RT and other such sources, however, you will already be aware of the discrepancie
Re: (Score:2)
There was never any doubt about who shot down that aircraft. The US never admitted responsibility, but formally regretted the loss of life and handed over tens of millions of dollars. The crew received combat zone medals for operating in a combat zone, which they had. There were no decorations for shooting down a civilian airliner.
I am absolutely sure that Vincennes did not deliberately shoot down an airliner. Why it was shot down seems to still be an open question.
Re: (Score:2)
There was never any doubt about who shot down that aircraft. The US never admitted responsibility, but formally regretted the loss of life and handed over tens of millions of dollars. The crew received combat zone medals for operating in a combat zone, which they had. There were no decorations for shooting down a civilian airliner.
And what about the criminal prosecution, which is being so enthusiastically pursued in the case of MH17? Where was the world-wide condemnation? Why did the prime minister of Australia never declare that he would confront the president of the USA and demand an explanation?
Re: From one Lion's Den into another (Corrected) (Score:2)
My last comment was wrongly formatted. This is how it should read.
There was never any doubt about who shot down that aircraft. The US never admitted responsibility, but formally regretted the loss of life and handed over tens of millions of dollars. The crew received combat zone medals for operating in a combat zone, which they had. There were no decorations for shooting down a civilian airliner.
And what about the criminal prosecution, which is being so enthusiastically pursued in the case of MH17? Where was the world-wide condemnation? Why did the prime minister of Australia never declare that he would confront the president of the USA and demand an explanation?
Re: (Score:2)
So, you are a British history graduate and a member of Mensa and yet an idiot if you truly believe any Russian news agency is more trustworthy than the BBC. Sorry.
And I am supposed to accept your verdict based on what evidence? Your say-so?
I don't believe that "any Russian news agency is more trustworthy than the BBC" simply as an item of faith. I believe it because day after day, literally for years, I have heard the BBC offer slanted, biased, one-sided stories. I have heard them cover stories about Palestine in which the views of the Israeli ambassador were balanced by the opinions of Jewish (but British) "analysts" - and whenever anyone represented the Palestinian
Re: (Score:3)
If Russia didn't invade Ukraine, why is the Crimea now Russian? Do you expect me to believe that plebiscite was run fairly?
Re: (Score:2)
Crimea is part of Russia now because
(1) It has been part of Russia, with a short break from 1991 until 2014. In other words Crimea became part of Russia before the USA existed.
(2) The citizens of Crimea voted, not just by a majority, but by an overwhelming majority, to become part of Russia again. (Incidentally, no one ever asked them in 1990-1 whether they wanted to leave Russia and become part of Ukraine).
(3) The great majority of Crimean people speak Russian, and consider themselves Russian.
(4) Over the
Re: (Score:2)
Further, see http://www.dailymail.co.uk/deb... [dailymail.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
And see http://www.bvoltaire.fr/ronald... [bvoltaire.fr]
Re: (Score:2)
And I am supposed to accept your verdict based on what evidence? Your say-so?
Based on the facts that
- Russia is one of the most dangerous countries in the world for journalists [wikipedia.org]
- Russia has one of the lowest press freedom indices in the world [wikipedia.org]
- There is [rsf.org] a clampdown taking place in Russia [rsf.org] on all independent media [amnesty.org]
- there are confirmed "Troll Factories" in Russia spreading lies and propaganda on social media across the world [nytimes.com]
Really, I could provide 500 other sources on all that's wrong with Russian media, but frankly I'm getting tired of fiddling with the A HREF's.
But let me guess, you
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly so. Rather like Pravda and Izvestia in Soviet times, ironically enough.
Re: (Score:3)
I am a British history graduate and a member of Mensa...
The whole Mensa thing is a trick question. You are the 1 millionth visitor click here for your free prize, and you fell for it. Did you ever wonder why the only people claiming to be from Mensa are actors and entertainers who are too stupid to figure it out that by passing you've actually failed?
Re: (Score:2)
My IQ testing scores indicate that I'd, almost certainly, qualify for Mensa. The amusing thing is, I'm really not all that smart. I just test really well. Not long after I've stopped doing something, I've forgotten it. If I cram, I can probably pass any test given to me. I'd wager on a passing score for any test where I can see the practice exams and have 72 hours to prepare with the test. I don't even care if it's a long test.
Re: (Score:2)
My IQ testing scores indicate that I'd, almost certainly, qualify for Mensa. The amusing thing is, I'm really not all that smart.
But you seem to be quite modest. What interests me is why you say "I'm really not all that smart". Do you really believe that, and if so on what evidence?
Or do you just believe - reasonably, given some of the replies to my comments - that on Slashdot it is better to keep a low profile and not seem as if you are claiming to be better than others?
Re: (Score:2)
I am intelligent enough to know how intelligent I am not. What I do have is the wisdom to know when to admit that I do not know and to seek an answer from those who do. The answer to your question is somewhere in there. I do hold my Ph.D in Applied Mathematics, but I've had the chance to work with some truly brilliant people and have learned much from them - including humility.
Re: (Score:2)
I am intelligent enough to know how intelligent I am not.
Which is the real test. I consider myself smart compared to ordinary people, but stupid next smart people.
I'm fortunate enough to work with PhD and expert in their field types, and I honestly wonder each day how I don't get fired. I feel like the dumbest guy in the room sometimes. Even then I tend to do well in those IQ and aptitude tests which leads me to conclude that they must be a con.
Re: (Score:2)
I attended a private school and then had the chance (after enlisting and getting access to financial aid through the GI Bill) to work with a few people who were called, 'savants.' Some where even called, 'idiot savants.' My Ph.D work, and university work, were done at a rather prestigious institute. (I was fortunate enough to be accepted at MIT and then was accepted into the Ph.D program.)
I say that, to explain this: I understand. I don't retain a whole lot unless I'm using it. What I can do is conceptualiz
Re: (Score:2)
I am familiar with the research and inclined to agree, at first blush. If you read the link you sent, you'll find some antecedents. I dare say, I prefer those.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I guess this Mensa member couldn't figure out that Private Eye is a parody paper.
Since I have been reading Private Eye since its first issue in 1961, that is not true. And, in fact, Private Eye has never been a "parody paper"; it has been a satirical magazine, which is something rather different. Journalists like Richard Ingrams, Paul Foot, and even Peter Cook the great satirical comedian went ruthlessly for the jugular with absolutely no respect for person or position. That was what made Private Eye worth reading - its complete and utter lack of deference or political correctness.
If th
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not proud of being a member of Mensa, nor would I be silly enough to expect that to gain me any special respect on Slashdot, where many of the contributors are intelligent and creative. I mentioned it merely to confirm that I have a reasonable level of analytic intelligence.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a business requirement. Basically foreign corporations and the financial regulators governing them are cutting off the US three letter agencies, off balance sheet investor fronts from insider trading schemes where billions where being made based upon secretly obtained corporate financial information from around the globe (this includes some participation by a UK agency). This to fund all sorts of illegal activities including a perversion ring involving the rich and greedy, including the nutso royal
Re: (Score:2)
Never mind the AC. He simply spouts a talking point of the extrem German right.
What used to be the stab in the back myth [wikipedia.org] in the run up to WW2 is now the obsession that Germany never truly became a sovereign state after reunification because it didn't give itself a new constitution.
This is of course completely divorced from reality, but goes to show that the US doesn't have a monopoly on wingnuts.
Re: (Score:2)
Kids, do yourselves a favor: Keep your own data in your own posession instead, ok? To hell with 'The Cloud', it's for chumps.
Erm... (Score:2)
The US are already spying on Germany.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07... [cnn.com]
Re: (Score:2)
And Germany on the US. Even the best of friends keep tabs on each other in global espionage circles.
Keep your friends close....
Very conveniently situated... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I doubt that has anything to do with it - Frankfurt am Main is Germany's financial hub, which would explain why the NSA would like to have its "we only spy on terrorists, not financial stuffsz!111 honest!" located nearby. Microsoft is most likely there because of its location - as home to the aforementioned financial institutions, it has excellent connectivity.
Re:Very conveniently situated... (Score:4, Informative)
'Excellent connectivity' is an understatement. Frankfurt is the largest internet exchange in the world by bandwidth.
https://www.peeringdb.com/priv... [peeringdb.com]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: Very conveniently situated... (Score:2)
Well spotted.
So to summerise
There is now to much data to spy on by sending it all over the Atlantic.
So the are moving the spy center to Germany. ..
And telling us its to keep our data safe from the nsa.
Sorry Microsoft, google and friends. Still not going to put anything of value on your hardware. Your cloud business model is still broken.
Re: (Score:3)
For the NSA to spy on a data center in Germany run by a German company is totally legal under US laws and by having a German company run it Microsoft is totally off the hook.
Can Still Be Punished? (Score:3, Interesting)
it cannot therefore be compelled — 'even by a third party' — to hand over customer data.
They might not be able to hand over the data, but I imagine they could still be found in contempt for not doing so.
Judge: "Hand over the data."
Microsoft: "We are physically incapable of doing so."
Judge: "Not my problem."
Re:Can Still Be Punished? (Score:5, Insightful)
What Microsoft created here is a "plausible deniability". They are neither the owner nor the operator of the computers. So if the judge argues that the data is stored on the german servers, Microsoft can say that they asked their german service provider, but the german service provider refused (rightfully, as Deutsche Telekom is incorporated in Germany and subject to german laws), and thus Microsoft simply can't answer the judge's request.
NSA Loophole (Score:5, Insightful)
So, every communication and bit of data is stored on a German server by a German company?
This is a great win for the National Security Agenty in the United States.
The NSA is not "legally" allowed to spy on USA Citizens. Great Briton and other countries have similar laws about their own citizens (for now.)
But a German company and its servers are German not American. So the NSA is perfectly in the right to hack, intercept or interrupt those severs in the interest of national security.
Sure, the current USA government can't publicly compel the release of USA citizens, but everything else is now on the table once your data is communicated to or kept by a non-citizen.
The only question now is: is Microsoft Word the format of choice for foreign terrorists? It's currently the standard for corporate ones.
Re: (Score:2)
The legality of illegal spying is not the point.
The point is keeping data out of reach of warrants.
Re: (Score:2)
The legality of the spying is the point now and the warrant requirements are not because the NSA and other intelligence agencies now share data with law enforcement for the purposes of prosecution.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what that means, but the point is stated in TFS and TFA:
Microsoft is working to make warrants served on Microsoft impotent by way of, "Oh, sorry. You'll have to take your silly-ass problem down the hall because we are the party responsible for the creation of data, but we are not the custodians of the data. We do have a Keurig 2.0 and some adorable K-cups if you like, and the restroom is the first door on your right."
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/... [eff.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft is unlikely to keep the NSA out of its data. It can keep it out of civil suits and the like, and that may be the intention.
The NSA is really mostly harmless to US citizens, compared to other organizations that might want such data.
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Office_for_the_Protection_of_the_Constitution
Add in the five eye nations too via the NSA, GCHQ.
Useless (Score:1)
Snowden's documents revealed that there's often close cooperation between the german intelligence and the NSA. So this legal arrangement might protect your data from a US court order, but not from the NSA. In general, the only jurisdictions that are unlikely to cooperate with the US intelligence are those of US adversaries, like Russia or China.
The only western country that has refused to cooperate with american intelligence and LEAs multiple times is... Vatican City. However, it's too artistically wonderfu
I don't believe them (Score:2)
Put it where the governement can't touch (Score:2)
Put the datacenters in Hollywood.
Not smart (Score:2, Informative)
The NSA is allowed to spy on foreign entities. That is their mission.
Soon, they will be barred from spying on US assets.
However in reality - they will continue to spy on everyone and everything.
Re: (Score:2)
So which do you think the NSA prefer: spying on German citizen's data in a US data centre, or spying on German citizen's data in a German data centre?
Germany for protection from US? (Score:5, Interesting)
Germany is one of the last places I'd go to escape US intelligence agencies. Microsoft would've been more believable if they'd partnered up with relatively neutral parties like Iceland or Switzerland.
Re: (Score:2)
This method will put collection back to the clandestine services and away from public US courts with laws searching for any data stored on a US bands products globally.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just that, a smart business move. The German market is the largest in Europe and the most sensitive to this issue. This is about revenue protection. Nothing less, nothing more.
Hmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
The idea that they're trying is using technical measures to keep the CIA and friends out, and the legal protection to stave off warrents. It's a decent idea when you think about it - it's not bulletproof, but a step up from existing measures. Furthermore, it makes it more illegal - going after an American on foreign land isn't domestic surveillance and it's not foreign surveillance either, making it harder to justify, and as such hopefully making whoever approves this crap more worried about the potential reprecussions. And that I think is the real purpose of this: not to make users immune to the intrusion, but simply to make it more difficult. I don't mind a fight being up, even if it is yet to be determined how effective it is.
Who thought we'd ever see a big corporation use a loophole for the benefit of its customers? I almost want to say that's what really scares me, if bribery didn't work.
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't designed to keep the NSA out. As you say, technical measures won't help, and realistically they will carry on spying on Americans no matter what so there is no point hoping that comes to an end soon.
This is designed to keep the FBI and other less clandestine elements of the US government out. The FBI usually have to reveal where data came from in court, and if they hacked it then the case gets thrown out because it could easily have been tampered with. So they put in legal requests demanding that
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft is just following the lead of Google and Apple by making it impossible to comply with such requests.
What have Google and Apple done to make it impossible to comply with legal requests?
perspective (Score:2)
This is to allow MS to continue to collect data on European customers without running afoul of the recent EU slam of 'Safe Harbor'.
Marketing spin turns this into "We are protecting you from spies" bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Safe Harbor will be resolved in six months and we'll be back to where it was, with maybe a few changes.
This is probably just something they were going to do anyway, and decided it was a good time to make a big deal out of it for PR purposes. Many customers wanted their stuff in the EU even before the Safe Harbor debacle.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not so sure about that. European governments have two big reasons for wanting data and data centers to come home to Europe: (1) it brings IT jobs back into their countries, IT jobs they have been unable to create through competition, and (2) it makes it much easier for European governments to spy on their own citizens; as long as it's the NSA spying on this data, European access to it is quite limited.
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking as someone who has European data in the US, we simply cannot afford to hire more Operations staff in the EU to look at EU data. A lot of businesses are in the same boat.
You might suggest that some local EU business might therefore eat our lunch, but honestly I don't know any company in the EU that does what we do.
They'll resolve it because it is a serious impediment to business and a lot of businesses also don't want to up and switch providers or force their providers to have to open EU subsidiari
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and think about the effects of that.
Big US companies can afford to hire European IT staff, so to them, that eliminates a competitor. I think most of them aren't trying to actively use these issues to kill competition, but they aren't going to spend a lot of money to lobby on your behalf, and they themselves don't care.
European IT companies, big and small, also face one fewer US competitor. They are certainly going to lobby their government for prot
NSA pushes US jobs over to Germany (Score:2, Insightful)
Just one more data point
translation (Score:2)
Translation: German intelligence is miffed that it is hard to spy on Germany citizens when their data sits on a US server; therefore, the German government pressures companies like Microsoft to move their servers to Germany, where the German government can spy on them much more easily. Having the servers in Germany not only makes it technically much easier to spy on users, it also allows the German police and spy agencies to demand data and issue gag orders, or even seize physical hardware if need be.
Will t
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry the BND is actually only a branch of NSA, they spy for the US on everyone including German diplomats.
LEO causes ... (Score:2)
... jobs to move offshore.
Hosting with Deutsche Telekom is safe ... (Score:2)
Hosting with Deutsche Telekom is really safe.
As soon as somebody accesses the data, they'll have their high-speed quota maxed out in an instant and their bandwidth reduced to a agonising 200 baud trickle.
I expect most people to give up accessing your data before they can get anything meaningful.
Ireland & Netherlands Too (Score:3)
This will only protect against lawsuits (Score:2)
Of course it won't do anything about ELINT.
What's your worry? (Cui bono?) (Score:2)
If you're worried about the NSA, this won't do a bit of good. If, however, you're worried about the DOJ, this may be an adequate defense. Which means that it's likely to be a safe place to hide corporate shenanigans, but not something the intelligence agencies are interested in.
So who benefits?
So they watched Homeland (Score:2)
They saw the breakup between Germany and the CIA
Not about the NSA (Score:2)
It seems more like they're building data centres in Germany because it makes it much easier to serve Europe from inside Europe.
I doubt they'll be storing any USA customer data there.
Maybe also because Europe frowns upon American companies shipping European customer data off to the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Stripe across countries! (Score:2)
Does it matter who runs the data center? (Score:2)
A German company will be operating the data center, but Microsoft will still be writing and presumably operating the software.
Or are they making an Office 365 install like running Apache and any ol' ISP can run a copy?
In a world where any computer can talk to any other computer, the physical location of the small bits of wire and magnets holding your data isn't the most important thing to worry about.
Re: (Score:2)
Which world is that? In the world I live in, you still need to plug bits of copper into contact with each other, or accelerate electrons in an antenna in a specific pattern, in order to get computer to talk unto computer. If you choose to NOT connect that cable, or to switch on the software that controls that antenna (if the electronics are actually installed in your computer, and if there is a corresponding antenna elsewhere in your building) the
Re: (Score:1)
Spying on your own diplomats could be a good idea. They've got the most opportunity to betray your country to its enemies.
Mutual Spying (Score:2)
This is not really a surprise. One of the ways you get around domestic anti-surveillance laws is to ask some friendly allies to do it for you. Basically you spy on their citizens and they spy on yours. Each government can then say it is not infringing its own citizen's rights.
I believe the USA - UK - Canada - Australia - New Zealand have a reasonably formal agreement to this effect.
The irony is that over the last few years it has become apparent that most westerners really don't give a stuff about whether t
Re:Mutual Spying (Score:4, Interesting)
This is not really a surprise. One of the ways you get around domestic anti-surveillance laws is to ask some friendly allies to do it for you. Basically you spy on their citizens and they spy on yours. Each government can then say it is not infringing its own citizen's rights.
... and yet, if you (hypothetically) were to hire a hit man to perform a murder, or a thief to steal something for you, the resulting investigation would indict you for conspiracy to commit murder or conspiracy to commit larceny and you would be punished just as much as your chosen proxy.
Yet another example of one set of laws for us, and another set for "them". The concept of rule of law takes another swift kick to the balls, again.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, it's all legit as long as you hire a hit-man from another country. At least that's what I was told.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, it's all legit as long as you hire a hit-man from another country. At least that's what I was told.
As long as hiring any hit man is illegal where you perform this act, I really do doubt this would be a legitimate legal defense. But then, IANAL. But I really, seriously wouldn't try it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
But just today all news sites over Germany reported that the German BND (the direct successor of the Nazi "Organization Gehlen") has been spying on allies, too, including France and German(!) diplomats.
I can't see the point of your Nazi reference. The Federal Republic of Germany can also be considered the direct successor of Nazi Germany. It's probably more accurate to describe the Gehlen [wikipedia.org] as a CIA program that recruited former members of the Nazi military in much the same way that the US military and later the space program used scientists who were active in the German war effort.
Re: (Score:2)
But just today all news sites over Germany reported that the German BND (the direct successor of the Nazi "Organization Gehlen") has been spying on allies, too, including France and German(!) diplomats.
I can't see the point of your Nazi reference. The Federal Republic of Germany can also be considered the direct successor of Nazi Germany. It's probably more accurate to describe the Gehlen [wikipedia.org] as a CIA program that recruited former members of the Nazi military in much the same way that the US military and later the space program used scientists who were active in the German war effort.
Yes, though we used (and sheltered) many more Nazis than is generally known, even to those familiar with Project Paperclip.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, though we used (and sheltered) many more Nazis than is generally known, even to those familiar with Project Paperclip.
Wait... Clippy is a Nazi spy?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, though we used (and sheltered) many more Nazis than is generally known, even to those familiar with Project Paperclip.
Wait... Clippy is a Nazi spy?
Yes, apparently his Diabolical Evil Plan was to systematically destroy the reading comprehension of people like you. Or to cause you to make lame jokes.
... I was referring to Project Paperclip [wikipedia.org]. You decide.
Or
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, your description is fairly accurate and it seems I should have expressed myself more clearly to avoid this misunderstanding. Organization Gehlen was not an organization funded by Nazis, it was funded under US supervision and only had a certain percentage of (former) Nazis such as SS and Gestapo officers. I just tend to include that little tid-bit whenever I talk about the BND, because it constitutes some often "lost knowledge" that seems generally worth knowing.
Re: (Score:3)
It had a lot to do with the Nazis, and this is well-known. Gehlen himself was from the Wehrmacht, but he managed, with the help of the US, to recruit many former members SS, SD, Abwehr, and Gestapo, in addition to many officers from the Wehrmacht. They got new names and identities, and yes, some of them were wanted for possible involvement in war crimes. Reference: The German wikipedia entry ("Nähe zum Nationalsozialismus") and any history book on the BND.
To be fair, most officers recruited by Gehlen w
Re: (Score:2)
Gehlen_Organization https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
".. for all the moral compromises involved [in hiring former Nazis], it was a complete failure in intelligence terms. The Nazis were terrible spies"."
Re: (Score:3)
The country most aggressively spying on the USA is not China, not Russia, not the USA itself, it is France.
And how do you know that? A moment's thought will show that, to make that assertion, you must know (1) how aggressively France is spying on the USA; and (2) how aggressively all other countries are spying on the USA.
Moreover, it's by no means simple even in the case of France. Which agencies do you take into consideration? The obvious organs of state intelligence might have delegated the task to better hidden, or entirely private teams.
And, of course, if you know how aggressively France is spying on the USA
Re: (Score:2)
It is no more effective than security theatre at the airport...just makes you feel warm and fuzzy
Erm... which part of the TSA make you feel all warm and fuzzy?
Re:Privacy Theatre (Score:5, Funny)
It is no more effective than security theatre at the airport...just makes you feel warm and fuzzy
Erm... which part of the TSA make you feel all warm and fuzzy?
Sometimes the guy doing the pat downs is bearded and sweaty
Re: (Score:2)
It is no more effective than security theatre at the airport...just makes you feel warm and fuzzy
Erm... which part of the TSA make you feel all warm and fuzzy?
Sometimes the guy doing the pat downs is bearded and sweaty
Hey man, whatever floats your boat. I'm not here to judge. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Erm... which part of the TSA make you feel all warm and fuzzy?
And which part of *you* does it make feel all warm and fuzzy?
Re: (Score:2)
I think the idea here isn't to protect US data, but primarily German data. A German company that stores its data in German isn't subject to underseas cables and satellite links being heavily monitored. Having to send data to US cloud services is a big concern many places, for good reason.
Other European countries might benefit too, if they think that the German government is less likely to engage in illegal information gathering than the US government is.
Re: (Score:2)
Cheap telco peering deals could send bulk German data on long trips past US sites in many other NATO nations.
Within Germany efforts like Operation “Glotaic“ show what can be done by splitting links and "collecting all"
The link is in German but the German video has a nice animation at 2:55 showing split options.
"http://www.zdf.de/frontal-21/wie-bnd-cia-und-nsa-
Re: (Score:2)
This is for optics. The Snowden revelations have cost US companies a lot of contracts. Americans might be OK with the NSA spying on them but Europeans are much less happy about it.
Re: (Score:2)