Mr. Snowden put himself at great personal risk physically (from "extraordinary rendition" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E... and the like) and criminally (where he can have his liberty taken from him after some state action) and professionally (hard to work places where the US won't be looking for you).

That is just. What he did was to bring great pressure on the US government to act. 100's of millions of dollars worth of security blown. Years of effort destroyed. He acted against his oath and against his country. There should be very strong repercussions for his actions. It is not a thing he did lightly nor without great thought. I presume that BECAUSE of the physical, criminal and professional danger he thought VERY HARD.

Mr. Snowden acted knowing the dangers, to himself, to his country and to the citizens therein. He believed he had knowledge that others did not, that he had a duty to act as a result and that whatever the consequences to him personally, the good would outweigh the harm. Whether or not you agree that he acted wisely or not is what puts you in the hero / traitor camps. I believe there are gradations between the two. I believe Mr. Snowden falls there.

He is a hero in that he believed that lawmakers were being deceived by the NSA to approve acts that were against the Constitutional rights of the citizens of the United States. He believed that if they really knew what was going on they would stop the NSA from those actions. I believe he was correct: that the NSA was wrong and the authority they acted under was gotten from Congress under false pretenses. That makes Mr. Snowden, in my mind, a hero.

But I am an American with children that I wish to have sleep safely at night. It worries me that a person can do so much damage at such a low level of responsibility. I do not believe every whistleblower is right. I'm not sure it's something we should encourage. Because he did not use the channels already in place (with the Inspector General Act of 1978, Mr. Snowden could have attained the same goals at least in theory. http://www.dodig.mil/Programs/...) he could be considered a criminal. I blame him for not making the attempt.

There is a huge problem with the NSA in this country. Someone had to act. Someone did, in contravention to the law. Mr. Snowden acted by his own reckoning "selflessly." He knew he would pay the price. Thank you Mr. Snowden. You were right. But you can never come home again.

Maybe. They do have a lot of job openings in Karnataka, Bangalore, India.

https://targetcareers.target.c...

...after all the cows got out.

Day late and a dollar short to worry about BlackPOS. Variants of "Dexter, first documented by Seculert in December 2012, is a Windows-based malware used to steal credit card data from PoS systems."

http://www.arbornetworks.com/a...

They have had 3 flavors so far:
1.] Stardust (looks to be an older version, perhaps version 1)
2.] Millenium (note spelling)
3.] Revelation (two observed malware samples; has the capability to use FTP to exfiltrate data)

I can buy any of these programs with a Tor browser, an ICQ client and some Bitcoin at any carder site on line.

A little late to be worried about snippets of code.

Appeals are only brought by someone that objects. Appellate review doesn't happen on it's own. Someone has to bring the case.

If no one knows what they've done, who objects to their rulings?

No one.

Who reviews them? Not the Supreme Court, unless someone objects.

So, no. There is no one reviewing them.

And all of the appointments ore of federal judges, yes. Very conservative pro executive branch. Most likely to expand NSA and government power.

So there is much to fear.

Put lime in it. Wards off scurvy.

You're welcome. And wear 50.

But can it tell them when they're gonna need a bigger boat?

http://www.wingclips.com/movie-clips/jaws/a-bigger-boat

I heard Goldman Sachs still runs Bob on 3/4s of its PCs.

http://toastytech.com/guis/bob.html

They are all picked by one man - Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/chief-justice-john-roberts-appointed-every-judge-on-the-fisa-court-20130812

This was meant to be a body of jurists to check the validity of search warrants, but it developed its own body of case law. With no check on its power. None.

The NY Times notes "In making assignments to the court, Chief Justice Roberts, more than his predecessors, has chosen judges with conservative and executive branch backgrounds that critics say make the court more likely to defer to government arguments that domestic spying programs are necessary."
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/26/us/politics/robertss-picks-reshaping-secret-surveillance-court.html?ref=charliesavage&_r=0

So, yeah, I'd say the FISA judges don't want anyone looking over their shoulders.

It seems they have the key to all the locks as soon as the lock gets built.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/catalog-reveals-nsa-has-back-doors-for-numerous-devices-a-940994.html

I think nothing is safe. Unless you're in a Faraday cage with a computer plugged into a UPS running a virtualized OS and ...

Fuck it. The NSA can have my data. Jack booted pricks.

You mean like the Yubikey?
http://www.yubico.com/products/yubikey-hardware/yubikey/

Don't forget: you can still encrypt with a keyfile you keep on a microSD card in your wallet. [copy to a USB stick in a lockbox, in case you lose it or get robbed.] Then, they can have your key, they still need the file.