Based on what I understand of the FIPS process (which is little, admittedly), the whole exercise to put your crypto under the microscope results in eliminating a number of coding mistakes and implementation problems. So even if the algorithms themeselves are potentially weakened (we don't know ), a FIPS approved product that's had 3rd party scrutiny is probably still better off than one that wasn't, due to cleaning up implementation issues with the keys, random numbers and algorithms.

the way that mr. fernandez comes across in the interview, it sounds like there is a single definitive history that only he knows about and resistant to share. it's not like movies are used as definitive pieces of history, it's essentially folklore at best.

is that this experience annoyed so many people, a lot of people will turn the feature off. Then when a real alert that affects a large population comes out, such as a Shelter in Place alert, a lot of people won't get the message.

The emergency system should only be used for disasters, not for amber alerts. I personally received the exact same alert 5 times.

The article found two examples of using Tor, and had already identified one from the past. That's the justification for the "increasingly using Tor" headline? Then again, I'm surprised that they didn't run with a headline of "Malware using Tor Doubled!"

Seems like that's a critical part of this story and the reason is not mentioned.

"The most common requests came from police investigating crimes or searching for people". Searching for people would mean that each request would affect one account. 4,000-5,000 requests affecting 10,000 accounts implies that each request touched on average two accounts (a caller and a recipient?). In addition, it doesn't say how much data was slurped out of each request either - is it a particular imessage or a whole dump of all imessage records, or is it tapping all imessages to come?

Encryption is fine and dandy, but your metadata is still exposed. Unless you have a Tor for your mobile traffic, then your metadata is still effectively exposed in the clear.

I don't know of any other place to get most of these nowadays. Lots of memories and magazines that I miss

http://archive.org/details/computermagazines

The whistleblower was either working for Microsoft or on Microsoft's behalf.

"a Microsoft official in China directed the whistle-blower to pay bribes to government officials to win business deals"

I agree with the above posters that licensing the right to use a the title is a fair practice. What is not fair is the restrictions placed on how the item can be used in the game. You are licensing the right to use the name of a real world weapon, and end up signing away the rights of how a gun can be used and who could use them in a game. How is that a fair depiction of the real world? It's like paying to be an advertiser for the gun company..