You would be incorrect.
The Canadian firm is responsible for ensuring that a breach doesn't happen when the data is in possession of the foreign firm, but it's not illegal to send it there at all.
Considering the Canadian firm's responsibilities, it can certainly be argued that it's rarely, if ever, a good idea, but it's certainly not illegal.
You would be incorrect.
Watch Disney`s Cars 2.
They're advertised as "Windows Notebooks". They should be able to boot Windows of the particular version mentioned on the activation code sticker. Anything else - not their problem. Sad but true.
They should also be able to run programs using standard Windows APIs to perform functions required by the user, without damaging anything.
VLC uses standard Windows APIs to play sound. If this damages the hardware, then it's Dell's problem.
You trust him. Isn't that special?
Now, tell us why we should trust YOU.
Because he's "jrronimo", not "Beta"?
(Sorry....I couldn't help it...)
I look forward to the day when sNOwden hangs for high treason against the government spooks of the United States of America.
His job was to find juicy tidbits in data scraped from external sources. His job was definitely NOT to find juicy tidbits in internal NSA documentation. The fact that he could easily and massively access this documentation without anyone seriously questioning his activities is a huge problem.
The assumption could be made that internal documentation and externally sourced data are stored on the same servers, and accessed using the exact same methods.
There is no possible explanation for this which doesn't involve the NSA having absolutely piss poor internal security.
Hey you forgot the part where to be able to preserve the way of life "some" murky actions are necessary
You mean the "way of life" where we're free people, not spied on by a fascist government, and executed whenever we piss off the king/emperor? Yeah....that's been preserved REAAAALLY well...
Never underestimate the sheer levels of incompetence in the government.
First you said he "shared secret information with our enemies." Then, when it turns out you're demonstrably wrong, you change that to "sharing with anyone that is not cleared is a violation of the contract he signed."
Keep moving those goalposts. Maybe you'll eventually find something that works for you.
Hey, it's another "the government can do no wrong! Please, I want bureaucrats to penetrate my ass with probes on a daily basis! After all, I've done nothing wrong, so I have no reason to prevent the government from raping my ass!" shill!
Please explain why the NSA is "necessary." In fact, please explain what the NSA has to do with this story, as it's detailing Canada's illegal surveillance activities, not the USA's.
The NSA hasn't stopped a single terrorist attack. They've said so themselves. So hindering them doesn't do any harm to finding terrorists, either, but it does a LOT of good to our democratic and personal freedoms, which is what our two countries used to stand for and respect.
You, on the other hand, sound like you should be spouting propaganda about the Nazis, Stasi, KGB, or whoever, during their heyday, and how they're protecting the motherland from those "evil" capitalists.
Same methods, different enemy. And you're either falling for it hook, line, and sinker, or you're being paid to promote it. Either way, shut your festering gob, you twit.
It wasn't the "silo-ization" as you put it, that was the problem. From my memory, there were warnings to the FBI regarding the 9/11 terrorists, but they were ignored.
That being said, I don't give a damn if various agencies share data among themselves. It's all the same government, so they have the data....go ahead and use the data. (Sure, there are exceptions to that: eg. health data shouldn't be used by the police to place suspicion of drugs on you, so they can raid your house....etc.etc.)
However, they shouldn't be using data that they have no business collecting in the first place. That's where the problem comes from. It is not the government's concern who I call, and for how long I talk to them. Unless one of those people I talk to is suspected of a crime and is actively being investigated, with a proper, publicly accessible court approved warrant, then leave my call records the fuck alone.
From my understanding, it was Microsoft that was the bully here, and tried to take the trademark from BSkyB in court, but lost.
Thinking that you will be secure by putting bad domain names into your host file will tead to tears of failure because:
a) it's attempting to enumerate badness. There's always new badness, you can't enumerate it all. New badness can be created quicker than you can update your hosts file.
b) bad software can happily use a randomly or dynamically generated name which you cannot add to your hosts file, as it can't be known in advance, and may only be used once.
How do we know that the malware uses a domain name in the first place? Maybe it just uses the IP address, which of course, cannot be blocked by modifying the hosts file, regardless of what apk will tell you.
If you're moving gigabytes of data, FTP is still the ticket. If you need encryption, do it first on the data files.
That does nothing to prevent your password from being sniffed.
However, like the GP, I've managed 8-10 MB/s to a Pentium 3 server on a 100Mb network, which is barely slower than FTP on the same hardware. It certainly loads the processor more than FTP does, so if you're trying to do multiple client connections on a Gigabit network with a low end processor in the server, you might slow things down. Maybe that's what your use case is?
There's "keeping the nation safe from a foreign invasion," and then there's "keeping individuals safe from an individual or small group of wackjobs."
The first is the job of the government. The second one isn't. They're trying to conflate the two, and take over the second, as well as the first.