Never mind, you probably wouldn't understand anyway.
I can sympathize, large corporations are usually terribly inefficient and inflexible to new requests like this, the technical excuses are probably legitimate on some level. However, the difference is that if my employer pulled this stunt, there would be fines and maybe even jail time.
Probably completely legitimate. After all, these are the people who can archive and search all metadata from everywhere, except their own, which is more complex by several orders of magnitude and reasons.
Yup. Feels like the judge ought to hit their director with a night in jail for contempt of court just for suggesting it. The NSA apparently has random contract-employee sysadmins who have enough scope of control to access gazillions of documents without being audited, much less required to meet two-man control rules, so any one of them should be able to preserve the metadata about the NSA's violations of the law.
A like just for it being the Gong Show, but did I miss PeeWee? [I think I found Paul Reubens, but Pee Wee was not to be seen]
Depends. Is your employer a bank?
At what point do we admit that this is obstruction of justice?
And the NSA doesn't care about following the law at all.
the idea that the NSA doesn't know how to make backup copies of the data they've already copied from elsewhere simply doesn't pass the laugh test. you can't reasonably suggest it with a straight face unless you're a pathological liar or a complete moron. so the question is, which one of those best describes NSA's representative in court?
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.