
Bill Gates: I assume my phone's not being tapped - prateekj
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57617672-71/bill-gates-i-assume-my-phones-not-being-tapped/
======
rl3
I refuse to believe he could be that naive, especially considering the amount
of wealth and power he has.

In a recent interview with Wired, when asked about NSA activities and data
privacy in general:

 _Gates: " ... There are legitimate reasons for the government to watch what’s
going on, particularly with nuclear and biological weapons. So it’d be nice if
there was a way that some part of the government that we really trusted was
looking at that information. Right now, people are going, “Oh my gosh!” and
you wonder—did they not think anything was going on? But it’s probably good
there is now an explicit conversation."_ [1]

He also has, or at the very least had, a Top Secret security clearance. [2]

While the purpose is debatable, one of the most likely reasons was so he could
receive State Department briefings prior to meeting with foreign leaders and
businessmen. A lot of that information would likely have come from NSA
intercepts.

Another purpose could have been to facilitate Microsoft's cooperation with the
NSA on software backdoors, cryptographic or otherwise.

[1] [http://www.wired.com/business/2013/11/bill-gates-bill-
clinto...](http://www.wired.com/business/2013/11/bill-gates-bill-clinton-
wired/all/)

[2]
[http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/bill_gates_has_top_secret_c...](http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/bill_gates_has_top_secret_clearance/)

~~~
atgm
> He also has, or at the very least had, a Top Secret security clearance.

Top Secret clearance is reviewed every five years and in theory is revoked
once the person no longer has a Need to Know. Since Bill is no longer active
at Microsoft, I would _guess_ that he does not have a Need to Know.

~~~
dclusin
He's still the chairman of the Microsoft board. I read bloomberg for most of
my business news and lots of op-ed contributors there stipulate that this is
making it harder for Microsoft to find a replacement CEO.

------
TrainedMonkey
This reminded me about quote from "Player of Games" a Culture novel by Ian
Banks.

Said by a character with diplomatic immunity after a particularly interesting
anti government statement: "We pretend they do not listen to us and they
pretend they do not hear anything."

~~~
prateekj
Except in this case, the pretense is getting less convincing with each passing
day.

~~~
n09n
It doesn't matter how convincing it is or isn't as long as you are just
choosing to pretend you believe it.

------
at-fates-hands
I can't tell whether to believe him or not. As someone with pretty deep
technological experience, his naivety to such matters is a bit off putting to
say the least.

~~~
walshemj
Well Microsoft has blundered into trouble before by not paying attention to
the real world. The whole antitrust thing and the amusing cock up over
contractor/permanent employees.

I bet China and Russia might be interested in Billg's phone both from an
industrial espionage and other more political point of view.

~~~
prateekj
That's what monopoly does to a corporation in the long run! When Microsoft was
completely dominating in the '90s, raking in billions of dollars in profit,
they became lethargic. When they realized what was going on, it was too late.

~~~
walshemj
No both of the examples are 1 showing the political naivety of Microsofts
senior managers and 2 MS's HR being incompetent

------
nlp
Nobody seems to be talking about SMTP...

SMTP is the protocol that is used for basically all email, and it does not
provide encryption. There are versions of the protocol that DO, however they
cannot be used in isolation. Emails hop from source to destination via a bunch
of SMTP relay servers, and since nearly all SMTP servers support the legacy
protocol and do not support key exchange, encrypted SMTP traffic will bounce.

When you use gmail, your connection to Google is secure. But if the recipient
of your message is not @gmail.com, the message leaves Google's servers in
plain text over SMTP. If the recipient is @gmail.com, the message stays inside
the Google network.

The point is, all of our emails traverse the internet in plain text unless we
use custom solutions (eg. PGP at both endpoints) or send emails within a
network (eg. Gmail to Gmail).

~~~
jlgaddis
Google's (outgoing) servers will use STARTTLS if it is advertised by the
destination mail server.

~~~
psc
Never knew, do you a have a source on this? Not that I don't believe you, I
just want to read more about it. A Chrome extension that shows you if STARTTLS
is being used would be really neat.

~~~
jlgaddis
Source: Me, who runs (among other things) mail servers for an ISP.

ETA:

    
    
        Received: from mail-pd0-f169.google.com (mail-pd0-f169.google.com [209.85.192.169])
        	(using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
        	(No client certificate requested)
        	by MAIL.MYDOMAIN.COM (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BBFA2909
        	for <ME@MYDOMAIN.COM>; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:00:32 -0500 (EST)

------
sxdtxdrttdx

      Bill Gates: I assume my phone's not being tapped
    
                  ...but choose to modify my behavior anyway, of course! Oh, and buy more Microsoft stock, please!
    

Meanwhile...

Microsoft Offers Secure Windows … But Only to the Government

[http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/air-force-
windows/](http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/air-force-windows/)

[http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2009/04/balmer...](http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2009/04/balmer_air_force.jpg)

------
mseepgood
That's what Merkel said as well in a public TV interview.

~~~
prateekj
Tapping Merkel's phone would have a very different meaning as compared to
tapping Gates' phone.

~~~
sentenza
Indeed, it is quite likely that Merkel was less interesting at the time they
started tapping her phone than Bill Gates is now (or has been since Win95).
Her phone was already being tapped in 2002, when she had freshly become
opposition leader in Parliament.

If push comes to shove, I wonder if waving around that "US citizen" badge
actually protects you from _any_ snooping.

~~~
prateekj
Tapping a politician's phone is always more "interesting", especially if the
politician is from another country. I don't think the "US citizen" badge means
anything anymore. If you are a prominent subject who is even slightly
important, you come under the radar.

------
zebra
He is working with billions - so it is very precious information where he is
going to invest or withdraw.

~~~
walshemj
And even his charity work could be considered an expression of American soft
power.

~~~
prateekj
Isn't that a bit pessimistic?

~~~
eseehausen
That's just reality. Pessimism would be saying that means no good can come of
it, which GP did not say.

~~~
prateekj
He is relating Bill Gates' charity to US consolidating its power. Be that as
it may, it is not an aid given by one country to another country. It is like
putting a pessimistic spin on something good. Don't you think so?

------
lifeisstillgood
Well depending on your definition it probably is not tapped - merely the
metadata collected. And that is I suspect Gates' point - we have entered a
world where the genie will not go back in the bottle, and there is only one
solution - carriers to offer protection. And that's an expensive solution.

------
greenlakejake
If Bill Gates really thinks his phone is not being tapped I have a bridge to
sell him.

------
forgotAgain
Since he has a vested interest in the public maintaining faith in high tech
companies, his response is neither surprising nor objective.

Even the gods can be self serving.

------
andor
He's probably just covering his ass. I guess he learned some operational
security since his mails were used as evidence in the anti-trust trial.

------
ivanca
The main owner of the american company creator of the most used operated
system in desktops around the world (in all countries, enemies and allies of
the USA government) may not be the most trustable source in this matter. Call
it "ad hominem" but let's not pretend it hasn't been this way when money and
government are involved.

------
dil8
First he is the authority on speaking about poverty and now he is the
authority on speaking about privacy. Oh the irony...

~~~
aragot
And here is how he discredited the biggest charity of the world with a single
sentende.

------
sdegutis
I figured he was just talking figuratively, speaking for the Everyman.

------
obastani
Am I the only one who interpreted him as saying he _ought_ to be able to
assume that his phone calls/emails are private? He clarifies:

"So there is a basic sense that whoever is providing that technology has to
make sure it's secure."

I think he's just saying it's the job of the mail service to provide security,
not something the end user should need to worry about.

