Comment by derbOac

16 days ago

You're right to point out how carefully worded these statements are. But I suspect it's rare for companies of Google's status to not have been asked for a backdoor. It's not really an informative question to ask Google.

Of course they were asked. That doesn’t matter, my point is the author is assuming more from the reply than what was said.

It’s like if you conspired with your brother to steal from the cookie jar. He stole the cookies while you distracted your parents. Later on your mother reports to your father:

> When asked whether they stole from the cookie jar, derbOac did not provide a direct answer but suggested they didn’t didn’t know who did it: "I did not see anyone removing cookies from the jar," they stated.

Your statement is factually correct, but it doesn’t say what your mother concluded.

Can you elaborate on why you say it is not informative?

  • My guess is Google, Microsoft, Signal, Apple, Cloudfare, etc etc etc have all been asked if they could make backdoors. I expect they have all been asked. It's not the same as asking if they have made a backdoor.

    So I think a journalist asking an organization like Google if they've been asked isn't really informative, because they almost certainly have been.

    I'm not sure how it's relevant other than to say an answer from Google's response might seem oblique, but they're also being asked obliquely and that colors how you might interpret their response.