The deal was big news across the web. Amazon, pundits said, had stepped up its effort to challenge old-school giants like IBM in an area the old guard had long dominated federal contracting. The chorus of voices swelled Friday when the General Accounting Office responded to IBM’s protest with a ruling that said the CIA chose Amazon over Big Blue due to a “superior technical solution.” But Amazon’s CIA contract is important for far bigger reasons, and marks a much bigger shift than most people realize. You see, the GAO ruling on the matter reveals that the contract involves Amazon building cloud services inside CIA data centers. “The contractor generally was to provide a copy of its existing public cloud (modified where necessary) to be installed on government premises,” the GAO ruling explains. That may seem like a small thing, but in the world of cloud computing, it’s a seismic event.

Amazon’s Invasion of the CIA Is a Seismic Shift in Cloud Computing | Wired Enterprise | Wired.com

U.S. Opens Antitrust Investigation Into Colleges' Talk of Student-Aid Reform

The U.S. Department of Justice has begun an investigation into “a possible agreement” among colleges to reform their financial-aid policies, according to a letter sent last month to at least two college presidents.

The investigation, several sources said, was prompted by recent discussions among a handful of college officials about how—or whether—they could collaborate to limit their use of merit-based financial aid and reduce bidding wars for applicants.

In the May 21 letter, a copy of which was obtained by The Chronicle, a lawyer in the department wrote that an agreement “to restrict tuition discounting and prevent colleges from changing or improving financial-aid awards to individual students” may restrain competition in violation of antitrust laws.

» via The Chronicle of Higher Education (Subscription may be required for some content)

There’s no denying it, the numbers speak for themselves. Five million people — that’s one in every 50 American adults — have clearance,” Goitein said. “It’s very pervasive. Over-classification results in over-clearance, essentially: Too many people needing clearance for jobs that are relatively low-level and non-sensitive in nature.

‘Top secret’ is the new ‘secret’ - Leigh Munsil - POLITICO.com

In its press release, Facebook reported that from June to December of 2012, the government made between 9,000 and 10,000 requests involving user data, and these requests were connected to between 18,000 and 19,000 accounts — clearly a small percentage of the 1 billion active users on the network. The Wall Street Journal reports that Facebook complied “at least partially” with 79 percent of the requests in that time.

Facebook, Microsoft disclose number of national security-related data requests — Tech News and Analysis

Obama Seeks to Expand Airwaves for Wireless Use

The Obama administration will invest $40 million in the next year and another $60 million over the next five years to free more of the nation’s airwaves for use by consumers in wireless broadband networks, the White House announced Friday.

The effort is meant to build on a 2010 initiative that aimed to make available some 500 megahertz of electromagnetic spectrum – the airwaves used by cellphone and wireless communications. Those airwaves were intended to come from a combination of federal and private-sector sources.

Citing “the skyrocketing demand of consumer and broadband business users,” President Obama directed federal agencies to make more capacity available by enhancing the efficiency of their spectrum use.

» via The New York Times (Subscription may be required for some content)

It would be odd [for the NSA] to focus entirely on telephony logs and exclude Internet traffic,” said Julian Sanchez, a research fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., who focuses on electronic surveillance topics. “I would assume they’re vacuuming up IP logs and perhaps e-mail headers as well.

NSA chief drops hint about ISP Web, e-mail surveillance | Politics and Law - CNET News

The big insight here is that younger adults are not indifferent to privacy, as many seem to believe.

Our director Lee Rainie, who aids the AP’s Martha Irvine in shedding light on the recent misconception (in light of NSA findings) that young people don’t care about privacy.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=191207581

(via pewinternet)

The Court disagrees with the Government,” the decision reads, “that FISC Rule 62 prohibits the disclosure of the copies of the FISC opinion to EFF under FOIA.

The Surveillance State Suffers a Surprise Legal Setback - Philip Bump - The Atlantic Wire

Now we live in a very different technological era. For many people, cell phones are the primary, if not exclusive, means of communication; the Internet has exploded into something that can now be accessed by a device that can fit in the palm of your hand; and we are slowly moving into an era when it will be commonplace for people to store personal data in “the cloud,” where Fourth Amendment protections don’t necessarily apply. To the extent that they have been able to deal with the issues that this new technology presents, courts have been forced to apply precedent based on twentieth, or nineteenth, century technology to the twenty-first century. The result, quite often, has been a decided bias in favor of the state and against individual liberty. At the same time, Congress has generally failed in its task of honestly debating new laws that apply to these technologies, and has acceded to the requests of law enforcement for greater powers to gather information. The classic example of this is the Patriot Act, which passed Congress with little actual debate by overwhelming margins in both the House and the Senate –a mere six weeks after the September 11 attacks. Since then, the law has been renewed with largely inconsequential revisions several times with little notice by the public.

PJ Media » Is Technology Outstripping the Ability of Law to Protect Us?

In World War II, the mentality of the public was that our whole way of life was at risk, we’re all in. We censored the mail. When you wrote a letter overseas, it got censored. When a letter was written back from the battlefield to home, they looked at what was in the letter to make sure they were not tipping off the enemy,” Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told reporters on Capitol Hill. “If I thought censoring the mail was necessary, I would suggest it, but I don’t think it is.

Lindsey Graham: ‘If I thought censoring the mail was necessary, I would suggest it’ | The Ticket - Yahoo! News