Dropbox's Condoleezza Rice advocating for warrantless NSA surveillance
drop-dropbox.com
drop-dropbox.com
appointing someone who advocates(or at least once did) warantless surveillance is certainly less overt than more direct cooperation and there are other organizations more strongly implicated in NSA surveillance. I don't feel like my cancellation will make a lick of difference nor do I feel like my citizen vigilance quota is filled up for the year. However it's one small thing I can do in under a minute.
The current story was killed by user flags. We didn't touch it.
Maybe she'll help Dropbox navigate those challenges to help protect the privacy of their users (black hat to white hat), but I'm dubious. She had a historic opportunity and went in the extreme other direction.
And in terms of corporate liability with respect to extant surveillance practices, a consistent line of argument and arm-twisting has been to proffer immunity in return for cooperation. ("Give us the data, and you won't be liable, criminally nor civilly.")
So... I don't see her new role at Dropbox as particularly encouraging with respect to the privacy of Dropbox users' data. Her concern, per the above, will be to ensure that if and when Dropbox provides surveillance access, the corporation cannot be prosecuted nor sued for doing so.
If you want some context for this argument, just refer back to all the stink about telecommunications companies' liability/immunity that erupted particularly into the public dialog around 2007 - 2008. Look also at the deals that have been proposed for what access ISP's should be required to provide and what they would get in return. Etc.
I saw her speak at Google in '09. She took questions, which were largely softballs, when finally one guy had the courage to ask something along the lines of, "Don't you want to apologize?" She was visibly annoyed; unapologetic and completely dismissive.
I left the talk, blood boiling, thinking, gee, there really are no consequences for this woman (and the bush admin).
That said, she's a skilled enough political figure that I'd be shocked if she doesn't have a more diplomatic line to trot out now. Hard political lines are bad for business.
(Yeah, not directly comparable, but she is still very much a sociopath, just like all other high-ranking politicians. True, this is just an assertion I'm making, so take it for what it's worth, but please do think for yourself.)
And to the point that her political views will somehow cloud security at Dropbox: they probably brought her on to advise on how to deal with security requests by the government.
In any case, the idea that adding Rice to the board will somehow make Dropbox excitedly comply with all governments surveillance is preposterous.
The article is talking about statements she made on TV in 2005. That is bad enough, I don't understand why you feel the need to make it seem like she is going to the White House today in a Dropbox t-shirt advocating for NSA surveillance.
Personally, I don't think people change much. I doubt she thinks she did the wrong thing, and would not hesitate to do it again if she went back in time.
Disclaimer: voted for him 2008
I wouldn't be surprised if China blocked them again due to this appointment.
Dropbox probably recruited her for her conservatism in this area, and for the prestige of her previous position. If she causes problems it would be because her prestige was dinged by backlash in the US.
To me the bigger issue for Dropbox is that it's a feature not a platform, which explains why they're having so much trouble entering new markets.
added: [wow, some pretty aggressive downvoting going on there, must have touched a nerve.]
We're currently evaluating BitTorrentSync and Owncloud. Any opinions about their relative merits for a 15-strong team that's half distributed, half local, and using this as a "shared drive" of sorts, are welcome!
Now let's talk about the real concerns regarding privacy and the encroach of politicians in Silicon Valley.