A recent dustup over smart light bulbs illuminates a larger problem.
The doxing of Ashley Madison reveals an uncomfortable truth: In the age of cloud computing, everyone is vulnerable.
A future awaits where countries share intelligence one minute, and hack and cyberattack each other the next.
Welcome to a world where it's impossible to tell the difference between random hackers and governments.
It's too early to take the U.S. government at its word.
A warrantless FBI search in Las Vegas sets a troubling precedent.
Maybe someday we'll patch vulnerabilities faster than the enemy can use them in an attack, but we're not there yet.
And real corporate security is still impossible.
You can't hack passively.
With Monday's new revelation, we can see the NSA's two-pronged system for finding out where people are.
Our choice isn't between a digital world where the agency can eavesdrop and one where it cannot; our choice is between a digital world that is vulnerable to any attacker and one that is secure for all users.
The secret eavesdropping ecosystem is breaking down, thanks to the Snowden documents.
Distributed citizen groups and nimble hackers once had the edge. Now governments and corporations are catching up. Who will dominate in the decades ahead?
The U.S. intelligence community claims it's not spying on citizens until someone actually looks at the data it collects. That argument is deeply flawed.
At this point, the agency has to assume that all of its operations will become public, probably sooner than it would like.
The nation can survive the occasional terrorist attack, but our freedoms can't survive an invulnerable leader like Keith Alexander operating within inadequate constraints.
The public has no faith left in the intelligence community or what the president says about it. A strong, independent special prosecutor needs to clean up the mess.
The scariest explanation of all? That the NSA and GCHQ are just showing they don't want to be messed with.
Technology companies have to fight for their users, or they'll eventually lose them.
NSA apologists say spying is only used for menaces like "weapons of mass destruction" and "terror." But those terms have been radically redefined.