The only reason any of this is an issue is because we have our data and communication in the internet. That's what makes mass surveillance possible.
If you keep your data off the internet, then you're only at risk of individual surveillance. But even that's difficult; stuxnet demonstrated that even air gapped computers are at risk, because we move data around on usb sticks and the like.
So, speech and paper, or human memory, are the only really secure media.
As for all the apps we carry around in our pockets ... do you really need instant online access to your bank balance over the internet on the bus? We used to carry around checkbooks and make entries in the register. If you really need to know your balance 24/7, carry a register booklet, or a moleskin. Then you don't have to wonder if Mint et al. are giving up your passwords.
So really what we need is some kind of API design that allows for password changes that all websites should adopt. Of course that's never going to happen...
Still, if 1password made scraping work for the biggest sites out there (google, microsoft, etc) then that in itself would already be worthwhile.
1Password doesn't store your passwords, it generates them on the fly. You would need to hand over your encrypted password storage and your passphrase. Both of which 1Password has no control over.
1Password is a local, encrypted store of known passwords. Nothing is generated, except for the original passphrases themselves, which are completely random (not from a seed).
Yeah, I was a little too quick in writing that. What I meant to write was that 1. passwords are stored locally and 2. you have the option to generate passwords with predefined complexity parameters. It would be possible to use this password generating feature to update your passwords automatically at a set interval.
Right, as soon as we can get a psychiatrist to examine him, we'll get back to you. Until then, we'll have to rely on circumstantial evidence and induction.
It does seem likely that anyone able to rise to the pinnacle of American politics would be a psychopath, so it's not as if such accusations are shots in the dark.
If people cared about surveillance, they could simply vote in an anti-surveillance policitian(s). The fact that this cursory act hasn't occurred would suggest that sub-100,000 person ISPs will have zero traction.
Of course it's normal, and of course "we" are not surprised y the scale of NSA spying. What did you think the NSA did if not this? Have all of their 40,000 employees listening in on Bin Laden's phone calls?
There was actually an article upvoted on HackerNews a few days ago which supposed, even before Snowden revealed himself, that these leaks were the result of Chinese intelligence activity.
The US Constitution and case law makes no distinction between protections granted to US citizens and foreigners. All are treated equally under the law, and thusly "enjoy" the same "protections."
However, case law has determined that such protections are not granted outside of the US's borders. Thus, an American citizen and a foreigner have equal protection (again, in theory) when inside of US borders - and both are equally unprotected when outside of US borders (it's a bit more complex regarding the 'outside of US borders' part, but that's the general gist).
Really, the only solution to this kind of thing is offshore corps.