So let's speculate about what the article almost-but-doesn't-quite propose:
The NSA, or related parties, was responsible for the breach. There was an investigation and postmortem, but because of an NSL or other gag-type order, they couldn't accurately publish what they discovered. So they figured that not releasing a report was better than releasing a report that either intentionally misled or pretended not to have figured out what happened.
I know, this is a pretty big leap. But regardless -- what does it mean? What are the ramifications if this is what happened?
The NSA, or related parties, was responsible for the breach. There was an investigation and postmortem, but because of an NSL or other gag-type order, they couldn't accurately publish what they discovered. So they figured that not releasing a report was better than releasing a report that either intentionally misled or pretended not to have figured out what happened.
I know, this is a pretty big leap. But regardless -- what does it mean? What are the ramifications if this is what happened?