September 2015 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Fwd: Do ethnic Germans have the right to racial and cultural strength? - was Re: At a Berlin church, Muslim refugees converting in droves.
by Zenaan Harkness 10 Sep '15

10 Sep '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Zenaan Harkness <zen(a)freedbms.net> Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 07:09:24 +0000 Subject: Do ethnic Germans have the right to racial and cultural strength? - was Re: At a Berlin church, Muslim refugees converting in droves. Hi Jim, a good question indeed. At Germany's 6% Islamic population set to grow to 12% in the next few years, there is going to be quite the shift there in the next couple of years. Some questions which Germans might ask themselves: 1) Do ethnic Germans, who are citizens of Germany have: - the right to racial strength, and or - the right to cultural strength, and or - the right to political strength, and or - the right to religious strength, in their own country (Germany)? 2) Is it racist for ethnic Germans of Germany to want to maintain their political majority in Germany? 3) We note that Islamic Muslims strongly practice and proclaim their rights to racial strength, cultural strength, religious strength, and political strength, and more than this, the right to change/ convert any and all non-Muslim jurisidictions (countries or part thereof) to Sharia Law and Muslim religion. So: - Are German citizens so naive to think that Muslims will change, just because they crossed a "border"? Regards, Zenaan On 9/7/15, Jim <jim.sovereign(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > FW: REFUGEE INVASION OF EUROPE.I wonder if Germany is committing cultural > and social suicide by allowing almost unrestrained admission of Islamic > migrant refugees. Many European countries are not as welcoming as Germany > towards the massive influx of refugees, and with good reason given the > problems caused by Muslims refusing to assimilate into their host country. > > Jim > > > > ------ Forwarded Message ------ > From: Frank & Halina <ffultiak(a)websurf.net.au> > Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 18:07:27 +1000 > Subject: REFUGEE INVASION OF EUROPE. > > > At a Berlin church, Muslim refugees converting in droves > > Hundreds embrace Christianity in possible effort to boost chances of winning > asylum, although most claim to be true believers > > THE TIMES OF ISRAEL > By Kirsten Grieshaber > September 5, 2015 > > > > Iranian asylum-seeker Aref Movasaq Rodsari stands in the Trinity Church in > Berlin, Germany, Aug. 13, 2015. (AP/Gero Breloer) > Related Topics > a.. Germany > b.. migrant crisis > c.. Syria > BERLIN (AP) - Mohammed Ali Zonoobi bends his head as the priest pours holy > water over his black hair. "Will you break away from Satan and his evil > deeds?" pastor Gottfried Martens asks the Iranian refugee. "Will you break > away from Islam?" > "Yes," Zonoobi fervently replies. Spreading his hands in blessing, Martens > then baptizes the man "in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy > Ghost." > > Mohammed is now Martin - no longer Muslim, but Christian. > > Zonoobi, a carpenter from the Iranian city of Shiraz, arrived in Germany > with his wife and two children five months ago. He is one of hundreds of > mostly Iranian and Afghan asylum seekers who have converted to Christianity > at the evangelical Trinity Church in a leafy Berlin neighborhood. > > Like Zonoobi, most say true belief prompted their embrace of Christianity. > But there's no overlooking the fact that the decision will also greatly > boost their chances of winning asylum by allowing them to claim they would > face persecution if sent home. > > Martens recognizes that some convert in order to improve their chances of > staying in Germany - but for the pastor motivation is unimportant. Many, he > said, are so taken by the Christian message that it changes their lives. And > he estimates that only about 10 percent of converts do not return to church > after christening. > > "I know there are - again and again - people coming here because they have > some kind of hope regarding their asylum," Martens said. "I am inviting them > to join us because I know that whoever comes here will not be left > unchanged." > > Being Christian alone does not help an applicant, and Chancellor Angela > Merkel went out of her way this week to reiterate that Islam "belongs in > Germany." But in Afghanistan and Iran, for example, conversion to > Christianity by a Muslim could be punished by death or imprisonment, and it > is therefore unlikely that Germany would deport converted Iranian and Afghan > refugees back home. > > None will openly admit to converting in order to help their asylum chances. > To do so could result in rejection of their asylum bid and deportation as > Christian converts. Several candidates for baptism at Martens' church would > not give their names out of fear of repercussions for their families back > home. > > Most said their decision was based on belief, but one young Iranian woman > said she was convinced most people had joined the church only to improve > their chances for asylum. > > Congregation member Vesam Heydari initially applied for asylum in Norway and > converted there in 2009. But his case was rejected because the Norwegian > authorities did not believe he would be persecuted as a Christian in Iran, > so he moved to Germany to seek refugee status here - and is awaiting a > decision. He criticized many of the other Iranian church members, saying > they were making it much harder for "real, persecuted Christians" like > himself to get approved for asylum. > > "The majority of Iranians here are not converting out of belief," Heydari > said. "They only want to stay in Germany." > > Meanwhile, as other churches across Germany struggle with dwindling numbers > of believers, Martens has seen his congregation swell from 150 just two > years to more than 600 parishioners now - with a seemingly unending flow of > new refugees finding the way to his congregation. Some come from cities as > far away as Rostock on the Baltic Sea, having found out by word-of-mouth > that Martens not only baptizes Muslims after a three-month "crash course" in > Christianity, but also helps them with asylum pleas. > > Other Christian communities across Germany, among them Lutheran churches in > Hannover and the Rhineland, have also reported growing numbers of Iranians > converting to Christendom. There are no exact numbers on how many Muslims > have converted in Germany in recent years - and they are a tiny minority > compared to the country's overall 4 million Muslims. But at least for > Berlin, Martens describes the number of conversions as nothing short of a > "miracle." And he says he has at least another 80 people - mostly refugees > from Iran and a few Afghans - waiting to be baptized. > > Germany is witnessing an unprecedented surge of asylum-seekers this year, > with the number of migrants expected to reach 800,000 this year, a fourfold > increase on last year. > > > Pastor Gottfried Martens prays with people from Iran during a baptism > service in the Trinity Church in Berlin, Aug. 30, 2015. (AP/Markus > Schreiber) > > Many of the new arrivals come from Muslim countries such as Syria, Iraq, > Afghanistan or Pakistan. While refugees from civil-war-torn Syria will > almost definitely be receiving asylum status, the situation is more > complicated for asylum seekers from Iran or Afghanistan, which are seen as > more stable. In recent years, roughly 40-50 percent from those two countries > have been allowed to stay in the country, with many of those getting only > temporary permission to remain. > > Germany's Federal Office for Migration and Refugees said it does not comment > on the reasons individual applicants give when they apply for asylum, or on > how many people receive refugee status in Germany based on religious > persecution. > > Zonoobi, who dressed all in white for his baptism on Sunday, said he had > attended secret religious services in Iran ever since friends introduced him > to the Bible at age 18. He decided to flee to Germany after several > Christian friends were arrested for practicing their religion. > > For Zonoobi and his wife Afsaneh - who since her baptism goes by the name of > Katarina - the christening marks a new beginning. > > "Now we are free and can be ourselves," she said. "Most important, I am so > happy that our children will have a good future here and can get a good > education in Germany." > > http://www.timesofisrael.com/at-a-berlin-church-muslim-refugees-converting-… >

1 0

Fwd: Look out!!! - was Re: Australia must become a sovereign republic
by Zenaan Harkness 10 Sep '15

10 Sep '15

tl;dr: - CEC - "change is good" peddlers in Australia. - CEC says "Our government is doing bad stuff, we have problems, therefore we must change our constitution by removing our titular queen/'crown' to fix the problem of the scumbags in power," which is of course bollocks. - How can any constitution protect against apathetic acquiescing citizens. - Is it possible that any "new" constitution (or constitutional change) "put to us" might be formulated by opportunistic scumbags currently in power, in order to grab more power to themselves? :) Z ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Zenaan Harkness Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 08:52:28 +0000 Subject: Look out!!! - was Re: Australia must become a sovereign republic The CEC perpetrates serious misunderstandings in this email, and DANGEROUS proposed actions! The CEC's otherwise un-challenged assumptions must be rebutted, and hopefully understood. Read on if you have time... On 9/10/15, CEC Media Release <cec(a)cecaust.com.au> wrote: > Visit this link > http://cecaust.com.au/releases/2015_09_10_Aus_Sovereign_Republic.html to > recommend this to your friends > > Citizens Electoral Council of Australia > Media Release Thursday, 10 September 2015 > Craig Isherwood‚ National Secretary > PO Box 376‚ COBURG‚ VIC 3058 > Phone: 1800 636 432 > Email: cec(a)cecaust.com.au > Website: http://www.cecaust.com.au > > > Australia must become a sovereign republic The only way to do that would be to have a referendum changing the foundations of our federal constitution - this is a VERY DANGEROUS thing to do! Gerrit Schorel-Hlavka, Andrew Moyle, Malcolm McClure, Mark McMurtrie and many others have shown that our CURRENT CONSTITUTION is plenty enough for those individuals who know which bits are important and are willing to stand in court (from personal experience, that's a bloody hard thing to do). We have powerful foundations in our federal constitution of Australia, and any referendum at this point will almost certainly TAKE POWER AWAY from the people, power THAT WE ALREADY HAVE if we would only use it. The problem is that the people of Australia DO NOT KNOW the power they hold thanks to our current constitution, and "change at any cost" will result in a WORSE SITUATION for all of us (except temporarily for those who currently hold political power, i.e. politicians, and they should know better since in time new politicians will replace them). > Queen Elizabeth is not a powerless, benign figurehead. She is now the > longest-reigning head of Britain’s oligarchical power > structure which sits above the institutions of democracy. She sits sort of above (in some very good ways mind you, at least with respect to her duty to uphold Christian and other common law foundations), but also in some ways she sits NEXT to our institutions of power. And re Australia, she is more titular (sovereign in title) than in the UK. > Her role ensures > that democratic power can never touch the network > of wealthy families, private banks, corporate boardrooms, elite schools, > permanent civil servants and secretive security > agencies, reinforced by the system of royal honours, where real power > resides in Britain, Australia, and every other state > where the Queen is Monarch. Absolute BOLLOCKS! The tendency for those who don't know any better (such as myself 20 years ago at the first "make us a republic" referendum) is to: 1) Throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak. 2) Assume that a referendum will improve things - any change will be better (yeah right!). 3) Assume that good people, who know how to improve things, are the ones who write the proposed options or "referendum questions" at any referendum. These assumptions are FALSE, and BLOODY DANGEROUS - since it is those who currently have some political power, who want MORE power, and want to get that additional power by TAKING it from we the people! Is it you who writes the proposed new foundations to be put to referendum? Is it me? NO - it is not us, therefore why the hell should we think that what is presented is going to be in our interest at all? If the government REALLY wanted to improve things for us - that's almost trivial to do - slash politician wages and pensions, eliminate revenue raising by Police, stop making victimless crimes punishable with jail, and plenty other common sense things, like don't bomb the crap out of countries at the other side of the world of people who think differently to us! It's not that firetruckin difficult! > The only way to bring this power-structure under democratic control is to > replace the Queen with a democratic head of state, Bollocks! The Queen is essentially titular anyway! And: A) She (the "Crown") granted us our respectful and united request for nationhood, with her blessing! B) The naming of our titular sovereign in our federal constitution's Preamble "under the Crown" is an AWESOME thing - this invokes the PROTECTIONS of the crown - Bill of Rights 1688, The Great Charter, ie. the Magna Carta 1215 and 1297. USE THESE AND REJOICE! C) Besides our foundational BILL OF RIGHTS and the great MAGNA CARTA, many other IMPERIAL ACTS are at our disposal - some of these are awesome! Right to Trial by Jury? check! Right to be brought before the Supreme Court and not be held indefinitely "on remand"? Writ of Mandamus, check!! D) Besides these and more wonderful things, the Crown is bound, and similarly we have bound ourselves, in our federal constitution, to the Blessing of Almighty God! This Blessing is better than the rest of the protections of the Crown combined - to learn why this is true is an excellent journey in understanding, and highly recommended! "So why are things so bad?" I hear you ask ... well, there are a bunch of power-hungry, greedy, selfish, self-centered humans who lust for positions in parliament, and so 'we' leave it to them since most of us want to get on with a life, family, creativity, wealth and stability. "Leaving it to them" is a major problem with we Aussies! Also most "of us Aussies" do not know the awesome foundations in our federal constitution - The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900/1901/whatever - tear it down AT YOUR PERIL, fellow Australians!!! > accountable to the people. The Crown has a duty of care to the people, and that duty of care HAS BEEN MET in the VERY FOUNDATIONS of our federal constitution! Learn these foundations and enjoy the fruits! We ought be thankful to the Crown, for providing to every one of us Australians such an awesome foundation! It was hard won for sure - some tough negotiating back and forth between our Aussie delegates (our founding fathers), and the Crown, and the British Parliament - but we got there, we got our nation and we kept the protections of the Crown, and we got the protections of the Blessing of Almighty God. Just because we might have a bunch of crooks who've taken power in our parliament today, does not mean we have a fundamentally broken system! We have a fundamentally good system, with some bad (selfish and compromised) people! As Malcolm has said many times - better to have bad people in a good system, than good people in a bad system - the bad system will deteriorate MUCH QUICKER! Our current constitutional monarchy system has withstood over 100 years of internal attacks and opportunists. > It is past time Australia did this, and finally > became an independent sovereign nation. Warning, this is what those in power want. Every few years they try again to turn us into a republic! So what should we want? The Crown HAS satisfied its duty of care to the people - this might sound strange, but in fact it is true. What is also true is that our state (i.e. our state and federal parliaments) have a duty of care to us as well - and on this front there are many failures. Finally and MOST IMPORTANTLY, it is also true that WE, the people, have a duty of care to our state (i.e. our state and federal, and also local for that matter, parliaments) - we the people have THOROUGHLY FAILED in our duty of care to our own state/ our system of government, our constitutional monarchy and the protection of our federal constitution! Absorb that, and know why we have problems. No matter what "system" we have, if we, the people, fail to satisfy our duty of care to our own bloody state, then we deserve the problems we get and no constitution in the world will ever do it for us! Sure, blame the government, blame the Crown and blame our constitution - but in the case of us here in Australia, blaming anything outside of ourselves won't help a bit, and a new constitution will not only NOT solve the problem, it almost certainly will create a WORSE PROBLEM, and the protections of the Crown, and the Blessing of Almighty God, are protections we should NEVER GIVE UP. NOTE CAREFULLY - even the SMALLEST CHANGE to the Preamble of our federal constitution, will allow the LAWYERS and POLITICIANS and JUDGES to reinterpret all the rest of our constitution, name us a republic and/ or a secular state and remove the protections of the BLESSING OF ALMIGHTY GOD. Let me repeat, whether you are religious or not, never give up the protections of the Blessing of Almighty God, as invoked by our founding fathers in our federal constitution. Give up these protections at your peril. > Here are the facts about the Queen’s power. In “The Real British Empire”, > published in the CEC’s October-November 2011 New > Citizen newspaper, the CEC reported a partial list of the Queen’s actual > powers, sourced from Burke’s Peerage and Baronetage. > Among her so-called Royal Prerogative powers, the Queen: > * alone declares war at her pleasure; And corrupt Australian politicians play lap dog to USA and Britain (/the Queen/ whatever)! > * is commander-in-chief, and may choose and appoint all commanders and > officers by land, sea, and air; Just as the president of the USA is commander-in-chief of the combined military forces of the USA. Just as there is some possibly analogous situation in Australia which no-one knows for sure but if we read our constitution we'd probably find out about. > * may convoke, adjourn, remove, and dissolve Parliament; British parliament. And perhaps via the governor general, the parliament of Australia. I don't know the details here. But do note, when (if) we the people finally learn to express our will of the people, for example oh that's right, establishing our nationhood as states federating in a commonwealth under the Crown and by the Blessing of Almighty God, then the Queen/Crown has been known to assent to said will of the people. But bloody hell mate, we have to speak up. And we need to speak in relative unity. If we can't unite in any demand of our politicians, for example to slash politician wages, how the hell do we think we'll ever get a better deal at a referendum scripted and orchestrated by those same politicians? Dream on... > * may dismiss the prime minister and choose his or her replacement; That sounds specific to UK, but whatever. > * alone may conclude treaties. Certainly here in Australia we sign to treaties by our own parliament's sovereign right and authority. > In practice, the British Prime Minister exercises these powers in the UK; > in Australia they are exercised by the Governor-General > under the advice of the Prime Minister. Nevertheless, they are her powers, > and the British PM consults with her closely, in > weekly face-to-face meetings and daily communications conveyed in her red > boxes; Australia’s PM consults almost as closely with > the Governor-General. > > Unlike the US president, for comparison, her powers are not defined, and > therefore limited, by a written constitution—the British > “constitution” is an unwritten system of feudalistic conventions and > precedents. Australia does have a written constitution, but > the Queen’s powers are largely undefined and untouched, which is > acknowledged in the “reserve powers” clause in the list of powers > of her Governor-General. (One power of the Queen that is defined in the > Australian constitution is her power to overrule any law > passed by the Australian parliament within 12 months of its passage.) > Australian constitutional law expert Ann Twomey called this > disguised but very real power of the Queen in Australia’s system the > chameleon Crown, which “takes great care to protect itself > by blending into its background so carefully that its presence is barely > perceptible”. (The Chameleon Crown: The Queen and Her > Australian Governors, by Ann Twomey). The Chameleon Crown - ok, haven't heard that one before. That can also be described as "historically significantly neutered Crown". A rose is a rose... > Take probably the most awesome of her powers, the power to declare war. > This is not a power of the US president, who is ostensibly > the most powerful person in the world. The British PM can declare war > without consulting parliament, as Tony Blair did on Iraq in > 2003, because the PM uses the Queen’s power to do so. The Australian > PM can similarly declare war without the democratic > accountability of consulting parliament, under our British-crafted system. > > The current UK Labour Party leadership campaign has produced a revealing > insight into just how undemocratic the British Crown system > is. London’s 31 August 2015 Telegraph newspaper launched an hysterical > attack on front-runner Jeremy Corbyn for suggesting that the > elected parliament should have a veto over the Crown’s Royal Prerogative > powers. Corbyn reportedly said, “The Royal Prerogative > should be subject to Parliamentary vote and veto if necessary. The Queen > hands her powers to the Prime Minister and he can then > exercise them. It’s a very convenient way of bypassing Parliament. Also, > orders in council are a very convenient way of bypassing > Parliament.” > > Whereas most Britons, and Australians, would assume that parliament > already does have the final say, the hysterical reaction to > Corbyn’s modest proposal proved emphatically otherwise, and indeed, just > how much the Queen’s position is dependent on not being > accountable to the elected parliament. The Telegraph quoted historian (and > Tony Blair’s biographer) Sir Anthony Seldon telling > LBC radio: > “It’s hard to know what would be left of the monarchy. The fact that Jeremy > > Corbyn is saying that, would be seen as an assault on > the monarchy. It would be crossing the Rubicon. He would be the first > Labour leader who started talking about a reduction in the > role of the monarchy. It would be very serious.” > > What is more serious is that an unelected hereditary monarch has that > much power over elected institutions. That power is enshrined Historically, "benevolent dictatorships" are also one of the most stable forms of societal structure - yes it requires ongoing benevolence of the monarch/dictator though, of course, yet exactly the same thing must be said of our "democratic" parliament - our Australian federal parliament is pretty non-benevolent these days, with incredibly feathered nests, declarations of war around the world, pervasive spying on its own population, and an endless litany of enforced victimless crimes... > in the system of hereditary monarchy, which the Crown will kill, > and has killed, to protect. Princess Diana was the last great > threat to the House of Windsor’s control of the British Crown, her > openness leading to scandalous insights into how the Monarchy > really functioned. Australian-based investigator John Morgan concluded, > from his forensic investigation of her death, that the Queen, > whose first duty is to the continuation of the Monarchy, ordered her > assassination and the subsequent cover-up. > (Visit this link > http://cecaust.com.au/releases/2015_02_19_Royal_Scandal.html) > > In a true republic, sovereignty comes from the people. Abraham Lincoln > expressed this principle most profoundly at the end of his > 1863 Gettysburg Address, when he called on his fellow citizens to ensure > “that government of the people, by the people, for the > people, shall not perish from the earth”. Oh right, America/ USA is a wonderful example of democracy today! </sarcasm> > It is time that Australians see through the carefully stage-managed PR > campaign around the Queen, and resolve to become, finally, > an independent sovereign nation. The CEC has been committed to that cause > since its inception—join us. > Authorised: Robert Barwick‚ 595 Sydney Rd‚ Coburg‚ Vic 3058 No. Firetrucking. Way. I didn't realise the CEC had sold out common sense. Watch out people - the road to hell is paved with good intentions, like diluting our local tribe with an endless parade of sympathy-snatching refugees from illegal wars perpetrated by our own government no less. I hope we Aussies can wake up. I really really hope so. Good luck Australia, Zenaan

1 0

Hostages for Sale on Telegram
by Rich Jones 10 Sep '15

10 Sep '15

More for the ISIS-loves-"Secure"-Messaging-Apps folder: "Dabiq 11 released by terror group ISIS. At the end it notes 2 new foreign hostages; 1 Chinese and other Norweigan." https://twitter.com/DrPartizan_/status/641671841380179968 Click through for pictures and Telegram number. R

4 3

Distributed Computing [was: Repbin release v0.0.2]
by grarpamp 10 Sep '15

10 Sep '15

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 5:48 PM, jim bell <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Has anybody ever considered the idea of doing otherwise-useful CPU work with Plenty of distributed computing efforts out there... BOINC, SetiAtHome, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_computing > the power currently expended by computing hashes in Bitcoin mining? The > most obvious application would be weather forecasting: It could use a huge > amount of computation, on a continuously ongoing basis, and is valuable to > every nation on earth. Whether it can be lasso'ed into a bitcoin-mining > engine, I don't know. Back when mining was done with GPU's, maybe, utilizing the newly installed base of GPGPU computing therein. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General-purpose_computing_on_graphics_process… Today all relavant mining is done with ASIC's, and all the installed base of them can do is SHA-256, so no. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_network#Bitcoin_mining https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=76.0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=81.0 rysiek wrote: > My dream would be a distributed github replacement (a'la gitchain) where > proof-of-work is somehow related to compilation, running tests, or somesuch. Maybe I just saw some news about a distributed repo. Too much distributed noise lately, so maybe not. Central here, signing off...

1 0

Russia failed to break Tor
by Anton Nesterov 09 Sep '15

09 Sep '15

A company hired by the Russian Interior Ministry to identify users of the Tor network, an anonymous Internet browser, has announced its plans to terminate its state contract without finishing the task. According to the Russian newspaper Kommersant, the Russian Interior Ministry signed a series of contracts in 2013 and in 2014 with a company called “the Central Scientific Institute for Economics, IT and Management Systems” (CSI EIM) to study and to fight online anonymity. The newspaper reports that CSI EIM has now hired lawyers, in order to terminate its four government contracts. Information about the contracts between CSI EIM and the Interior Ministry is classified. According to an investigation conducted by Kommersant, however, one of the agreements, under the code name “TOR (Flot),” involved studying how to retrieve information about Tor users and investigating what technologies Tor uses. CSI EIM was supposed to earn 3.9 million rubles ($57,540) for the work. In addition, CSI EIM won a government contract in 2014 for 20 million rubles ($295,000), known under the code name “Chameleon-2,” involving “the creation of a hardware and software complex for allowing secret and anonymous remote access to strategically important information.” The Interior Ministry has refused to comment. https://meduza.io/en/news/2015/09/09/the-russian-government-hired-people-ha… Tender to crack Tor http://zakupki.gov.ru/epz/order/notice/zkk44/view/common-info.html?regNumbe… Archived version with Tor in description https://archive.is/gCweX Tender that has info on termination of tender to crack Tor http://zakupki.gov.ru/223/purchase/public/purchase/info/common-info.html?no… -- https://nesterov.pw GPG key: 0CE8 65F1 9043 2B11 25A5 74A7 1187 6869 67AA 56E4 https://keybase.io/komachi/key.asc

2 1

Brazil hero homeless man dead after save a woman from gunman
by Felipe Felipe 08 Sep '15

08 Sep '15

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z3Q6y0dNAY http://www.unilad.co.uk/articles/homeless-man-dies-fighting-gunman-to-save-… Is brazilian security a joke? I'm from brazil and just wonder why things like that still are happening here. Is the cops from here a joke? Yes they are. I 've already been beaten by them without do anything just for walking in the streets, but when good people need them , they nothing do. They have had a chance to shot the man who had the woman, but besides they didn't anything they also let a citizen homeless get close of the killer, and they used to shot more than 30 times in the killer. The killer had been arrested more than 10 times, drug trafficking, attemped tp murder, aggression, resistance and many other things, he had got more than 20 years in jail and was in the streets free and armed. Is that our justice just do, let killers and bad people walk free among the citizens. Both men are homeless people and the killer was always been in walking with the gun in this place. That place that happend this is in the cathedral of Sé in São Paulo, too many foreign use to visit this place, because is the biggest church of Brazil and a historical place, that happend on last friday.

4 5

Re: Script Kiddie Killed in Drone Strike
by Rich Jones 08 Sep '15

08 Sep '15

Update to this: ISIS Twitter claiming this was the result of backdoors the ' Surespot <https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2015/06/07/developers-silence-raises-concern…>' "secure" messaging application. https://twitter.com/p_vanostaeyen/status/639165071072038913 On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Rich Jones <rich(a)openwatch.net> wrote: > > http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/junaid-hussain-dead-isis-computer-6… > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junaid_Hussain > > Apparently one of the TeaMp0isoN founders was just killed by a US drone > strike in Syria. Crazy times. > > According to the.. fairly questionable.. article linked above, he was #3 > on the US kill list, "behind only Jihadi John and ISIS leader Abu Bakr > al-Baghdadi"! Not bad for a guy most famous for SQL injections.. I wonder > who took his place on the list. > > R >

2 1

Hackers spent at least a year spying on Mozilla to discover Firefox security holes – and exploit them
by Georgi Guninski 08 Sep '15

08 Sep '15

Just to change the current boring discussion about fucked RFCs. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/04/mozilla_firefox_bugzilla_leak/ Hackers spent at least a year spying on Mozilla to discover Firefox security holes – and exploit them Bugzilla infiltrated, private vulns slurped since at least 2014 ==== comments: 2014 appears too high bound for me, might be wrong. Likely the mozilla u$a comrades caught the less skilled attackers, not those with r00t access (having in mind what a mess their code is).

10 17

Re: Hackers spent at least a year spying on Mozilla to discover Firefox security holes – and exploit them
by Ryan Carboni 07 Sep '15

07 Sep '15

No wonder firefox is seemingly more insecure lately. Only choices now are chrome or a text-only browser.

3 3

Can the NSA break 100000 bit RSA assuming they have O(n^6) or O(n^12) factoring algorithm?
by Georgi Guninski 07 Sep '15

07 Sep '15

In 2010 I generated two RSA keys (and certs) of size above 100000 bits: [Full-disclosure] nonsense fun: 100 000 bit rsa key http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/fulldisclosure/2010-08/0384.html The keys/certs: http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/fulldisclosure/2010-08/att-0384/gir.… (the certs might have expired but this doesn't matter). The private keys are included too. According to my mail they were generated in "about 30 hours on 1 core" and I used state of the art primality checking "pfgw". n is the size of the modulus in bits. Assume the much loved NSA has factoring algorithms of complexity O(n^6) or O(n^12) running on classical computers. Can the NSA break n=100000 without using owning/torture? Some computations suggest NO, especially for the second: sage: k=100000 sage: RR(k^6).log(2) 99.6578428466209 sage: RR(k^12).log(2) 199.315685693242 Comments about quantum computer that can break them are welcome too.

1 0