- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Schneier on Russian Hacking - deconstructed
by Steve Kinney 19 Jan '17

19 Jan '17

On 01/17/2017 04:49 PM, Bruce Schneier wrote: > > CRYPTO-GRAM > > January 15, 2017 > > The Obama administration has been more public about its evidence in the > DNC case, but it has not been entirely public. To date I have seen many assertions, but nothing resembling evidence, in support of the allegation that Russia "hacked" the DNC and released damaging (but never disclaimed) DNC documents in an effort to influence the Presidential election. > The constellation of evidence attributing the attacks against the DNC, > and subsequent release of information, is comprehensive. I believe the Bruce must have meant to say something to the effect that "The constellation of evidence attributing the attacks against the DNC, if any, has not been disclosed to the public." Or was he asserting that he has been read into the programs that developed this evidence, and shown relevant documentation? > Obama decided not to make the accusation public before the election so > as not to be seen as influencing the election. Excuse me? Obama decided to make the accusation public in a press release, a.k.a. propaganda placement dated October 7, 2016. Its content was attributed to the "USIC" by the Department of Homeland Security. This press release was distributed with clear intent to influence the election. Read it here: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07/joint-statement-department-homeland-sec… The key allegation: "The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks .com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process." In keeping with propaganda best practices, this statement does not actually accuse Russia of anything - not if you read it closely and interpret it according to strict rules of grammar. The source of the statement is not identified: There is no such agency as the United States Intelligence Community (USIC per the press release), so it can not be attributed to any responsible authority or formal reporting process. This is the safest way to tell a Big Lie. The preceding sentence is not a statement by me that it WAS a Big Lie - so if I get dragged into Court for saying so, my hands are clean. The inflammatory pre-election press release from the Obama Administration's Department of Homeland Security was followed up by numerous placements in the U.S. press, a constellation of assertions consistent this template: A reporter says an anonymous source claimed an unnamed senior intelligence official told them that unspecified secret information confirms Russian involvement in releasing incriminating DNC e-mails to Wikileaks. The timing, context and follow-on promotion of the DHS press release blaming the leak on Russia indicate it was a component of a larger campaign by the DNC on behalf of the Clinton campaign, intended to demonize Trump by depicting his stated willingness to negotiate with Russia as proof of collaboration with a foreign enemy. Post-election, the DHS press release became the rarely-cited but always referenced cornerstone of a separate campaign asserting that the election was stolen by Russia and Trump. This was the keynote of an apparent attempt to persuade the Electors to install Hillary Clinton as President. > Now, afterward, there are > political implications in accepting that Russia hacked the DNC in an > attempt to influence the US presidential election. But no amount of > evidence can convince the unconvinceable. To the best of my knowledge - and I have been following this story closely - no evidence of "Russian Hacking" has been presented to date. We have been treated to a few code names of "hacking groups" allegedly involved, and a couple of textbook diagrams of how hostile parties penetrate network servers. That is all. If no evidence can be released due to legitimate concerns for protecting sources and methods, and no substantial national security mission is advanced by partisan accusations, it would be nice if the "USIC" would stop exposing their super-secret capabilities to the world by asserting what they knew and when they knew it. > The most important thing we can do right now is deter any country from > trying this sort of thing in the future, and the political nature of the > issue makes that harder. Right now, we've told the world that others can > get away with manipulating our election process as long as they can keep > their efforts secret until after one side wins. Obama has promised both > secret retaliations and public ones. We need to hope they're enough. Would these retaliations include, perhaps, the murder of the Russian ambassador to Turkey, the downing of a Russian plane carrying an irreplaceable cultural and diplomatic delegation to Syria, the rapid deployment of a battalion strength U.S. armor force to the Russian Federation border, and a missile attack on a Syrian airport by friendly Israelis? And if so, should we presume that all-around security expert Bruce Schneier approve of these actions? I could interpret the Obama Administration's 11th hour provocations against Russia as an effort to create a massive foreign relations crisis for the incoming Trump Administration, intended to overwhelm its underqualified foreign policy contingent and deliver early control of Trump Administration foreign policy to the U.S. intelligence establishment and other Deep State actors. Whether this might have been a "wise" course to take, is a matter of opinion. As would be the legality of such a maneuver. It may also be possible that the Obama Admninistration's pre-election propaganda placement blaming the DNC leak on the Russian Federation simply started a domino effect that ran out of control and nearly caused World War III. > This essay previously appeared on CNN.com. > http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/opinions/proving-source-of-dnc-hacks-difficul… CNN? I will not here repeat the propaganda slogan presently saturating U.S. media, two words that malign the veracity of certain press outlets. But the shoe fits and Mr. Schneier will have a hard time taking it back off. That makes me sad. :o/

7 7

[TriggerWarning: Neonazi baiting] Creator of a neo-Nazi website resigns b/c married to Jew
by Razer 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

> Mike Peinovich, the creator of a neo-Nazi website on which he jokes about the Holocaust and talks about killing Jewish people, resigned after rival neo-Nazis revealed that he was married to a Jewish woman. >From this week's Harpers Weekly Review. http://harpers.org/blog/2017/01/weeklyreview20170117/ A personal recollection A decade or so ago I was arrested after some skinhead kid at the local bus station took a swing at me for absolutely no reason (probably meth psychosis). The cops arrested both of us even though there were reliable witnesses telling them I had done, literally, nothing to start the fight (never seen the putz before in my life). While we were sitting in the back of the pigmobile waiting for the trip to jail the kid actually had the nerve to say "Please don't file charges on me! I'm on parole!" I told him he should have fucking thought about that before he decided I looked like a victim... He replied: "Awww c'mon White Blood doesn't do that to white blood!" I said: "Would it shut you the fuck up if I told you I was Jewish?" He replied, with a BIG cornball smile: "Jews are OK with me! Sholom Aleichem!" Moral of story Neonazis are ethic-less cohone-less shapeshifting weasels. Exterminate on sight. Rr Ps. I was released the next morning without apology after my story was 'officially' corroborated. And the booking papers? The charge they held me on was "Drunk in public". I rarely drink. Never in public, and I don't drink to the point of being even tipsy, no less drunk. When I mentioned that to the booking officer at the desk he just shrugged his shoulders. Another bogus crime statistic they probably ended up using to stump for the funding to build a new state-of-the-police-state-art "Alcoholic Recovery Unit", aka "Drunk Tank".

1 0

Did you know...
by Razer 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

Detroit has a bus route named DHCP Config. https://twitter.com/internetofshit/status/821570833063682053 RR

1 0

List Administrivia
by grarpamp 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

You need to be sure that you accept both 'Cc:' and 'Bcc:' to you since various other lists and conversations may include them towards you.

2 2

[OT] I Have a Dream - Martin Luther King, Jr.
by Cecilia Tanaka 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

ALL men and women are created equal. I don't have children yet, but I do dream they will live in a world where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, gender, sexual choice, religion, social status or anything, but by the content of their character. - c. ===== " I Have a Dream " - Martin Luther King, Jr. # https://youtu.be/H0yP4aLyq1g # http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm -- "The future cannot be predicted, but futures can be invented."

6 37

WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?
by grarpamp 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/5oizud/911_firefighters_reveal… # Signs of an explosion at the WTC North Tower lobby https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvUIQZ7t7Ak # 9/11 Firefighters Tell How Bombs Were Going Off In The Lobby Of World Trade Center 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqX4Q6_C6iQ https://www.sott.net/article/220802-9-11-Nuclear-Demolition-Theory-Censored… http://www.nuclear-demolition-wikipedia.com/nuclear-demolition-wikipedia.ht… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_demolition http://www.nuclear-demolition.com/ iron melts 1811k 1538c boils 3134k 2862c steel melts 1100-1538c depending on alloy content aluminum melts 933k 660c boils 2473k 2470c jet fuel open air burn 1030c to 2500k 2230c https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_temperature You decide the physics, the evidence and testimony, the spy agency technical foreknowledge, the political cover. Submit the FOIA's, find and interview witnesses. I've no opinion. Discover the whole truth. That has merit.

4 4

Re: [tor-talk] Tor and Google error / CAPTCHAs.
by grarpamp 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Alec Muffett <alec.muffett(a)gmail.com> wrote: > This latter is the kind of "Graduated Access" thing which Grarpamp was > arguing in favour of, yesterday. 'Graduated Access' is where a service applies certain heuristics in order to qualify the validity of an account. Such may include things like, logins over time, messages sent, feedback [from others to helpdesk] received, length of time and activity since account origination, 'likes', p2p user based ratings, etc. Explicitly, and not merely, whether or not they exit from a tor/i2p/etc node or not (unfortunately the case today). As that would be arbitrarily prejudiced against certain 'real' peoples who care to preserve various sensitive aspects, for whatever personal or philosophical beliefs or reasons that are valid to them. [cc, and probably 'moderated', cypherpunks]

1 0

Re: [tor-talk] Tor and Google error / CAPTCHAs.
by grarpamp 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

Just noting that these threads are, beyond silly corporate mandates, largely unexplored, and I'd like to, time permitting, follow up with Mirirmir and Alec on their fine ideas and discourse, since access to services, even anonymously so, is an important thing for the world's peoples.

1 0

Project Veritas: Disrupt J20
by grarpamp 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

# Project Veritas: Disrupt J20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIjbkYLI1nY

2 1

Re: [Cryptography] Cryptocurrency Exchange without a trusted third party
by grarpamp 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

The general trendy to not name names, to hide, to sequester open journalism and speech, under whatever premise, is what is at issue here, not any specific instance of such, as may be explained, among other plausibly banal reasons, in the current example.

1 0