On 10/08/2015 07:42 PM, coderman wrote:
On 10/7/15, Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
Let me begin by saying that Cryptome initially denied the leak, then that the data was stolen, then that the whole thing was a fake "a lie by [a] spy-newbie."
the lie is assuming these requests over plain-text were ever private :P
That is the key point! And anyway, all traffic to all websites is public.
Look at the data itself and examine the multiple sources, then decide for yourself.
i find that understanding data requires placing in the utmost context of additional data, thus leading to a cycle of expanding corpora.
i understand if this discussion is a bit forward to have a public, like some of your referrers. why did you install that toolbar? for shame...
It's important to note that the logs were not just found in the USBs John Young/Cryptome sent to me, but in the ones sent to "bandmon", who unless I'm mistaken is coderman@gmail.com
i'm not sure who bandmon is, but they're not coderman@gmail.com. i would however be amenable to uploading a list of sha-256 digests to verify components of similarity between the torrent and origin.
https://thepiratebay.mn/torrent/11113511/Cryptome_archive_2014-06-02
It was my strong preference **not** to post this, but since Cryptome has refused to validate the data, there is no other way to authenticate it than to release it to the public along with how to find that information in the Cryptome USBs/CDs and their various mirrors.
actually one may cross reference with their own requests and circuits, for high confidence of legitimacy.
i find it apropos to now quote the original disclaimer in full: ''' This is a trap, witting and unwitting. Do not use it or use at own risk. Source and this host is out to pwon and phuck you in complicity with global Internet authorities. ... Signed Batshit Cryptome and Host, 9 July 2014, 12:16ET." - cypherpunks/2014-July/005020.html, and true for FY-2014, too. '''
best regards,