NY Post: It only took five seconds for assassins to kill Kim Jong Nam
Jim Bell's guess: hydrogen cyanide. (Hydrocyanic acid) It only took five seconds for assassins to kill Kim Jong Nam http://nyp.st/2kOmYtb For more on the New York Post and to download our apps, visit NYPost.com Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On 02/16/2017 12:16 PM, jim bell wrote:
Jim Bell's guess: hydrogen cyanide. (Hydrocyanic acid)
It only took five seconds for assassins to kill Kim Jong Nam
My guess? Vietnamese prostitutes, and the spray? Perfume. He probably stiffed them after they gave him a 'stiff', so they offed him. But made themselves recognizable to him by their fragrance so he'd remember them and what he'd done while he was dying in pain from damage done by the chokehold. Just ask any pig. If done wrong (or in this case 'right') you've subdued the suspect (victim) rather permanently. Or perhaps Mr Bell is too sexist to believe women could execute(sic) a chokehold? Because he's never tangled with a female cop... Or taken a speck of martial arts. Women are excellent bare-hands killers with the proper training, and Vietnamese prosties have a rough life. Rr Ps. The NY Post used to be a decent newspaper... The 'workingman's New York Times', and the NY Daily News was one step short of the National Enquirer. The roles have reversed over the years. Still getting used to it. Pps. Know the symptoms of Cyanide poisoning. Pain IS NOT one of them but giddiness is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanide_poisoning#Signs_and_symptoms
I remarked earlier that several security proposals would not in practice be useful because Hillary's main security concern was not the Russians stealing her emails, not Wikileaks stealing her emails, not the Chans stealing her emails, but Obama stealing her emails. Similarly, it is clear that if Trump had a chat with Assad of Syria clearing a bombing run Isis in Syria, his target list would appear in the New York Times, as he bitterly complained in his latest press conference. Indeed this appears to be what has already happened with the Trump's raid on Al Qaeda in Yemen - the information wound up in the hands of Al Qaeda, probably by the State Department electronically intercepting Trump and Pentagon communications and then leaking the information to their pet "Moderate Islamic Opposition" aka Al Qaeda and Islamic State, and as a result several American commandos were killed or wounded. They got killed as a result of conflict between the red empire of the bases and the blue empire of the consulates. It very much looks as if Chief Petty Officer William "Ryan" Owens was killed as a result of people in the US government leaking information to the enemies of Americans. Trump in his recent news conference reports his phone calls are being listened into by his enemies and then made public, so the leak mechanism in the Yemen case was likely similar. This is far from being the first deadly conflict between the red and blue empires, though the internal conflict within the US government looks to be escalating massively under Trump. In general, your biggest spying threat is from people mighty close to you. I am not worried about the CIA spying on me. I am worried about them spying on Trump. To solve this problem, we need end to end encryption with the keys on your own device. And we need everyone using by default and standard, so that Hillary's not very bright people and Trumps menials use it when communicating with Hillary and Trump. Which means all proposals that require managing their own keys are not going to work. For Hillary's people to use it, it needs to be so standard that even people arranging assignations on Facebook use it without being aware of it. That is why proprietary usb dongles will not work. It is unlikely that Trump would manage his own public keys - and he cannot trust the white house staff and government security people to manage them for him. It is even more unlikely that Podesta would manage his own public keys. So we need a security mechanism for the masses, a security mechanism that even the Chairman of the Board can use, a security mechanism suitable for everyone in the world, a security mechanism that requires zero clicks.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:47:15AM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
It is unlikely that Trump would manage his own public keys - and he cannot trust the white house staff and government security people to manage them for him. It is even more unlikely that Podesta would manage his own public keys. So we need a security mechanism for the masses, a security mechanism that even the Chairman of the Board can use, a security mechanism suitable for everyone in the world, a security mechanism that requires zero clicks.
Ack. IPSEC was in principle the right approach in so far as "pre-emptive" or opportunistic "link" encryption (i.e., your communication channel, by default - as you say, zero clicks).
On 2/17/2017 11:37 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:47:15AM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
It is unlikely that Trump would manage his own public keys - and he cannot trust the white house staff and government security people to manage them for him. It is even more unlikely that Podesta would manage his own public keys.
IPSEC was in principle the right approach in so far as "pre-emptive" or opportunistic "link" encryption (i.e., your communication channel, by default - as you say, zero clicks).
Ipsec is not very secure. What I was thinking of is a global database linking phone numbers, email addresses, etc, to public keys with a witness mechanism to ensure that every client gets told the same story as to which public key is associated with which phone number. So if your client looks up its own public key by phone number, it sees a hash chain connecting that association to the global witness hash, and knows that client it is talking to sees the same public key. Clients upload and download public keys at infrequent intervals without human intervention. This works fine with phones, since people assume one phone number per physical phone. Phone forwarding systems are assumed to forward from one phone number/physical device to another phone number physical device. Not so fine with email addresses. Just have to give people the option 'Your emails are currently encrypted so that they can only be read on the following physical devices ... "Add current device to list for future emails?" "Edit list of devices that are empowered to decrypt your email?" Which interface is likely to confuse and irritate them. And if you lose or damage the physical device that currently holds all your old emails and you have not backed it up recently, thus losing all your old emails and the secret key that can decrypt them - that could be very handy if an investigation is coming up.
These key storage and recovery issues are a prime focus of SatochiLabs Trezor series. https://doc.satoshilabs.com/trezor-faq/overview.html Warrant Canary creator On Feb 16, 2017 6:35 PM, "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote:
On 2/17/2017 11:37 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:47:15AM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
It is unlikely that Trump would manage his own public keys - and he cannot trust the white house staff and government security people to manage them for him. It is even more unlikely that Podesta would manage his own public keys.
IPSEC was in principle the right approach in so far as "pre-emptive" or
opportunistic "link" encryption (i.e., your communication channel, by default - as you say, zero clicks).
Ipsec is not very secure. What I was thinking of is a global database linking phone numbers, email addresses, etc, to public keys with a witness mechanism to ensure that every client gets told the same story as to which public key is associated with which phone number.
So if your client looks up its own public key by phone number, it sees a hash chain connecting that association to the global witness hash, and knows that client it is talking to sees the same public key. Clients upload and download public keys at infrequent intervals without human intervention.
This works fine with phones, since people assume one phone number per physical phone. Phone forwarding systems are assumed to forward from one phone number/physical device to another phone number physical device. Not so fine with email addresses. Just have to give people the option
'Your emails are currently encrypted so that they can only be read on the following physical devices ...
"Add current device to list for future emails?"
"Edit list of devices that are empowered to decrypt your email?"
Which interface is likely to confuse and irritate them.
And if you lose or damage the physical device that currently holds all your old emails and you have not backed it up recently, thus losing all your old emails and the secret key that can decrypt them - that could be very handy if an investigation is coming up.
On 02/16/2017 07:47 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
I remarked earlier that several security proposals would not in practice be useful because Hillary's main security concern was not the Russians stealing her emails, not Wikileaks stealing her emails, not the Chans stealing her emails, but Obama stealing her emails.
Are you daft ? Obama had more important things than to go through Hillary's emails. He already knew all about her and her failure as Secretary of state.
Similarly, it is clear that if Trump had a chat with Assad of Syria clearing a bombing run Isis in Syria, his target list would appear in the New York Times, as he bitterly complained in his latest press conference.
Again - are you Daft ? Assad is in a bitter fight with Isis - he would not leak that info. ...Not that i support that horrid dictator. I did work on the Streisand effect for Assad's regime.
Indeed this appears to be what has already happened with the Trump's raid on Al Qaeda in Yemen - the information wound up in the hands of Al Qaeda, probably by the State Department electronically intercepting Trump and Pentagon communications and then leaking the information to their pet "Moderate Islamic Opposition" aka Al Qaeda and Islamic State, and as a result several American commandos were killed or wounded. They got killed as a result of conflict between the red empire of the bases and the blue empire of the consulates.
It very much looks as if Chief Petty Officer William "Ryan" Owens was killed as a result of people in the US government leaking information to the enemies of Americans. Trump in his recent news conference reports his phone calls are being listened into by his enemies and then made public, so the leak mechanism in the Yemen case was likely similar.
Nonsense. Trump did not get the right info - he did not know how well defended the site was. It was not a leak that made the attack fail it was overly hasty action. Even Obama (the bomber) did not want to do that action - he knew it as ill advised but the Chump was all go to do it not knowing what was there on the ground - and it got a lot of people including and American soldier killed.
This is far from being the first deadly conflict between the red and blue empires, though the internal conflict within the US government looks to be escalating massively under Trump.
In general, your biggest spying threat is from people mighty close to you.
I am not worried about the CIA spying on me. I am worried about them spying on Trump.
To solve this problem, we need end to end encryption with the keys on your own device. And we need everyone using by default and standard, so that Hillary's not very bright people and Trumps menials use it when communicating with Hillary and Trump. Which means all proposals that require managing their own keys are not going to work.
Hillary's people manage to use Signal. I bet even Trumps crowd could manage that. As always it is laziness that is the enemy of good crypto use.
For Hillary's people to use it, it needs to be so standard that even people arranging assignations on Facebook use it without being aware of it. That is why proprietary usb dongles will not work.
It is unlikely that Trump would manage his own public keys - and he cannot trust the white house staff and government security people to manage them for him. It is even more unlikely that Podesta would manage his own public keys. So we need a security mechanism for the masses, a security mechanism that even the Chairman of the Board can use, a security mechanism suitable for everyone in the world, a security mechanism that requires zero clicks.
Well i think the Hillary team managed it. ....AFTER.... all their stuff was hacked. Little too late. I just wonder if the stuff that made it to Wikileaks was unedited. The stuff i looked at was so insipid.
Marina Brown:
Nonsense. Trump did not get the right info - he did not know how well defended the site was.
Actually the reason so many women were killed was because the defenders weren't al-Qaeda, it was a village protection group which includes lots of females because most of the military age males are 'out of town' having picked sides and deployed, or more likely dead. I think the age of the average male in Africa is down around 16 years old because of that continent's ongoing battle, in so many ways, to keep the West at bay, but I haven't checked recently. Pretty sure the situation's the same in the middle east too.. Old men, and kids... The rest are dead or fighting in the field. -- RR "You might want to ask an expert about that - I just fiddlefucked around with mine until it worked..."
On 02/16/2017 07:47 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
I remarked earlier that several security proposals would not in practice be useful because Hillary's main security concern was not the Russians stealing her emails, not Wikileaks stealing her emails, not the Chans stealing her emails, but Obama stealing her emails.
Are you daft ? Obama had more important things than to go through Hillary's emails. He already knew all about her and her failure as Secretary of state.
Similarly, it is clear that if Trump had a chat with Assad of Syria clearing a bombing run Isis in Syria, his target list would appear in the New York Times, as he bitterly complained in his latest press conference.
Again - are you Daft ? Assad is in a bitter fight with Isis - he would not leak that info. ...Not that i support that horrid dictator. I did work on the Streisand effect for Assad's regime.
Indeed this appears to be what has already happened with the Trump's raid on Al Qaeda in Yemen - the information wound up in the hands of Al Qaeda, probably by the State Department electronically intercepting Trump and Pentagon communications and then leaking the information to their pet "Moderate Islamic Opposition" aka Al Qaeda and Islamic State, and as a result several American commandos were killed or wounded. They got killed as a result of conflict between the red empire of the bases and the blue empire of the consulates.
It very much looks as if Chief Petty Officer William "Ryan" Owens was killed as a result of people in the US government leaking information to the enemies of Americans. Trump in his recent news conference reports his phone calls are being listened into by his enemies and then made public, so the leak mechanism in the Yemen case was likely similar.
Nonsense. Trump did not get the right info - he did not know how well defended the site was. It was not a leak that made the attack fail it was overly hasty action. Even Obama (the bomber) did not want to do that action - he knew it as ill advised but the Chump was all go to do it not knowing what was there on the ground - and it got a lot of people including and American soldier killed.
This is far from being the first deadly conflict between the red and blue empires, though the internal conflict within the US government looks to be escalating massively under Trump.
In general, your biggest spying threat is from people mighty close to you.
I am not worried about the CIA spying on me. I am worried about them spying on Trump.
To solve this problem, we need end to end encryption with the keys on your own device. And we need everyone using by default and standard, so that Hillary's not very bright people and Trumps menials use it when communicating with Hillary and Trump. Which means all proposals that require managing their own keys are not going to work.
Hillary's people manage to use Signal. I bet even Trumps crowd could manage that. As always it is laziness that is the enemy of good crypto use.
For Hillary's people to use it, it needs to be so standard that even people arranging assignations on Facebook use it without being aware of it. That is why proprietary usb dongles will not work.
It is unlikely that Trump would manage his own public keys - and he cannot trust the white house staff and government security people to manage them for him. It is even more unlikely that Podesta would manage his own public keys. So we need a security mechanism for the masses, a security mechanism that even the Chairman of the Board can use, a security mechanism suitable for everyone in the world, a security mechanism that requires zero clicks.
Well i think the Hillary team managed it. ....AFTER.... all their stuff was hacked. Little too late. I just wonder if the stuff that made it to Wikileaks was unedited. The stuff i looked at was so insipid.
On 02/16/2017 07:47 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
I remarked earlier that several security proposals would not in practice be useful because Hillary's main security concern was not the Russians stealing her emails, not Wikileaks stealing her emails, not the Chans stealing her emails, but Obama stealing her emails.
On 2/18/2017 1:46 PM, Marina Brown wrote:
Are you daft ? Obama had more important things than to go through Hillary's emails. He already knew all about her and her failure as Secretary of state.
Illegally employing her own email server was an anti Obama security measure, not an anti Wikileaks or anti Chan measure. She would have been more secure against Wikileaks, the Chans, and the Russians, had she done the legal thing and used the official government (aka Obama) controlled mail server. Similarly, Google ratting out Petraeus to Obama has caused a sudden and striking disinclination to use Gmail among persons of interest. On 02/16/2017 07:47 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
Similarly, it is clear that if Trump had a chat with Assad of Syria clearing a bombing run Isis in Syria, his target list would appear in the New York Times, as he bitterly complained in his latest press conference.
On 2/18/2017 1:46 PM, Marina Brown wrote:
Again - are you Daft ? Assad is in a bitter fight with Isis - he would not leak that info.
Of course Assad would not - but the State Department is supporting Isis, and would. And someone in the government, probably the CIA or the State Department did leak the equivalent info about the raid in Yemen to Al Qaeda, resulting in many injuries and a death.
...Not that i support that horrid dictator. I did work on the Streisand effect for Assad's regime.
I totally support Assad. He stands between the US State Department, and the genocide of all Alawites, Christians, and all Shiites of Palestinian descent in Syria. The State Department aims to do to Alawites in Syria what it did to Tutsis in the Congo, and a side effect that they do not much care about or rather like is that Christians in Syria would get genocided also.
Nonsense. Trump did not get the right info - he did not know how well defended the site was.
Al Qaeda tells us that they knew what was coming. So chances are that the site *became* well defended shortly after the decision to attack it was made. There is a tendency to analyze security as if your home computer was secure, which it is not. But the error of analyzing security as if your organization was secure and cohesive is a greater error. Trump is at far greater risk of being spied on by the CIA and the State Department than the Russians, and the consequences of that spying are more severe. Similarly, Hillary was primarily concerned about Obama spying on her, and was right to be concerned. Petraeus should have been similarly concerned. So security really has to be in the hands of the end user, rather than the organization. Trump, Hillary, Podesta, Petraeus, and the Chairman of the Board are never going to use PGP, or even correctly use browser Certification Authorities. Podesta and Hillary's information technology guy did not seem to know what a website certificate is, or how it works.
On 02/18/2017 04:54 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
On 02/16/2017 07:47 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
I remarked earlier that several security proposals would not in practice be useful because Hillary's main security concern was not the Russians stealing her emails, not Wikileaks stealing her emails, not the Chans stealing her emails, but Obama stealing her emails.
On 2/18/2017 1:46 PM, Marina Brown wrote:
Are you daft ? Obama had more important things than to go through Hillary's emails. He already knew all about her and her failure as Secretary of state.
Illegally employing her own email server was an anti Obama security measure, not an anti Wikileaks or anti Chan measure. She would have been more secure against Wikileaks, the Chans, and the Russians, had she done the legal thing and used the official government (aka Obama) controlled mail server.
Similarly, Google ratting out Petraeus to Obama has caused a sudden and striking disinclination to use Gmail among persons of interest.
On 02/16/2017 07:47 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
Similarly, it is clear that if Trump had a chat with Assad of Syria clearing a bombing run Isis in Syria, his target list would appear in the New York Times, as he bitterly complained in his latest press conference.
On 2/18/2017 1:46 PM, Marina Brown wrote:
Again - are you Daft ? Assad is in a bitter fight with Isis - he would not leak that info.
Of course Assad would not - but the State Department is supporting Isis, and would. And someone in the government, probably the CIA or the State Department did leak the equivalent info about the raid in Yemen to Al Qaeda, resulting in many injuries and a death.
...Not that i support that horrid dictator. I did work on the Streisand effect for Assad's regime.
I totally support Assad. He stands between the US State Department, and the genocide of all Alawites, Christians, and all Shiites of Palestinian descent in Syria. The State Department aims to do to Alawites in Syria what it did to Tutsis in the Congo, and a side effect that they do not much care about or rather like is that Christians in Syria would get genocided also.
The only party i really support in Syria is the YPG. It's the non-murderous force of modernism in Syria. Assad might protect some of the Alawites and Christians but he has far far too much blood on his hands. I really find it hard to forget the pictures of regular everyday people who got horrifically tortured for simply getting caught up by Assads police force.
Nonsense. Trump did not get the right info - he did not know how well defended the site was.
Al Qaeda tells us that they knew what was coming. So chances are that the site *became* well defended shortly after the decision to attack it was made.
There is a tendency to analyze security as if your home computer was secure, which it is not. But the error of analyzing security as if your organization was secure and cohesive is a greater error. Trump is at far greater risk of being spied on by the CIA and the State Department than the Russians, and the consequences of that spying are more severe. Similarly, Hillary was primarily concerned about Obama spying on her, and was right to be concerned. Petraeus should have been similarly concerned.
So security really has to be in the hands of the end user, rather than the organization. Trump, Hillary, Podesta, Petraeus, and the Chairman of the Board are never going to use PGP, or even correctly use browser Certification Authorities. Podesta and Hillary's information technology guy did not seem to know what a website certificate is, or how it works.
Hillary's IT people and Podesta really were the example of the worst security possible.
participants (6)
-
James A. Donald -
jim bell -
Marina Brown -
Razer -
Steven Schear -
Zenaan Harkness