Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome]
You can read through the emails for yourself, no doubt. Start with the original email about the GCHQ slide with redacted IPs, where I ask for verification/validation. On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
Show me the email where you called for help ... i have been traveling heavy so missed it
The type of work of forensics research is important and how ot is conducted is as well
Its not about my personal stamp of approval it is about community and respecting of and embodiment of the community
If anyone including john is being a fucker we need to account for that On Oct 10, 2015 12:04 PM, "Michael Best" <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
The list had been involved since the first post about the GCHQ slide. The list was no help at all.
Sorry you don't approve, Cari, but what's done is done. The list was consulted and no help. John Young refused to acknowledge the problem - *or fix it. *[sarcasm] But what's terribly wrong is that I reported it - *not* that John leaked it or lied it about it when he kept denying it or anything else. [/sarcasm]
*Cari Machet* carimachet@gmail.com
<carimachet%40gmail.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcryptome%5D%20Re%3A%20%5Bcryptome%5D&In-Reply-To=%3CCAGRDzQX8MeKa3DuwLaNpW-jfTneECwos-oXhSxo0iCb5V%2BGsHA%40mail.gmail.com%3E> *Sat Oct 10 04:51:59 EDT 2015*Still michael best you could have consulted the list here That someone calls you a liar therefor you act is an ego based mindset Answer why you decided to not consult this list that has profoundly smart beings on it You could have asked this list for help we are interested in helping with such matters i would say and you could have done so without revealing info ... did this never cross your mind ? If it never even crossed your mind to consult us i find there is something terribly wrong
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 12:01 AM, coderman <coderman@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/9/15, Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
... *they never would've been published. *
i find it useful to think of voice. published yes, with little voice.
now it's most certainly a loud something! the published always was, however...
John has yet to post a notice on his site alerting users to the log's leaking and the possible compromise, but he has added a warning about a "growing censor-tamper-implant-bowdlerize-redact-tag-track of archives, torrents, drops, shares, wikis, disclosure sites." So that's something?
Mirrors of the Cryptome Archive should be accessed with caution, none have been authenticated by Cryptome and sigs can be faked to hide tampering. There is growing censor-tamper-implant-bowdlerize-redact-tag-track of archives, torrents, drops, shares, wikis, disclosure sites.
I guess John was right before. "Compromise should be publicized but seldom is: *hide, deny, ignore, delude*." On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
You can read through the emails for yourself, no doubt. Start with the original email about the GCHQ slide with redacted IPs, where I ask for verification/validation.
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
Show me the email where you called for help ... i have been traveling heavy so missed it
The type of work of forensics research is important and how ot is conducted is as well
Its not about my personal stamp of approval it is about community and respecting of and embodiment of the community
If anyone including john is being a fucker we need to account for that On Oct 10, 2015 12:04 PM, "Michael Best" <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
The list had been involved since the first post about the GCHQ slide. The list was no help at all.
Sorry you don't approve, Cari, but what's done is done. The list was consulted and no help. John Young refused to acknowledge the problem - *or fix it. *[sarcasm] But what's terribly wrong is that I reported it - *not* that John leaked it or lied it about it when he kept denying it or anything else. [/sarcasm]
*Cari Machet* carimachet@gmail.com
<carimachet%40gmail.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcryptome%5D%20Re%3A%20%5Bcryptome%5D&In-Reply-To=%3CCAGRDzQX8MeKa3DuwLaNpW-jfTneECwos-oXhSxo0iCb5V%2BGsHA%40mail.gmail.com%3E> *Sat Oct 10 04:51:59 EDT 2015*Still michael best you could have consulted the list here That someone calls you a liar therefor you act is an ego based mindset Answer why you decided to not consult this list that has profoundly smart beings on it You could have asked this list for help we are interested in helping with such matters i would say and you could have done so without revealing info ... did this never cross your mind ? If it never even crossed your mind to consult us i find there is something terribly wrong
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 12:01 AM, coderman <coderman@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/9/15, Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
... *they never would've been published. *
i find it useful to think of voice. published yes, with little voice.
now it's most certainly a loud something! the published always was, however...
Are you this twatter luser: NatSecGeek https://twitter.com/NatSecGeek Suggested by: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/cryptome-ip-leak-john-young-michael-best/ In case of positive answer, what does "Nat" mean?
NatSecGeek=National Security Geek. Other than recent Cryptome stuff, it's mostly links to archives and datasets. I assume "luser" is internet speak for "wild and crazy guy"? http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/the-festrunk-brothers/n8662 ;-) On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
Are you this twatter luser:
NatSecGeek
https://twitter.com/NatSecGeek
Suggested by: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/cryptome-ip-leak-john-young-michael-best/
In case of positive answer, what does "Nat" mean?
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 09:59:20AM -0400, Michael Best wrote:
NatSecGeek=National Security Geek. Other than recent Cryptome stuff, it's mostly links to archives and datasets.
I still fail to understand the answer to the first question. In case of positive answer, please define "National". "nations" bomb/nuke each other AFAICT.
I assume "luser" is internet speak for "wild and crazy guy"? http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/the-festrunk-brothers/n8662 ;-)
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
Are you this twatter luser:
NatSecGeek
https://twitter.com/NatSecGeek
Suggested by: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/cryptome-ip-leak-john-young-michael-best/
In case of positive answer, what does "Nat" mean?
Here's the windup... and the pitch... It looks like it's gonna be an ad hominem! Best doesn't swing at it. Ball one. On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 09:59:20AM -0400, Michael Best wrote:
NatSecGeek=National Security Geek. Other than recent Cryptome stuff, it's mostly links to archives and datasets.
I still fail to understand the answer to the first question.
In case of positive answer, please define "National".
"nations" bomb/nuke each other AFAICT.
I assume "luser" is internet speak for "wild and crazy guy"? http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/the-festrunk-brothers/n8662
;-)
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
Are you this twatter luser:
NatSecGeek
https://twitter.com/NatSecGeek
Suggested by:
http://www.dailydot.com/politics/cryptome-ip-leak-john-young-michael-best/
In case of positive answer, what does "Nat" mean?
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 10:14:57AM -0400, Michael Best wrote:
Here's the windup... and the pitch... It looks like it's gonna be an ad hominem! Best doesn't swing at it. Ball one.
In case you can't understand the question, are you this?: https://twitter.com/NatSecGeek According to: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/cryptome-ip-leak-john-young-michael-best/
Yep. Thought tacit acknowledgment in first answer was clear, but like it was lost in translation as too often happens with email. My fault. Ad hominem anticipation was in response to the bombing comment. On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 10:14:57AM -0400, Michael Best wrote:
Here's the windup... and the pitch... It looks like it's gonna be an ad hominem! Best doesn't swing at it. Ball one.
In case you can't understand the question, are you this?: https://twitter.com/NatSecGeek According to: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/cryptome-ip-leak-john-young-michael-best/
Just had it pointed out to me "luser" was just internet slang, and not really an insult. Sorry I got a little defensive after that. For me, "national security" is anything a nation needs to prosper and survive, including national medical care, education, ensuring a healthy job market and that there's infrastructure for everyone to get food, water, information, and from place to place. A lot of my emphasis is on the intelligence aspects of national security, because I started off and got hooked on the subject while reading military history and ex-spook/spy memoirs. I'm fascinated by the economic side of things and think it's under represented, and we need more/better education (at least in the U.S.) that's gauged to a realistic job market and caters to the individual's actual capabilities. I generally don't talk about that part because I only understand it in the broadest terms, and the best I can do is try to listen to the experts in that field and people who are smarter than me. And then there's separating policy from politics... I hope that helps clarify some. Sorry again for assuming that your question was insincere/attacking. Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 10, 2015, at 10:23, Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
Yep. Thought tacit acknowledgment in first answer was clear, but like it was lost in translation as too often happens with email. My fault. Ad hominem anticipation was in response to the bombing comment.
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote: On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 10:14:57AM -0400, Michael Best wrote:
Here's the windup... and the pitch... It looks like it's gonna be an ad hominem! Best doesn't swing at it. Ball one.
In case you can't understand the question, are you this?: https://twitter.com/NatSecGeek According to: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/cryptome-ip-leak-john-young-michael-best/
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:38:47 -0400 Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
For me, "national security" is anything a nation needs to prosper and survive, including national medical care, education, ensuring a healthy job market and that there's infrastructure for everyone to get food, water, information, and from place to place.
I thought the reference to 'natsec' was derogative. Silly me. You think all those wonderful things for the 'nation' should be done by the government mafia? I
generally don't talk about that part because I only understand it in the broadest terms, and the best I can do is try to listen to the experts in that field
ANd who are those experts...?
and people who are smarter than me. And then there's separating policy from politics...
I hope that helps clarify some. Sorry again for assuming that your question was insincere/attacking.
Sent from my iPhone
The fucking wind is the biggest expert i know On Oct 10, 2015 11:34 PM, "Juan" <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:38:47 -0400 Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
For me, "national security" is anything a nation needs to prosper and survive, including national medical care, education, ensuring a healthy job market and that there's infrastructure for everyone to get food, water, information, and from place to place.
I thought the reference to 'natsec' was derogative. Silly me.
You think all those wonderful things for the 'nation' should be done by the government mafia?
I
generally don't talk about that part because I only understand it in the broadest terms, and the best I can do is try to listen to the experts in that field
ANd who are those experts...?
and people who are smarter than me. And then there's separating policy from politics...
I hope that helps clarify some. Sorry again for assuming that your question was insincere/attacking.
Sent from my iPhone
From: Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> Just had it pointed out to me "luser" was just internet slang, and not really an insult. Sorry I got a little defensive after that.
My recollection is that "luser" originally (40 years ago) was supposed to stand for "logged-in user" in Unix. But it presumably survived for its humorous connotations. Jim Bell
Does it help if I've been told that I have anti-social tendencies? ;-) Joking aside, I actually think I understand. I got so fed up with it that I took a break from social media, and added "More information, less social media" to my 'Twatter' (did I say that right??) when I did come back. I'm not even on MyFace anymore!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_qs_JM48ug On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 6:37 PM, coderman <coderman@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/10/15, Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
Yep...
Michael the first rule of cypherpunks is to admit nothing. especially use of social media ;)
On October 11, 2015 3:42:14 PM coderman <coderman@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/10/15, Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
Yep...
Michael the first rule of cypherpunks is to admit nothing. especially use of social media ;)
You all already know I don't use Twatter, Failbook et al (Gord knows I bitch about them enough), but I do have one or two idiotbox indulgences and one happens to be airing tonight. So may I say, in the most respectful way possible: Go JTrig yourselves - I'm out for the night, bitches! ;) -Shelley
On 10/11/2015 03:37 PM, coderman wrote:
On 10/10/15, Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
Yep... Michael the first rule of cypherpunks is to admit nothing. especially use of social media ;)
His use of a sig with all his social networks is one of the reasons I earlier said Best has some income-related motive, and that he's most likely dealing in 'future rewards'. After all BB is a contributor to the intercept and even that cheap ass street panhandler "Commander X" aka 'curbhugger chris' got a whole damn writeup in the New Yorker. RR
On October 12, 2015 9:31:40 AM Razer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
His use of a sig with all his social networks is one of the reasons I earlier said Best has some income-related motive, and that he's most likely dealing in 'future rewards'. After all BB is a contributor to the intercept and even that cheap ass street panhandler "Commander X" aka 'curbhugger chris' got a whole damn writeup in the New Yorker.
RR
Razor, what has gotten into you? The only social network sig block I've seen is this: --- Twitter <https://twitter.com/tbiehn> | LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn> | GitHub <http://github.com/tbiehn> | TravisBiehn.com <http://www.travisbiehn.com> | Google Plus <https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn> -- There has been a lot of noise on the list so I could have missed it, but I don't recall seeing Mike post anything like that (whereas the above is posted in each of Travis's replies, and I don't see you calling him out for it.) Georgi asked Mike if he was NatSecGeek, that's the only time I recall his Twatter being mentioned. If you're going to attack someone, at least get the facts straight. -S
*wiggles eyebrows* didn't think that would take this long to mention. Don't forget the conspicuous use of gmail and suspiciously legitimate names. Can't trust em. -Travis On Mon, Oct 12, 2015, 12:46 PM Shelley <shelley@misanthropia.org> wrote:
On October 12, 2015 9:31:40 AM Razer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
His use of a sig with all his social networks is one of the reasons I earlier said Best has some income-related motive, and that he's most likely dealing in 'future rewards'. After all BB is a contributor to the intercept and even that cheap ass street panhandler "Commander X" aka 'curbhugger chris' got a whole damn writeup in the New Yorker.
RR
Razor, what has gotten into you?
The only social network sig block I've seen is this:
--- Twitter <https://twitter.com/tbiehn> | LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn> | GitHub < http://github.com/tbiehn> | TravisBiehn.com <http://www.travisbiehn.com> | Google Plus <https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn> --
There has been a lot of noise on the list so I could have missed it, but I don't recall seeing Mike post anything like that (whereas the above is posted in each of Travis's replies, and I don't see you calling him out for it.) Georgi asked Mike if he was NatSecGeek, that's the only time I recall his Twatter being mentioned.
If you're going to attack someone, at least get the facts straight.
-S
On 10/12/2015 09:41 AM, Shelley wrote:
Razor, what has gotten into you?
The only social network sig block I've seen is this:
--- Twitter <https://twitter.com/tbiehn> | LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn> | GitHub <http://github.com/tbiehn> | TravisBiehn.com <http://www.travisbiehn.com> | Google Plus <https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn> --
There has been a lot of noise on the list so I could have missed it, but I don't recall seeing Mike post anything like that (whereas the above is posted in each of Travis's replies, and I don't see you calling him out for it.) Georgi asked Mike if he was NatSecGeek, that's the only time I recall his Twatter being mentioned.
If you're going to attack someone, at least get the facts straight.
-S
On October 12, 2015 9:31:40 AM Razer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
His use of a sig with all his social networks is one of the reasons I earlier said Best has some income-related motive, and that he's most likely dealing in 'future rewards'. After all BB is a contributor to the intercept and even that cheap ass street panhandler "Commander X" aka 'curbhugger chris' got a whole damn writeup in the New Yorker.
RR
Mea Culpa regarding the presumption it was Best's sig (it was an html post with links obscured) but NO apology at all for the presumption of 'future rewards' or Best being a "Bird dog in a snipe hunt' who's not cognizant of who the 'hunters' are... or perhaps he is.
participants (9)
-
Cari Machet -
coderman -
Georgi Guninski -
jim bell -
Juan -
Michael Best -
Razer -
Shelley -
Travis Biehn