Re: Swartz, Weev & radical libertarian lexicon (Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany - Aaron Swartz)
That is the charges against Aaron Swartz. http://docs.jstor.org/summary.html
That's a link to jstor. Irrelevant.
Well thanks James. Of course you didn't read your own source. "Meanwhile, on October 14, we asked MIT if they could identify the person responsible because we wanted to understand the downloader's motivation, to ensure the articles already downloaded would not be distributed," >ensure the articles already downloaded would not be distributed, >ensure the articles already downloaded would not be distributed, >ensure the articles already downloaded would not be distributed, See? That's called 'intelectual property'.
--On Wednesday, January 08, 2014 4:35 AM -0300 Juan Garofalo <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
That is the charges against Aaron Swartz. http://docs.jstor.org/summary.html
That's a link to jstor. Irrelevant.
And thank you again James. "Our monitoring systems did not alert us to accelerated downloading at MIT in November and most of December. By mid-December we had completed work on the redirect and, pending testing by JSTOR and by MIT, planned to implement the change in early January 2011. Later, we discovered that significant downloading had, in fact, continued during this time using a method that we did not detect. " So, the disruption was oh so bad...that they couldn't even detect it.
On 2014-01-08 17:44, Juan Garofalo wrote:
"Our monitoring systems did not alert us to accelerated downloading at MIT in November and most of December. By mid-December we had completed work on the redirect and, pending testing by JSTOR and by MIT, planned to implement the change in early January 2011. Later, we discovered that significant downloading had, in fact, continued during this time using a method that we did not detect. "
And if he had, like Snowden, kept a low profile, instead of flicking a towel in their faces, they never would have detected it.
James Donald wrote:
And if he had, like Snowden, kept a low profile, instead of flicking a towel in their faces, they never would have detected it.
Swartz bragged to a slew of people and was caught. Manning bragged to Lamo and was caught. Kiriakou bragged to a journalist and was caught. Sabu bragged to cohorts and was caught. Barrett Brown bragged to the world and was caught. Several Anonymouses bragged and were caught. And so on, dozens in just the last decade. Jim Bell bragged online and went to jail. So did Carl Johnson. Cops love braggarts, brag themselves to braggarts to keep prisons happylands. How many did not brag and remained uncaught? There are likely thousands of them. Many of those work with or emulate spies who do not brag as rule number 1. Snowden wanted to be identified, so it is alleged, and has been caught as intended. Is this nuts or what, vainglorious stupidity, or a commonplace ruse to get the enemy to expose its capabilities, or to flaunt one's own hybrid of authentic and fake to spook the enemy, to seel products, to boost budgets, to manipulate public opinion. The fundamental purpose of leaks. Keeping a non-existent profile is worth considering, along with a hundred pseudos. And putting a high-profile out there is what the Internet was intended to do, fake, sock, pseudo, anon, sucker. Not to be overlooked: the essence of comsec and crypto is deception. So laugh at the open source ruse on the way to the pokey.
Snowden wanted to be identified, so it is alleged, and has been caught as intended.
I think the reasoning with Snowden was not so much to brag as to make himself a hard-to-assassinate public figure. In his case, so few people could have acquired the documents he did, that it was a matter of (little) time before he was noticed to be conveniently absent as the shit hit the fan. If he wasn't in the public eye by that time, he'd have been disappeared and/or shot in short order.
Not to be overlooked: the essence of comsec and crypto is deception. So laugh at the open source ruse on the way to the pokey.
Funny that, I look at closed source as evidence of deception; without deception, there is no reason to hide the source. As long as they keys are secret, the protocol and code can be open, and should be if anyone's to trust that they're A) beneficent and B) competent. In the comparison of Cryptocat, which has tightened up radically because of code audits enabled by Open Sourcing it, to Bittorrent Sync (which used to advertise AES256 which was impossible with the keylength being shared, now advertises AES128, nobody knows how they implement it but a mistake like that screams "badly"), which is still unaudited snakeoil: BTSync boast massive bandwidth usage implying a significant user uptake, and moreso since the Snowden affair because of their snakeoil offering. So the Open Source guy gets all the attention, audits and improvement, while the closed source guys get no attention, no audits, and finally notice internally that they're offering AES256 when they can't physically accomplish it with the keylengths. I'll take Open, thanks. At least I can see what's wrong if it errs. On 08/01/14 12:55, John Young wrote:
James Donald wrote:
And if he had, like Snowden, kept a low profile, instead of flicking a towel in their faces, they never would have detected it.
Swartz bragged to a slew of people and was caught. Manning bragged to Lamo and was caught. Kiriakou bragged to a journalist and was caught. Sabu bragged to cohorts and was caught. Barrett Brown bragged to the world and was caught. Several Anonymouses bragged and were caught. And so on, dozens in just the last decade.
Jim Bell bragged online and went to jail. So did Carl Johnson. Cops love braggarts, brag themselves to braggarts to keep prisons happylands.
How many did not brag and remained uncaught? There are likely thousands of them. Many of those work with or emulate spies who do not brag as rule number 1.
Snowden wanted to be identified, so it is alleged, and has been caught as intended.
Is this nuts or what, vainglorious stupidity, or a commonplace ruse to get the enemy to expose its capabilities, or to flaunt one's own hybrid of authentic and fake to spook the enemy, to seel products, to boost budgets, to manipulate public opinion. The fundamental purpose of leaks.
Keeping a non-existent profile is worth considering, along with a hundred pseudos.
And putting a high-profile out there is what the Internet was intended to do, fake, sock, pseudo, anon, sucker.
Not to be overlooked: the essence of comsec and crypto is deception. So laugh at the open source ruse on the way to the pokey.
Did you read today (NYT) that one of the founders of EFF, Mitch Kapor, was a first investor in a leading ubiqutious camera spying venture to put in the hands of everybody what once was used only by spies and cops? Everybody is TLA, TLA is everybody. Snowden, allegedly, gave docs to a world-class braggart, Greenwald, and to two or three much less loud-mouthed but in the professional bragging business, Poitras and Gellman, documentary tout and national security tout, respectively. Thereafter the tout bragging industry kicked into high gear and quickly overwhelmed whatever Snowden might have intended by their own fabricated, doctored, hyperbolied super-touted headlined versions of his intentions, but more so, in their own economic interest, whipping up a frenzy about their noble intentions to rake in the loot after years of nearing bankruptcy (the forlorn solo journo, Greenwald and Poitras profiles too.) Greenwald in particular bellows excessively, as a lawyer must, about his obligation to a pact with Snowden, and lately his much greater jury-pandering about his pact with Omidyar. His recent long bloviation on his blog is purely promotional bragging characteristic of the hustler forever crowing about its prowess, whining about attacks, disdaining critics with puerile condescension. Omidyar and Bezos among others, have been sucked into the ultra-bragging game, large, inebriated with unquenchable wealth accumulation, after years of supporting highly vainglorious and dispensible NGO investments, not a few of which have failed due to exaggerated brochure-toute expectations which could not be met but were invented losers to be run into the ground for the tax benefits of ultra-concentrated wealth. This the exact model of the Firstlook venture, a combo of high-profit media industry and simulated "NGO" journalism to exempt the taxable profits. Would that work here. Youbetcha. The very founding of cypherpunks employed that model and sustains it to solicit and amass data of crypto-freedom-drunk users for marketing peculiarly faulty products across the political spectrum from faux privacy to faux security. Https everywhere, har, Tor, har, WikiLeaks, har, Cryptome, spit, and what have you now, Snowden. Braggarts always have noble purposes, bragging about nobility is what sustains the illusion of superiority. And glosses the nobility of great wealth or depthless desire for it. Significant variations of braggardy, from loud to quiet. overstatement to understatement. Chump version: "needs killing." Chimp version: Snowden is a hero, or traitor. Wimp version: more leaks by others, none by me. Gimp version: this is nothing new. Limp version: don't insult people here, don't discuss politics, message deleted by moderator. Blimp version: this forum is unmoderated. At 09:15 AM 1/8/2014, you wrote:
Snowden wanted to be identified, so it is alleged, and has been caught as intended.
I think the reasoning with Snowden was not so much to brag as to make himself a hard-to-assassinate public figure. In his case, so few people could have acquired the documents he did, that it was a matter of (little) time before he was noticed to be conveniently absent as the shit hit the fan.
If he wasn't in the public eye by that time, he'd have been disappeared and/or shot in short order.
Not to be overlooked: the essence of comsec and crypto is deception. So laugh at the open source ruse on the way to the pokey.
Funny that, I look at closed source as evidence of deception; without deception, there is no reason to hide the source. As long as they keys are secret, the protocol and code can be open, and should be if anyone's to trust that they're A) beneficent and B) competent.
In the comparison of Cryptocat, which has tightened up radically because of code audits enabled by Open Sourcing it, to Bittorrent Sync (which used to advertise AES256 which was impossible with the keylength being shared, now advertises AES128, nobody knows how they implement it but a mistake like that screams "badly"), which is still unaudited snakeoil: BTSync boast massive bandwidth usage implying a significant user uptake, and moreso since the Snowden affair because of their snakeoil offering. So the Open Source guy gets all the attention, audits and improvement, while the closed source guys get no attention, no audits, and finally notice internally that they're offering AES256 when they can't physically accomplish it with the keylengths.
I'll take Open, thanks. At least I can see what's wrong if it errs.
On 08/01/14 12:55, John Young wrote:
James Donald wrote:
And if he had, like Snowden, kept a low profile, instead of flicking a towel in their faces, they never would have detected it.
Swartz bragged to a slew of people and was caught. Manning bragged to Lamo and was caught. Kiriakou bragged to a journalist and was caught. Sabu bragged to cohorts and was caught. Barrett Brown bragged to the world and was caught. Several Anonymouses bragged and were caught. And so on, dozens in just the last decade.
Jim Bell bragged online and went to jail. So did Carl Johnson. Cops love braggarts, brag themselves to braggarts to keep prisons happylands.
How many did not brag and remained uncaught? There are likely thousands of them. Many of those work with or emulate spies who do not brag as rule number 1.
Snowden wanted to be identified, so it is alleged, and has been caught as intended.
Is this nuts or what, vainglorious stupidity, or a commonplace ruse to get the enemy to expose its capabilities, or to flaunt one's own hybrid of authentic and fake to spook the enemy, to seel products, to boost budgets, to manipulate public opinion. The fundamental purpose of leaks.
Keeping a non-existent profile is worth considering, along with a hundred pseudos.
And putting a high-profile out there is what the Internet was intended to do, fake, sock, pseudo, anon, sucker.
Not to be overlooked: the essence of comsec and crypto is deception. So laugh at the open source ruse on the way to the pokey.
I love it, pure poetry :) Go JYA! (reformatted slightly) On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 10:29:26AM -0500, John Young wrote:
[...] Significant variations of braggardy, from loud to quiet. overstatement to understatement. Chump version: "needs killing." Chimp version: Snowden is a hero, or traitor. Wimp version: more leaks by others, none by me. Gimp version: this is nothing new. Limp version: don't insult people here, don't discuss politics, message deleted by moderator. Blimp version: this forum is unmoderated.
Adam
Doesnt Surprise me, During the original publication cycle of PGP an effort was made to reach out to mitch kapor and john perry barlow for aid from EFF but Jim Bidsoz was already there with his lies that PGP was stolen/purloined code and thus mitch/perry washed his hands of PGP. FUCK THEM.. FUCK MITCH KAPOR, FUCK JOHN PERRY BARLOW!! and yes this list and so called movement(HAH!) was founded on Media Manipulation/Braggarts/BS if you will) of the highest order, It even got a greater push after we viewed an Inforwar Con V presentation in 1994 called Red Teaming(it was an information attack on the structures of the press(propaganda with a twist)). And given Internet Sockpuppets :) its remarkably easy to be ones one greek Chorus(and press army).. in fact Anonymous vs the rootkit.com founder was over "greek chorus" type of sockpuppet software that the firm was developing , and while javascript turing scripts did pose initial problems for same(sockpuppet software) when facebook and others tried implementing them, call outs to the "mechnical turk" and later to the Selenium plugin nowadays for the amateur efforts quickly solved that technical issue. Anonymous remailers have also been remarkably effective in hoodwinking both the press corp and the public and even members of this list to swallow both the malware nostrums(mcafee and others)(hook) and later PGP/other crypto/security crap (line and sinker). This kind treatment of the truth was drove our first list foil Detweiler stark raving bonkers and sent him raving on the list about tentacles of MEDUSA especially after list participants picked up and started remailer bombing him with a procmail script that someone thoughtfully published to the list that would email him several (n+1)slightly different copies of his own posted mail each time he posted. Detweilers final demise from his position as one of the privileged Sysadmins at the University when he carelessly replied to a type one remailer block that contained his direct supervisors spouse's(wife) email address among others(the chancellors of the university email addresses were included in that block.) thinking that he was instead replying to one of his sockpuppet harassers(I believe it was tentacle #69 who copped to this). Badda bing Badda boom,, all 83 email addresses he had been abusing from the university position where he was employed were gone in 1 hour etc...as was his job and privileged position from where he abused the rest of the list. David Sternlight was made of much stronger stuff :) ... Lance Detweiler was MUCH more careless and thought he was one of the rulers of us.. I LOVE this topic John!! GH ps more on earlier list protagonists/propagandists later...statute of limitations for all of these early list antics is of course LONG expired.. pss if Lance Detweiler had NOT stepped up we would have had to create him as a SOCKPUPPET.. more on the NOT lamented Detweilers ravings: https://www.google.com/search?q=tentacles+of+MEDUSA&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=fflb#channel=fflb&q=tentacles+of+MEDUSA+lance+detweiler&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official. On 1/8/14 7:29 AM, John Young wrote:
Did you read today (NYT) that one of the founders of EFF, Mitch Kapor, was a first investor in a leading ubiqutious camera spying venture to put in the hands of everybody what once was used only by spies and cops? Everybody is TLA, TLA is everybody.
Snowden, allegedly, gave docs to a world-class braggart, Greenwald, and to two or three much less loud-mouthed but in the professional bragging business, Poitras and Gellman, documentary tout and national security tout, respectively.
Thereafter the tout bragging industry kicked into high gear and quickly overwhelmed whatever Snowden might have intended by their own fabricated, doctored, hyperbolied super-touted headlined versions of his intentions, but more so, in their own economic interest, whipping up a frenzy about their noble intentions to rake in the loot after years of nearing bankruptcy (the forlorn solo journo, Greenwald and Poitras profiles too.)
Greenwald in particular bellows excessively, as a lawyer must, about his obligation to a pact with Snowden, and lately his much greater jury-pandering about his pact with Omidyar. His recent long bloviation on his blog is purely promotional bragging characteristic of the hustler forever crowing about its prowess, whining about attacks, disdaining critics with puerile condescension.
Omidyar and Bezos among others, have been sucked into the ultra-bragging game, large, inebriated with unquenchable wealth accumulation, after years of supporting highly vainglorious and dispensible NGO investments, not a few of which have failed due to exaggerated brochure-toute expectations which could not be met but were invented losers to be run into the ground for the tax benefits of ultra-concentrated wealth. This the exact model of the Firstlook venture, a combo of high-profit media industry and simulated "NGO" journalism to exempt the taxable profits.
Would that work here. Youbetcha. The very founding of cypherpunks employed that model and sustains it to solicit and amass data of crypto-freedom-drunk users for marketing peculiarly faulty products across the political spectrum from faux privacy to faux security. Https everywhere, har, Tor, har, WikiLeaks, har, Cryptome, spit, and what have you now, Snowden.
Braggarts always have noble purposes, bragging about nobility is what sustains the illusion of superiority. And glosses the nobility of great wealth or depthless desire for it.
Significant variations of braggardy, from loud to quiet. overstatement to understatement. Chump version: "needs killing." Chimp version: Snowden is a hero, or traitor. Wimp version: more leaks by others, none by me. Gimp version: this is nothing new. Limp version: don't insult people here, don't discuss politics, message deleted by moderator. Blimp version: this forum is unmoderated.
At 09:15 AM 1/8/2014, you wrote:
Snowden wanted to be identified, so it is alleged, and has been caught as intended.
I think the reasoning with Snowden was not so much to brag as to make himself a hard-to-assassinate public figure. In his case, so few people could have acquired the documents he did, that it was a matter of (little) time before he was noticed to be conveniently absent as the shit hit the fan.
If he wasn't in the public eye by that time, he'd have been disappeared and/or shot in short order.
Not to be overlooked: the essence of comsec and crypto is deception. So laugh at the open source ruse on the way to the pokey.
Funny that, I look at closed source as evidence of deception; without deception, there is no reason to hide the source. As long as they keys are secret, the protocol and code can be open, and should be if anyone's to trust that they're A) beneficent and B) competent.
In the comparison of Cryptocat, which has tightened up radically because of code audits enabled by Open Sourcing it, to Bittorrent Sync (which used to advertise AES256 which was impossible with the keylength being shared, now advertises AES128, nobody knows how they implement it but a mistake like that screams "badly"), which is still unaudited snakeoil: BTSync boast massive bandwidth usage implying a significant user uptake, and moreso since the Snowden affair because of their snakeoil offering. So the Open Source guy gets all the attention, audits and improvement, while the closed source guys get no attention, no audits, and finally notice internally that they're offering AES256 when they can't physically accomplish it with the keylengths.
I'll take Open, thanks. At least I can see what's wrong if it errs.
On 08/01/14 12:55, John Young wrote:
James Donald wrote:
And if he had, like Snowden, kept a low profile, instead of flicking a towel in their faces, they never would have detected it.
Swartz bragged to a slew of people and was caught. Manning bragged to Lamo and was caught. Kiriakou bragged to a journalist and was caught. Sabu bragged to cohorts and was caught. Barrett Brown bragged to the world and was caught. Several Anonymouses bragged and were caught. And so on, dozens in just the last decade.
Jim Bell bragged online and went to jail. So did Carl Johnson. Cops love braggarts, brag themselves to braggarts to keep prisons happylands.
How many did not brag and remained uncaught? There are likely thousands of them. Many of those work with or emulate spies who do not brag as rule number 1.
Snowden wanted to be identified, so it is alleged, and has been caught as intended.
Is this nuts or what, vainglorious stupidity, or a commonplace ruse to get the enemy to expose its capabilities, or to flaunt one's own hybrid of authentic and fake to spook the enemy, to seel products, to boost budgets, to manipulate public opinion. The fundamental purpose of leaks.
Keeping a non-existent profile is worth considering, along with a hundred pseudos.
And putting a high-profile out there is what the Internet was intended to do, fake, sock, pseudo, anon, sucker.
Not to be overlooked: the essence of comsec and crypto is deception. So laugh at the open source ruse on the way to the pokey.
-- Tentacle #99 ecc public key curve p160 ;9C~b~)3)cp0d!?C1JIVI=tI( Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.’
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:22 AM, gwen hastings <gwen@cypherpunks.to> wrote:
... This kind treatment of the truth was drove our first list foil Detweiler stark raving bonkers and sent him raving on the list about tentacles of MEDUSA especially after list participants picked up and started remailer bombing him with a procmail script that someone thoughtfully published to the list that would email him several (n+1)slightly different copies of his own posted mail each time he posted.
Detweilers final demise from his position as one of the privileged Sysadmins at the University when he carelessly replied to a type one remailer block that contained his direct supervisors spouse's(wife) email address among others(the chancellors of the university email addresses were included in that block.) thinking that he was instead replying to one of his sockpuppet harassers(I believe it was tentacle #69 who copped to this).
Badda bing Badda boom,, all 83 email addresses he had been abusing from the university position where he was employed were gone in 1 hour etc...as was his job and privileged position from where he abused the rest of the list.
the best kinds of drama! ... when does cypherpunks the movie come out??
On 1/8/14, 5:10 PM, coderman wrote:
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:22 AM, gwen hastings <gwen@cypherpunks.to> wrote:
... This kind treatment of the truth was drove our first list foil Detweiler stark raving bonkers and sent him raving on the list about tentacles of MEDUSA especially after list participants picked up and started remailer bombing him with a procmail script that someone thoughtfully published to the list that would email him several (n+1)slightly different copies of his own posted mail each time he posted.
Detweilers final demise from his position as one of the privileged Sysadmins at the University when he carelessly replied to a type one remailer block that contained his direct supervisors spouse's(wife) email address among others(the chancellors of the university email addresses were included in that block.) thinking that he was instead replying to one of his sockpuppet harassers(I believe it was tentacle #69 who copped to this).
Badda bing Badda boom,, all 83 email addresses he had been abusing from the university position where he was employed were gone in 1 hour etc...as was his job and privileged position from where he abused the rest of the list.
the best kinds of drama!
... when does cypherpunks the movie come out??
Ah Detweiler... I mention him to Internet newbies (anyone online after 1994) once in a while to blank stares. What an implosion. But I missed the episode below, so thanks for that! We really need an FAQ on varieties of madness: Detweiler Tea Party Saturate GOPping mad Faux News Skewed Reality Tin Foiler Crystal Crank Drug Addled Nonsensical NSA Paranoid (wait, that's just reality now) Zion refugee Microsoftie (Apologies for the cross-post.) sdw
On 2014-01-08 17:35, Juan Garofalo wrote:
"Meanwhile, on October 14, we asked MIT if they could identify the person responsible because we wanted to understand the downloader's motivation, to ensure the articles already downloaded would not be distributed,"
MIT, however. made no real effort to identify the person responsible until he brought their network to a grinding halt. Aaron Swartz was arrested for pissing off the sysadmins, and he pissed off the sysadmins by busting their wiring in their wiring closet. The cause of his arrest, and the charges against him, were damaging interference with other people's physical property.
participants (8)
-
Adam Back -
Cathal Garvey -
coderman -
gwen hastings -
James A. Donald -
John Young -
Juan Garofalo -
Stephen Williams