Cryptome run by feds

[George Grantham]

On 2016-08-23 5:43 PM, jaun wrote:
> 
> Well that site needs to be taken down who responsible locked up. Posting
> CIA names and address, snowden and tons of other information putting
> people at Risk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> On Aug 23, 2016, 3:48 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:
> 
> 
>     On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 3:35 PM jaun < arpspoof at protonmail.com
>     <mailto:arpspoof at protonmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>         I had heard their keys had been compromised a while back..... jy
>         has been living large. Reason are obvious for assuming control
> 
> 
>     Seems prudent to always assume anything you read could potentially
>     be fake or otherwise manipulated to try to skew your opinion in a
>     direction someone wants to skew it in. In fact, doesn't that
>     describe pretty much all communication? Young or Natsios could just
>     as easily be modifying or filtering what they release based on their
>     own agenda. And even without controlling the site, the feds (or any
>     other government or group) could be intentionally leaking particular
>     information to bring about some desired result.
> 
>     But I don't think the potential compromise of a few PGP keys, which
>     we learned about because Young revoked them and announced it, or the
>     fact that a highly successful architect is "living large", is reason
>     in particular to believe the site is under the control of the feds.
> 
>         -------- Original Message --------
>         On Aug 23, 2016, 3:19 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:
> 
> 
>             On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:42 PM jaun <
>             arpspoof at protonmail.com <mailto:arpspoof at protonmail.com>>
>             wrote:
> 
> 
>                 Could anyone confirm or deny to that cryptome.org
>                 <http://cryptome.org> is being run by the feds and has
>                 been for a number of years.
> 
> 
>             I have no idea either way, though I'm interested to know
>             what you think their motive might be for doing so, and what
>             made you think it might be?
> 

Sounds like an extreme response to the advent of governmental
transparency at its most personal form.