sweetbitter

6 ms·

1.
by sweetbitter 3y ago
You could just use onion services to to hide the server, and store some backup onion services (whose private keys are kept offline) within the application or its files. When the server goes down due to seizure, you spin up a new one under t
2.
by sweetbitter 3y ago
Well, you could try something like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36672217
3.
by sweetbitter 3y ago
If you just want to track a few individuals... Enumerate all those who possess the data. Now look for data brokers that they deal with (as commenter korse said) and recurse. Find all the employees of every company in question. Muster a few
4.
by sweetbitter 3y ago
> It helps to think of it this way, if it touches your phone or the internet in any way, it's part of the public record. No matter what app you were using. So be cognizant of that, it can come back to bite you 10 years later in ways
5.
by sweetbitter 3y ago
If you're serious about it, check out this article: https://www.vice.com/en/article/nepxbz/i-gave-a-bounty-hunte... What you need to do is pick an entity that has the information you desire, and recursiv
6.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Not quite. The guy who wrote Tor can be clearly seen to have been studying a lot of these things in the later 90s, and it was pretty much always public, but only developed after he got the Navy to get him an NSF grant. Hell, in one slide he
7.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
> If someone wants you compromised, you will get compromised, it only matters how many resources they are willing to throw at you. Wants who compromised? What are they going to do against people who use no pseudonym and never originate f
8.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
For very obvious reasons you don't need to run any nodes, craft any malware, or scrutinize a target's layer 3+ OPSEC, in order to break Tor. You simply go to tier 1 ISPs and buy up IP datagram headers going to/from entry node
9.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
> can just wait for you to make a mistake. Anyhow, if one slip-up is enough, you're doing it wrong. Imagine you were a mad scientist testing out a jetpack- you are confident yes? But I imagine you would feel more confident with a bu
10.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Well, what about Monero? That has low fees and is pretty reliable and private.
11.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Thanks for the advice. I use synchronous media like chat protocols much more often, and was blind to this- and yep, it does seem like the primary objection to that argument was born out of a flawed understanding of the analogy.
12.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Runtime checker as in the guys who are eager to correct the terminology? Hahahaha
13.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
> Cryptocurrencies are a qualitatively new thing humanity has never had to deal with ever, no matter how insistent are cryptocurrency aficionados’ in calling it merely “a digital version of cash”. This serves their wallets, by suspending
14.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
> Kinda sorta. Wasn't that back when people assumed cryptocurrency provided the same kind of privacy that cryptography does, which was (in retrospect), pretty dumb? Well, there are currencies that do provide strong anonymity, so no?
15.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
> The entire purpose of cryptocurrencies are to avoid those things, so while you technically could have them with a cryptocurrency, you would end up with no good reason to have a cryptocurrency at all. I will substitute a word from your
16.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Is it 'illegitimate' that I read all of my preferred news content and chat on the internet using Tor?
17.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Well, you should consider what exactly would be hacked. Banks don't really hold huge amounts of gold or physical cash anymore, most of what they have is 'credit' and debt. Cryptographic currencies are not credit, they are the
18.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Looks like it's back online, anon.
19.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Must we pursue this path of suicide? Oh, well, I will make sure I enjoy my life as much as I can. We may be the last generation to enjoy life at all.
20.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
You only think in words?
21.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Several kilometers of range seems tolerable with enough collaboration. I do wonder though, whether mesh networks for bidirectional (synchronous) comms are a good idea in hostile environments. It seems too easy to map out the positions of th
22.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
They seem to be online via Tor, but have temporarily taken down whatever proxy/server their .net domain points to for the last ~week for reasons. It's likely that they will put their stuff back online though. And before that they
23.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
I was speculating that the notion of a laser-based mesh network could deserve more attention, if it is economically viable. That seems like a better choice than something like WiFi, because you do not have to share a channel with huge amoun
24.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Then your business is not actually scalable.
25.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
NOP
26.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Maybe it is too much data for devices that have to share a channel. But lasers (think: old TV remotes using infrared) do not have to share channels with each other, and can be very high-bandwidth and more difficult to snoop on indeed. Mirro
27.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
Presumably channers seeking to claim the glory of a 1666666666 GET.
28.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
How can Chrome be considered secure if its "security" entails the equivalent of giving a shell on the PC of all users to a shady corporation like Google?
29.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
"Well regulated" in this context means well-equipped, does it not?
30.
by sweetbitter 4y ago
For a moment I thought I was on Lainchan. Anyway, does the set of people that never eventually learns how to anonymous email addresses meaningfully intersect with the set of people that will ever learn any meaningful amount of knowledge abo

More ›