4 ms·

I'll also add that BULLRUN clearly stated they were backdooring cryptographic standards. At that point, any NSA connection is suspect. Personally, I thought it

I'll also add that BULLRUN clearly stated they were backdooring cryptographic standards. At that point, any NSA connection is suspect. Personally, I thought it was brilliant attempt at a NOBUS attack. NOBUS is rarely achievable in practice while simultaneously being deniable.

tptacek 7y ago
I'll note as well that you've been on plenty of threads that contradict the account 'nullc provided here, but appear happy to let it go in the service of whatever weird point you're trying to make here. Gross.
- nickpsecurity 7y ago
  I was corroborating the backdoor point. I didn't read the rest of the comment cuz I was too busy going through a ton of threads in prolly 15 minutes. Also, I stayed rate limited voluntarely from way back to deal with being on social media too much. By default, I don't comment or elaborate most of the time in case more important stuff comes up needing my commemts. It did. There were two chances in that timeframe to do some good. One was a set of comments on robust software at 4-5pts with a two follow-ups in comments who plan to learn more. Another was necessary reminder banks can themselves cut funding off opponents like they did Wikileaks. That was 5pts with 2 supporting comments. Whatever you expected me to reply to was presumably going to use up my few comments to do less social good. I figured I'd throw one your way since you or anyone following this may not know why I don't comment as much in situations with lots of back and forth style discussion. It use up all my comments for probably nothing. Now you know why I didn't reply to several of yours done in that way. Just the rate limit doing its job, Sir. ;) Edit: I'm keeping everything but "sophistry" I edited out. Although sleepy as hell from 13hr days, I checked out your other comments in that thread. My memory is too bad to know what NSA programs you were calling or not calling in the past. That commenter might be full of shit about that. Original comment stands since it was just as a corroboration they were doing it regardless of what you said.

tptacek 7y ago

I'll note as well that you've been on plenty of threads that contradict the account 'nullc provided here, but appear happy to let it go in the service of whatever weird point you're trying to make here. Gross.

nickpsecurity 7y ago
I was corroborating the backdoor point. I didn't read the rest of the comment cuz I was too busy going through a ton of threads in prolly 15 minutes. Also, I stayed rate limited voluntarely from way back to deal with being on social media too much. By default, I don't comment or elaborate most of the time in case more important stuff comes up needing my commemts. It did. There were two chances in that timeframe to do some good. One was a set of comments on robust software at 4-5pts with a two follow-ups in comments who plan to learn more. Another was necessary reminder banks can themselves cut funding off opponents like they did Wikileaks. That was 5pts with 2 supporting comments. Whatever you expected me to reply to was presumably going to use up my few comments to do less social good. I figured I'd throw one your way since you or anyone following this may not know why I don't comment as much in situations with lots of back and forth style discussion. It use up all my comments for probably nothing. Now you know why I didn't reply to several of yours done in that way. Just the rate limit doing its job, Sir. ;) Edit: I'm keeping everything but "sophistry" I edited out. Although sleepy as hell from 13hr days, I checked out your other comments in that thread. My memory is too bad to know what NSA programs you were calling or not calling in the past. That commenter might be full of shit about that. Original comment stands since it was just as a corroboration they were doing it regardless of what you said.