4 ms·

1. It would need to be a _very_ stupid adversary.

• snowwrestler 6y ago
  This type of disinformation has a history; look at so-called "red mercury" during the Cold War. An adversary does not need to actually believe everything you say, in order to decide that it's worth looking into what you're trying to hide. This distracts some amount of resources from other investigations, and potentially exposes some of their assets if you've built artificial channels for them to follow. On the other hand, it's also potentially a great way to find the credible/gullible folks within your adversary, to which you could feed other misinformation later on.