3 ms·

It has never been discovered to exist. If it’s actually good it’ll defeat attempts to uncover it. An even better cell structure would be one where the cells don

It has never been discovered to exist. If it’s actually good it’ll defeat attempts to uncover it. An even better cell structure would be one where the cells don’t even know that other cells exist.

dragonwriter 4y ago
> An even better cell structure would be one where the cells don’t even know that other cells exist. You can’t have a network with more than one cell where no one outside of the cell knows that it exists, and without those people using a communication method to people in the cell that at least one person in the cell knows exists. And when you minimize down to the minimum contact, the network is very much non-resilient: its hard to discover and roll-up, but (especially if the cells are doing high-risk functions, which is probably why you want to do it) its also easy to disintegrate accidentally, even without being discovered and rolled-up.
- zimpenfish 4y ago
  I think you -could- generate a network of cells where cells are independent and the communicator doesn't know the cells - broadcast your radicalisation on radio and let the cells organise themselves. At least one cell member knows about the communication method but since it's broadcast, I think that's safe (in this context.) But practically there's a whole bunch of problems as you say - you've no idea how many - if any - cells exist, they can't coordinate on which one picks up a particular target, the communicator is obviously at risk from being tracked down, how do you tell people where the radio broadcast is, authorities can obviously listen in once they've found the broadcast, etc.
  - JPLeRouzic 4y ago
    > "and the communicator doesn't know the cells - broadcast your radicalisation on radio and let the cells organise themselves. At least one cell member knows about the communication method" Couldn't be done by sending messages encrypted with private key and the cells decode it with public key? Then the problem is: How to trust public keys to have been provided by the "right" correspondent, and not someone from another gang or law enforcement?
- cookieperson 4y ago
  Not trying to start an argument because I think your statements are mostly correct. I do think you can have autonomous actors inside of cell systems that can compose an entire cell. Especially at the lowest levels. Cell systems have order, but only where the most risk is imposed. Lesser risk, less order. Infact, too much order imposes far more risk.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> An even better cell structure would be one where the cells don’t even know that other cells exist. You can’t have a network with more than one cell where no one outside of the cell knows that it exists, and without those people using a communication method to people in the cell that at least one person in the cell knows exists. And when you minimize down to the minimum contact, the network is very much non-resilient: its hard to discover and roll-up, but (especially if the cells are doing high-risk functions, which is probably why you want to do it) its also easy to disintegrate accidentally, even without being discovered and rolled-up.

zimpenfish 4y ago
I think you -could- generate a network of cells where cells are independent and the communicator doesn't know the cells - broadcast your radicalisation on radio and let the cells organise themselves. At least one cell member knows about the communication method but since it's broadcast, I think that's safe (in this context.) But practically there's a whole bunch of problems as you say - you've no idea how many - if any - cells exist, they can't coordinate on which one picks up a particular target, the communicator is obviously at risk from being tracked down, how do you tell people where the radio broadcast is, authorities can obviously listen in once they've found the broadcast, etc.
- JPLeRouzic 4y ago
  > "and the communicator doesn't know the cells - broadcast your radicalisation on radio and let the cells organise themselves. At least one cell member knows about the communication method" Couldn't be done by sending messages encrypted with private key and the cells decode it with public key? Then the problem is: How to trust public keys to have been provided by the "right" correspondent, and not someone from another gang or law enforcement?
cookieperson 4y ago
Not trying to start an argument because I think your statements are mostly correct. I do think you can have autonomous actors inside of cell systems that can compose an entire cell. Especially at the lowest levels. Cell systems have order, but only where the most risk is imposed. Lesser risk, less order. Infact, too much order imposes far more risk.