8 ms·
This World of Ours (2014) [pdf]
- samlinnfer 1y agoThis will always be my favourite Mikens essay (The Slow Winter): https://www.usenix.org/system/files/1309_14-17_mickens.pdf https://www.usenix.org/system/files/1309_14-17_mickens.pdf
- chao- 1y agoMine as well. I have a fond memory of being at a party where someone had the idea to do dramatic readings of various Mickens Usenix papers. Even just doing partial readings, it was slow going, lots of pauses to recover from overwhelming laughter. When the reading of The Slow Winter got to "THE MAGMA PEOPLE ARE WAITING FOR OUR MISTAKES", we had to stop because someone had laughed so hard they threw up. Not in an awful way, but enough to give us a pause in the action, and to decide we couldn't go on. Good times.
- eeeficus 1y agoSounds like you found nerd heaven. I couldn't imagine a situation like yours in my world! :)
- purplehat_ 1y agoBit of an aside, but I'm wondering in what city this was in. I'm going to be job hunting soon and I was planning to prioritize the Bay Area because that's the only place I've encountered a decent density of people like this, but maybe I'm setting my sights too short.
- chao- 1y agoHouston, Texas. There are nerds everywhere.
- isoprophlex 1y ago> [...] it’s pretty clear that compilers are a thing of the past, and the next generation of processors will run English-level pseudocode directly. hilarious AND scary levels of prescient writing...
- purplehat_ 1y agoIf people want to read all six, here they are! https://mickens.seas.harvard.edu/wisdom-james-mickens https://mickens.seas.harvard.edu/wisdom-james-mickens My favorite is The Night Watch.
- tuzemec 1y agoSomewhat related video: https://vimeo.com/95066828 https://vimeo.com/95066828
- optimalsolver 1y agoI think fighting Israel is kind of a glimpse into what trying to fight a malevolent AGI will be like. Expect to lose in highly surprising ways.
- speedgoose 1y agoI don't know, driving a big truck into AWS' us-east-1 power supply section sounds more than enough to take down internet for a while.
- lesser-shadow 1y ago[dead]
- ta1243 1y agoI would hope that data centre has multiple power supplies from multiple locations - as well as UPS and on site generators, certainly mine do. However given AWS is so complex (which is required because they want to be a gatekeeping platform) leading the uptime to struggle to match a decent home setup, I'm not sure. I'm sure there's no 6 figure bonus for checking the generators are working, but a rounded corner on a button on an admin page?
- WJW 1y agoOf course, but that's the point. Actual AGI wouldn't need to limit itself pointlessly in ways that would make it obvious to every internet rando how to hit it. Just as you cannot kill an intelligence agency with a single strike, it could distribute itself over many secret locations.
- red-iron-pine 1y agoITT: we've never spent time around ashburn va data centers. most have big heavy barriers and multiple bollards and fences. some of the reston va data centers have big glorious planters out front and weird angles to walk up to the mantrap -- to prevent trucks from driving through. the generators usually have some sort of fence or bollards, and most are on multiple power sources from the local and airport grids. source: used to manage nova data centers and did plenty of attack surface mapping. the truck-through-front-door approach is consistently considered.
- realFredWilson 1y ago[flagged]
- lexicality 1y agoBought a pager recently?
- tsimionescu 1y agoJust because you don't like the reputation that the Mossad has both gotten and created for itself, doesn't mean that playing on that reputation is in any way antisemitic. It's fair perhaps to consider it anti-Israel, given that the Mossad is am agency of the state. And the Mossad really has a terrible reputation, both for efficiency and for being relatively bloody. The assassinations of the nazi officials who had fled to South America are a founding myth (and a positive one, of course - no one should cry for spilled literal nazi regime blood). For a more recent example, you have the campaign of booby-trapped Hezbollah devices that killed or injured quite a few Lebanese civilians along with various militia members, which the Mossad and Israeli government more generally gleefully talked about. You'll find far fewer similar stories about the CIA or even GRU - at least from any current events (e.g. the CIA's most heinous actions were usually only talked about years later, like their campaigns of terror in Latin America). The GRU's operations are also less talked about, no doubt to a great extent because it is an adversary, and we don't want to talk about how good our adversaries are.
- george916a 1y ago[flagged]
- tsimionescu 1y agoRidiculous on the face of it.
- kotaKat 1y agoInteresting we get these sudden 2 to 3 month old accounts with no comment history popping into these threads to start stirring the pot.
- broodbucket 1y agoRemember, you don't have to be unhackable, just sufficiently unimportant to not be worth burning any novel capability on
- INTPenis 1y agoThat's right, just keep your head down, smile and nod, do your job and nothing will ever go wrong. /s
- brigandish 1y agoA more charitable view would be to act like a zebra in a herd of zebra rather than a zebra in a herd of horses.
- IAmBroom 1y agoCharitable, but also privileged. Many people only have the option of looking like a cow in a cattle yard.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- GreenWatermelon 1y agoYou /s but this is actually valid advice for someone who just wants to get by in life and is content.
- energy123 1y agoDownvoted, but so much evil is caused by people due to their distorted yet sincerely believed moral virtues. Not due to an absence of morality but because of it. Whatever you have in your mind as the image of quintessential evil is probably caused by those people's sincerely held moral system, a moral system they believed in as strongly as you do yours. So people who just live their lives and do not grasp on external change are fine by me.
- edu 1y agoThat's a fun take, similar to the classic XKCD 538: Security. https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
- hshdhdhehd 1y agoThe 4096 bits just stops it being so easy to surveil you that it is hyper-automated. So there is some use. The $5 wrench needs a million dollar operation to get that guy to your house.
- b112 1y agoOh come on, that's way over budget! Every time I managed such an operation, we'd just rent a van and... uh, I mean, um, I heard it costs less. <NO CARRIER>
- hshdhdhehd 1y agoIts a million dollars to the defense contractor who lobbies for more wrench attacks.
- ta1243 1y agoDepends how strong the protections of your civil society is, but it doesn't cost $1m to send a goon with a crowbar or shotgun. Sure that doesn't scale, but if you are a target you're screwed
- hshdhdhehd 1y agoThe $1m is the stuff they did to the point where they knew where to send the goon. If you are a target you are screwed. But clever crypto isn't useless.
- sigwinch 1y agoProbably used to average over $1m. Nowadays, those operations (polonium, novachuk, expending expensive KGB resources) send a signal. Otherwise, swatting your home while they drain your wallets; or threatening to swat; quite inexpensive.
- eirini1 1y agoNever agreed with this logic. For a lot of people (anyone that does political activism of some sort for example) the threat model can be a lot more nuanced. It might not be Mossad or the CIA gunning for you, specifically, but it might police searching you and your friend's laptops or phones. It might be burglars targetting the office of the small organization you have and the small servers you have running there.
- rini17 1y agoYou did not write what you actually disagree with....
- turboturbo 1y agoThe false dichotomy
- rini17 1y agoThe dichotomy between what average people(including political activists) can actually handle and stuff proposed by security researchers is real.
- anonym29 1y agoThe idea that average people can't handle incremental improvements like a password manager, MFA, full disk encryption, etc is unhealthy infantilization of people who are entirely capable of understanding the concepts, the benefits, the risks they address, and appreciating the benefits of them. Most people just don't care enough until after they're hacked, at which point they care just enough to wish they'd done something more previously, which is just shy of enough to start doing something differently going forward. It's not that normies are too stupid figure this out, it's that they make risk accept decisions on risks they don't thoroughly understand or care enough about to want to understand. My personal observation is that the concept of even thinking about potential future technology risks at all (let alone considering changing behavior to mitigate those risks) seems to represent an almost an almost pathological level of proactive preparation to normies, the same way that preppers building bunkers with years of food and water storage look to the rest of us.
- megous 1y agoNot sure what audience he is talking to. Experts deal with a lot more issues that sit between choosing a good password + not falling for phishing and "giving up because mossad". The terminology that he sprinkles about suggests the audience is experts.
- rini17 1y agoThe article actually addresses this -- that all these extra issues are not manageable for mere mortals anyway and/or perfectly spherical cows are involved.
- impossiblefork 1y agoThe Mossad part is a very silly element of the text. Many organizations have to defend against US intelligence, Israeli intelligence etc., and I'm sure, that they, with the exception of some very terrible countries with a lot of incompetence or full of disloyal people likely to become infiltrators, are quite successful. Actual security is possible even against the most powerful and determined adversaries, and it's possible even for you.
- IAmBroom 1y agoWell, data security. Right up until the wetware is included.
- impossiblefork 1y agoI think, a lot of people imagine these people as very capable, and they think of things like those pagers etc., but when I think of them I think of the Lillehammer affair and a bunch of other similarly silly business, so I'm much less impressed with them, feeling that they're basically silly people. There's so many cock-ups etc. that you can read about Wikipedia that I don't understand why people hold these people highly and imagine them to be so able. They simply aren't.
- lifestyleguru 1y agoThen how it's possible Mossad didn't know about what had happened on 7 October 2023?
- INTPenis 1y agoThis is exactly the type of comment that will get you mossad'd.
- lifestyleguru 1y agook I'll keep you updated, but I don't own any real estate they could "de-Hamasify"
- ozirus 1y agoDomestic intel = Shin Bet, not Mossad
- b112 1y agoThe same way the US didn't know about 9/11. Intelligence failures. (Portions of the US intelligence apparatus knew, but that knowledge didn't transition into action)
- energy123 1y agoIsrael's intelligence services (not Mossad) did collect valid signals, such as sim cards in Gaza being swapped out for Israel sim cards, but it was ignored as another false positive. What the public don't see are all the false positives (like many drills for an attack that don't materialize) that drown out valid signals when the attack is actually going to happen. There's also hesitancy to act on signals because drills are used to expose intelligence. It's one of the many asymmetries that changes when you are the defender versus the attacker. As the defender, you have to be right 100% of the time. As the attacker, you have the luxury of being right only 30% of the time. The law of large numbers is on the side of the attacker. This applies to missile offense/defense and to usage of intelligence. This information asymmetry is also one of the key drivers of the security dilemma, which in turn causes arms races and conflict. The defender knows they can't be perfect all the time, so they have an incentive to preemptively attack if the probability of future problems based on their assessment of current information is high enough. In the case of Gaza there was also an assessment that Hamas were deterred, which were the tinted glasses through which signals were assessed. Israel also assumed a certain shape of an attack, and the minimal mobilisation of Hamas did not fit that expected template. So the intelligence failure was also a failure in security doctrine and institutional culture. The following principles need to be reinforced: (i) don't assume the best, (ii) don't expect rationality and assume a rival is deterred even if they should be, (iii) intention causes action, believe a rival when they say they want to do X instead of projecting your own worldview onto them, (iv) don't become fixated on a particular scenario, keep the distribution (scenario analyses) broad
- torginus 1y agoIf your adversary is a state intelligence agency, you're probably a high ranking politician and a boomer who is clueless about computers, and has demonstrably terrible opsec, either through government incompetence of your own agencies, or not following the terribly cumbersome opsec procedures, either because of inconvenience, the policies being terrible or sheer incompetence. The amount of examples we've seen of this is staggering.
- sigwinch 1y agoThat sounds like an elected legislator, not like the kind of person with close access to compartmentalized info. And its the form of a leak of policy or some covert program; details which could also be bought; so it’s called “retail” compared with systematic.
- torginus 1y agoI think saying that people like Hillary Clinton, Trump, Biden or Bolton didn't have access to highly sensitive information is not a reasonable stance (and those are just the ones we know about).
- sigwinch 1y agoIt’s good that no one is arguing that. But your argument isn’t strong. You’re saying that numbers matter. Those kinds of people go in and out of SCIFs. If they belch a secret at lunch, maybe it has lobbying implications, but it wasn’t compartmentalized. It can even be disinfo. The real ROI is to land a Jonathan Pollard. Not even a million Hegseths can leak enough info to collect into one Pollard.
- mike_hearn 1y agoIt's hilarious, but the hilarity gets in the way of recognizing how much insight there is also there. It makes serious points. This part about the Mossad is especially astonishing given the pager attack: > If your adversary is the Mossad, YOU’RE GONNA DIE AND THERE’S NOTHING THAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT. The Mossad is not intimidated by the fact that you employ https://. If the Mossad wants your data, they’re going to use a drone to replace your cellphone with a piece of uranium that’s shaped like a cellphone It's like a Mossad agent read this paper and thought hey that's actually not a bad idea. But the core rant is about dubious assumptions in academic cryptography papers. I was also reading a lot of academic crypto papers in 2014, and the assumptions got old real fast. Mickens mocks these ideas: • "There are heroes and villains with fantastic (yet oddly constrained) powers". Totally standard way to get a paper published. Especially annoying were the mathematical proofs that sound rigorous to outsiders but quietly assume that the adversary just can't/won't solve a certain kind of equation, because it would be inconvenient to prove the scheme secure if they did. Or the "exploits" that only worked if nobody had upgraded their software stack for five years. Or the systems that assume a perfect implementation with no way to recover if anything goes wrong. • "you could enlist a well-known technology company to [run a PKI], but this would offend the refined aesthetics of the vaguely Marxist but comfortably bourgeoisie hacker community who wants everything to be decentralized", lol. This got really tiresome when I worked on Bitcoin. Lots of semi-technical people who had never run any large system constantly attacking every plausible design of implementable complexity because it wasn't decentralized enough for their tastes, sometimes not even proposing anything better. • "These [social networks] are not the best people in the history of people, yet somehow, I am supposed to stitch these clowns into a rich cryptographic tapestry that supports key revocation and verifiable audit trails" - another variant of believing decentralized cryptography and PKI is easy. He also talks about security labels like in SELinux but I never read those papers. I think Mickens used humor to try and get people talking about some of the bad patterns in academic cryptography, but if you want a more serious paper that makes some similar points there's one here: https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/1336.pdf https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/1336.pdf
- Yizahi 1y ago> Lots of semi-technical people who had never run any large system constantly attacking every plausible design of implementable complexity because it wasn't decentralized enough for their tastes, sometimes not even proposing anything better. And for added fun, that same radical decentralization crowd, finally settling on the extremely centralized Lightning crutch, which is not only centralized but also computationally over complicated and buggy.
- smashah 1y agoVery true, unfortunately there's no password strong enough to stop Malaysian Airlines ground crew from loading a pallet full of Mossad-rigged walkie talkies on my flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing via conveniently-placed-NATO-AWACS-infested airspace. 2FA isn't going to protect me from cruising altitude walkie talkie detonation and having the debris scattered over an impossibly wide area. I guess the best thing to do is not take an airline of a country that has recently showed public support for Gaza specifically during a humanitarian visit in the months prior to my flight. Thankfully none of this is true and everything the mainstream media and governments tell us are true - imagine if things weren't as they seemed?.. Craziness... Back to my password manager!
- gjvc 1y agothis guy's stuff reads like word salad and people lap it up. I've never understood why.
- Havoc 1y agoDespite word salad it is entertaining and the core message is valid
- EdwardDiego 1y agoBecause it's a funny rant.
- gjvc 1y agoWithout the burden of being funny
- torginus 1y agoHe wrote quirky internet humor before it was mainstream, in fact he's a victim of his own success - when this article came out this would've been considered funny and witty writing, but has become tired and derivative enough today to provoke a negative reaction.
- ChrisMarshallNY 1y agoI've always enjoyed Mikens' writing. He has a great sense of humor. I like his using Mossad as the extreme. I guess "Mossad'd" is now a verb.
- zkmon 1y agoSecurity is a problem caused by ownership of some usefulness. Sometimes solution can be around addressing these two causes.
- tarjei_huse 1y agoDo you have a concrete example?
- zkmon 1y agoDo not have concentrated usefulness and do not have concentrated ownership.
- Havoc 1y agoI see this on reddit a lot in self hosting context. The range of things people do on security is wild. Everything from publicly expose everything and pray the apps login function some random threw together is solid to elaborate intrusion detection systems.
- jones89176 1y agoI enjoyed "The Night Watch" a lot: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/mickens/files/thenightwatch.pdf https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/mickens/files/thenightwatc... > A systems programmer will know what to do when society breaks down, because the systems programmer already lives in a world without law.
- dnlserrano 1y agoMickens essays are always a good read
- contrarian1234 1y agoI think the central premise is a "wrong". The "point" of science isn't really to do useful things. Framing things from that angle is in subtle ways dangerous bc that shouldnt be part of the incentive structure. you dont understand the mating behaviors of naked mole rats bc of some sense of "usefulness". Its just an investigation of nature and how things work. The usefulness comes out unexpectedly. Like you find out naked mole are actually maybe biologically immortal You should just find interesting phenomena and invetigate. Capitalism figures out the usefulness side of things
- wmwragg 1y agoYeah, Science shouldn't be concerned with usefulness, just like Art. It's the application of those fields which should concern itself with usefulness i.e. applied science, engineering, design etc. I'm not saying that scientific research shouldn't be carried out by companies with specific goals in mind, just that it shouldn't be the expected default.
- kragen 1y agoBoth Assange and Snowden are apparently alive and well, despite Mossad-like agencies wishing otherwise, largely thanks to Tor; and Hamas, whose adversary was in fact the Mossad, apparently still exists. Hizbullah has hopefully taught us all a good lesson about supply-chain attacks. Debian is probably the only example of a successful public public-key infrastructure, but SSH keys are a perfectly serviceable form of public-key infrastructure in everyday life. At least for developers. Mickens's skepticism about security labels is, however, justified; the problems he identifies are why object-capability models seem more successful in practice. I do agree that better passwords are a good idea, and, prior to the widespread deployment of malicious microphones, were adequate authentication for many purposes—if you can avoid being phished. My own secure password generator is http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/netbook-misc-devel/bitwords.py http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/netbook-misc-devel/bitwords...., and some of its modes are memorable correct-horse-battery-staple-type passwords. It's arguably slightly blasphemous, so you may be offended if you are an observant Hindu.
- sigwinch 1y agoWhy did you choose random’s SystemRandom rather than secrets?
- kragen 1y agoWhat? Oh, you mean PEP 506. I wrote this program in 02012, and PEP 506 wasn't written until 02015, didn't ship in a released Python until 3.6 in 02016, and even then was only available in Python 3, which I didn't use because it basically didn't work at the time. PEP 506 is just 22 lines of code wrapping SystemRandom. There's no advantage over just using SystemRandom directly.
- drdrek 1y agoThe point about the lay person not needing massive parallelism was very true, until it was not :D
- anthk 1y agoAh, very Germanic tactics against some Mediterranean foe. Us, Southern Mediterranean/half Atlantic guys, we have it easier. We would just put fake data, hints and traces untl they get mad and paranoid between themselves, we are experts on that since forever. Also, the Southern part of the country (which I am pretty much not related culturally at least on folklore and tons of customs) managed to bribe even the Russian mafias. They were that crazy, it's like a force of nature. OFC don't try backstabbing back these kind of people, some 'folklorical' people are pretty much clan/family based (even more than the Southern Italians) and they will kick your ass back in the most unexpected, random and non-spectacular way ever, pretty much the opposite of the Mexican cartels where they love to do showoff and displays. No, the Southern Iberians are something else, mixed along Atlantics and Mediterranean people since millenia and they know all the tricks, either from the Brits/Germanics to Levantine Semitic foes... You won't expect it. You are like some Mossad random Levi, roaming around, and you just met some nice middle aged woman on a stereotyped familiar bar where the alleged ties to some clan must be nearly zero, and the day after some crazy Islamic terrorist wacko with ties to drug cartels will try to stab you some Sunday in the morning and he might try to succeed with the dumbest and cheapest way ever. No, is not an exaggeration. We might not be Italy, but don't try to mess up with some kind of people. My country is not Mafia-bound, but criminal cartels, mafias and OFC some terror groups from the Magreb (and these bound to the Middle East ones) have deals with each other because of, you know, weapons and money. And Marbella it's pretty much a hub.
- kragen 1y agoThis explains a lot about Argentina.
- anthk 1y agoHalf of Iberians can't stand the rascal (picaresca) tradition from the other half. Specially the heavy industrialized North. We are not as divided as Italy, as Spain has powerhouses in the South as Airbus and the like, but, yes, there's a 'climatological gap' between the different 'Spains' across the mountains. Not Ethnics, but kinda like what would happen in Italy if the North wasn't as developed (the North of Spain isn't bad but you can't compare it against the Franco-German-Austrian-Italian industrial hub) and the South had their Mafias shut down in the 19th century and if they were more developed than they are compared to the Southern Spain. The South here isn't a shithole as Napoli and the like but some Andalusian coastal places can be far more dangerous than the Basque Country/Navarre in the 80's (terror attacks) for a policeman. OTOH, Belgium it's far closer to be a Narcostate than some microrregions in Spain such as Algeciras in Cádiz (Andalusia) were you can read about the Militarized Police fighting drug boats almost as a daily chore. On Argentina, except for a die hard Ghetto like the '3000 viviendas' and Cañada Real, every Argentinian would love to stay in Spain even at the worst neighbourhood at their town. Iberia it's far more secure than Latin America by a huge margin. The most dangerous issue on any bad town would be either a pickpocket/non-violent rob of watching some low tier drug dealers doing their stuff and maybe some very late night rape issue over months if not years. Far less than anything you would get in Buenos Aires. Unless, as I said, you really want to mess up your like with some sketchy people, the ones you would spot from meters away, especially in remote/nearly hidden taverns/pubs where drug dealing it's widely known. For example, if some pub it's accesed by walking down some stairs into a basement, (where you can't see anything from the outside without going down); even if it looks good, clean, modern, maintained... run away.
- coolThingsFirst 1y agoAnother example of power resides where men believe it resides. Americans are just very scared of Mossad. Tons of money goes into Holywood to make them appear invincible to the world. Fun fact, they aren't. Intelligence agencies have great capabilities no doubt they get billions of $$$ and have utter immunity to do whatever they want in the name of national security. Why is only Mossad scary? I'd be more scared of the CIA and KGB than of Mossad. US has never been in existential threat like Israel has been, if it were I wouldn't want to stand in their way.
- wk_end 1y ago> Americans are just very scared of Mossad. Tons of money goes into Holywood to make them appear invincible to the world. I don't believe I've ever seen Mossad depicted in a Hollywood movie? I guess there was Munich. Are there specific movies/TV shows that you're thinking of? Americans, by and large, don't even think about Mossad. Certainly not the way they're aware of the CIA and KGB - which no one should be scared of at the moment since it hasn't existed since 1991, though obviously there are modern successors.
- cool_man_bob 1y ago> Are there specific movies/TV shows that you're thinking of? Not GP, but NCIS is the big one offhand. Of course that show has simply gotten more and more ridiculous on general over the years
- hackernewscunts 1y ago[dead]
- teddyh 1y agoDespite his somewhat annoying style, that article has many good points about the aloofness of security researchers. However, I will disagree on two points which the article contains: 1. Tor is (rightly) used by anyone who has a good reason for remaining anonymous. (See [REALNAMES] for who this can be.) Anyone trying to smear Tor as only used by drug dealers and other unsavory types are themselves suspect of having an agenda of discouraging Tor use for anyone lest they be suspected. This can only lead to an installation of Tor being viewed as a suspicious thing in itself; who would want that? 2. His threat model of Mossad or not-Mossad leaves out one important actor, which we can call the NSA. They, and others like them, unlike Mossad, are not after you personally in that they don't want to do anything to you. Not immediately. Not now. They simply want to get to know you better. They are gathering information. All the information. What you do, what you buy, how you vote, what you think. And they want to do this to everybody, all the time. This might or not bite you in the future. He seems to imply that since nothing immediately bad is happening by using slightly bad security, then it’s OK and we shouldn’t worry about it, since Mossad is not after us. I think that we should have a slightly longer view of what allowing NSA (et al.) to know everything about everybody would mean, and who NSA could some day give this information to, and what those people could do with the information. You have to think a few steps ahead to realize the danger. [REALNAMES] Who is harmed by a "Real Names" policy? <https://geekfeminism.fandom.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Real_Names%22_policy%3F https://geekfeminism.fandom.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22R...> (Repost of <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23572778 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23572778>)
- reedf1 1y agohonestly I find any idiosyncratic style refreshing in AI slop world
- bitbasher 1y agoMy favorite talk by Mickens (https://vimeo.com/95066828 https://vimeo.com/95066828), also talks about Mossad.
- singular_atomic 1y agoWhen we need him the most (a world overrun in llms and AI slop) it seems like he's vanished...
- tomhow 1y agoPreviously: This World of Ours (2014) [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27915173 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27915173 - July 2021 (6 comments)
- some_random 1y agoWhere does this deification of Mossad come from anyways? They've done a lot more than western intel agencies post cold war but that's absolutely come with failures just like every other intel agency in existence.
- pinebox 1y agoThis all seemed very clever until I read the bio and learned that the author works for Microsoft -- the last company that has any business being flip about security. Bro needs to STFU and get on with the security drudgery, because his customer's opposition very definitely is the Mossad.