Re: [liberationtech] Why can’t email be secure? - Silent Circle Blog

[MARK GORE]

J_Y is red hot! This motherfucker can write, hell I can't stop reading tis... like a dog smelling his own piss. Anyways; couldn't you of, summed up the lovely line items/goddamn Bar?
Cheer's _Mg

On Aug 25, 2013, at 06:00 PM, John Young <jya at pipeline.com> wrote:

> A swell beginning, for email to be merely one way to
> communicate, supplemented with unlimited other
> ways which do not require email, or for that matter,
> the Internet or any digital means.
>
> Presume that digital means are the easiest to fuck with,
> sorry, subvert, corrupt, pack with junk, surveil, harvest,
> store, search, forge, track, make your own list on your
> digital device and expect it to be violated accordingly
> and used against you whether you know or not, usually
> not. Here especially.
>
> Now the other means, non-digital, ancient and amply
> used and understood among those who use them
> although susceptible to the digital vulnerabilites if
> considerable more difficult:
>
> Paper
> Music
> Sound
> Dance
> Architecture
> Plastic arts
> Graphic arts
> Poetry
> Drum
> Glossalia
> Jokes
> Holler
> Gypsy
> Mime
> Chant
> Curse
> Vulgarity
> Sex
> Sin
>
> And much more everybody uses with greater facility
> than digital emissions.
>
> Note that conventional lanugages are not on the list
> because of the heavy reliance upon them to communicate
> and thus most heavily scutinized and attacked, usually
> successfully.
>
> Language is like metadata, with only its mastery the content
> can be followed from end to end, then the ends burgled,
> beat, cut, shot, persuaded to talk in plain language.
>
> Steagonagraphy is not on the list unless it is non-digital,
> and if not, then hiding communication has great potential.
> Its weakness is finding a means, non-digital, for preparation
> and transceiving.
>
> For example, architecture is an ancient means of communication,
> among its funders, designers, builders, maintainers, destructors,
> restorers, investors, evaluators, burgler, surveyors, surveillors,
> protectors, attackers, underminers, repairers, materials suppliers,
> excavators, and a host of participants -- the list of guilds and unions
> and professionals is vast -- perhaps one of the largest cohorts
> of quasi-private aggregations on earth lagging only farmers
> if taken to mean any form of human construction. I flatter
> myself, so do yourself likewise.
>
> Similarly, just about any specialty of human intercourse has
> its quasi-private, esoteric, unique means of communication.
> The human body specialists -- scientific, shamanistic, soulseeking --
> along with its pschobabbling corollary, generates a fantastic
> array of marketable, if not wholly, believable garble and
> gibberish. Politics and law the most vivid at laying on the
> self-serving shit about the necessity of government and
> the rule of law(yers).
>
> Now back to the simple task of communicating in private.
> Before that, a side note, the end is near:
>
> First do not expect anyone to believe anything using the
> word "security." So comsec is dead due to abuse. Maybe
> compriv is better, understanding that privacy has become
> a crock of shit too.
>
> "Shit bag" (thanks to Assange) Natsec needs to go as well
> because it has been abused the most of all since assuming
> the parmount importance of a secular religion prevailing
> over all belief-systems with deadly weaponry, heartlessness,
> amorality, criminality and unaccountability, motto: fuck with
> it and you will die. Much evidence of motto in deed. And
> much evidence it will be used against its insiders.
>
> This is relevant to private communication. Natsec really
> hates being cut out of any kind of communication. It
> will use virtually unlimited means to get inside, most
> of them kept secret and manifestly violent if needs
> be.
>
> So compriv should not be promoted as capable to
> exclude natsec's prying, stealing, owning, using to
> demolish with its opponents. OTR is futile, BTW,
> as comsec.
>
> Wind compriv down to comchat. Then wind comchat
> down to comgossip, to comwhine, comjoke, comlie,
> comlurk, comslur, com-social engineer. You get the
> point. Do nothing life-threatening or natsec defying
> by com-whatever. Communications is owned by
> those who provide its means and they are owned
> by extremely badass natsec ritualists willing to
> barbecue your beloveds to share the goodness
> carefully prescribed in their secret manuals of
> unlimited warfare.
>
> In conclusion, there you have it, com-bat, the most
> reliable means of communication. Anything less is
> com-ical.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 5054 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20130831/95f9df63/attachment-0001.txt>