Live data from Hacker News

COMSEC: Beyond Encryption [pdf]

grugq.github.io

51–54 of 54 posts

Re: COMSEC: Beyond Encryption [pdf]

#51
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And is pretty much a statement of fact. "Sticking out like a white guy in a Mayan village" would probably have been non notable so I don't follow how it's offensive by switching the subjects.

Mentioning in minorities in contexts that aren't explicitly positive is pretty much a holocaust-tier offense.

Well, it isn't, but p.c. proponents certainly seem to make it seem that way. :-)

Re: COMSEC: Beyond Encryption [pdf]

#52
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would have been better that you hadn't mentioned using tor then hmm?

Maybe I'm lying ;)

We need to start writing apps that use an embedded tor, not for anonymity, but to increase the noise floor.

NB Just remember that lying to the FBI is in itself a criminal offence :-( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

Re: COMSEC: Beyond Encryption [pdf]

#53
post #41
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>FWIW this is the talk that got them (Ben Nagy and The Grugq) thrown out of Kiwicon See, fuck this. We are all fucked if style begins to trump substance in infosec, like it has in most everything else. Fucking marketing turds. The Grugq is dropping pearls before swine.

If you need to say rude things in order to convey your message, you might take a moment to consider whether or not your message is actually worth conveying.

Whether or not a message is perceived as rude is irrelevant and a matter of selfishness. Whether or not it is true is what you should concern yourself with if you mean to get things done.

Re: COMSEC: Beyond Encryption [pdf]

#54
post #43
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is if you're an overly sensitive SJW twat. Otherwise, no. It isn't insulting to desert-dwelling transgendered Mongolians, just a humorous ad lib pulled from the speaker's memory based on something they happened to have read recently.

You'll pardon me if I reject any argument premised on a notion of someone being an "overly sensitive SJW twat". Comments like that say more about the person uttering them than their arguments.

I won't pardon that, because it shows your bad priorities of style over substance. That kind of flawed reasoning has too many negative consequences for me to merely overlook. Sorry.
Post reply on HN