cpu backdoor

Are there any known cases of people being caught because of intel ME or amd PSP? Because I find it hard to believe that if it was really being used as a backdoor since 2008 we wouldn't have been able to figure out at least one arrest caused by it

>>23033 stop being schizo and just buy a macbook/mac windows is like kicking dead whales down the beach, and so does linux, as a daily driver os. its time to move on anon

there are no known instances of it. the PSP is less understood and cannot have its potential risks mitigated unlike the IME though.

>Because I find it hard to believe that if it was really being used as a backdoor since 2008 we wouldn't have been able to figure out at least one arrest caused by it Just because the evidence wasn't used in court doesn't mean it wasn't used to apprehend a suspect. Also, use of such backdoors might be limited to spooky stuff, in which case they will just make up a story and/or disappear someone overnight, no public records to be found. >>23034 fug off

Security is not just for criminals (or even spies). For example journalists probably have the most concerning threat model since they might face attack from government agencies as well as criminal actors. OP's point is valid though, the spazzing out over security is not really justified by the data available. It's good to try to be practical. As far as criminals go Encrochat was proprietary so perhaps the Ndrangheta will learn from this next go around.

>>23033 Yes, but you don't know about them, since either the story is not reported on (because the MSM is owned by the same zionigs that spy on people with their machines) or the death of the one they are targetting is done in such a way that it looks like an accident, done by someone else (a car accident, a cop busting a cap in someone etc.) or through stuff like suicides (or 'suicides') that most people do not make the connection. It's a very strange world we live in, where a lot of your life is dictated by the machine (/computers). The machine is so all-powerful and present now and it has slow-boiled many of the elders into it, while the youth is born into it, that few realize how ever-present the machine is. The machine dicates so many aspects of everyday life while it also is capable of dictating death. The finer workings of the machine are unknown to me, but what I do know is that there are beings that are able to work this machine to achieve an outcome that is wanted by those that work the machine. Since (Israeli) Intel (Inside) owns a big part of the CPU market, and has rooted many vital machines in lands they occupy, the power they wield is a force to respect.

>>23043 >since either the story is not reported on (because the MSM is owned by the same zionigs that spy on people with their machines) You know that police reports and court records are available to *all* journalists, not just mainstream ones? Non-mainstream media could easily report on it as well. >or the death of the one they are targetting is done in such a way that it looks like an accident, done by someone else (a car accident, a cop busting a cap in someone etc.) or through stuff like suicides (or 'suicides') that most people do not make the connection. Indeed this is how most intelligence agencies operate.

>>23044 Yes, I know that those reports are available, but OP's question was if people were caught using those CPU backdoors. It's a basic rule that if you have a power such as CPU backdoors, you don't let it known, and when you use it, you only use it when you are absolutely sure you won't get caught. The machine is capable of creating scenario's ('narratives') through which people die through an 'accident'. If the report states that someone died through what can be considered 'natural means' (or at least no 'unnatural means'), that's that for most people. One has to make the connection that this was because of some zionig working the machine. And then there's other times where people simply 'disappear'. This has happened often in recent years. Then when someone does make the connection that this was because someone opposed the zionigs, they immediately become a target and get hassled by the spooks that they own. The operations they can pull (both physical and psychological) are tough stuff and can be enough for most people to back down and try to salvage what's left of what once was their life.

>>23045 I often wonder if people like you are plants trying to push leftists away from questioning the NWO by using ridiculous terms like "zionig"

>>23046 The whole post makes sense, yet you trip over a meme-word like zionig? And in the same post you use a dichotomous term like 'leftist'? The whole political left/right ideology is meant to divide people. If people can't see past a world like 'zionig' or both political 'wings' being part of the same deceivement, they are unable to question the bigger things, such as the power of the Zionist have in society.

>>23047 >The whole post makes sense I wouldn't go that far >yet you trip over a meme-word like zionig? Maybe you shouldn't use meme-words then. >The whole political left/right ideology is meant to divide people. and yet, there are leftists.

>>23048 Don't really care what you think I can and can't do. >and yet, there are leftists. Yes, they have booked success into dividing the people into 'left' and 'right' thinking. However, I don't want to argue with you, since I think you and are in alignment of the goals we pursue;': both of us want to make people aware that there's a clique of powerful Zionigsts that are doing everything they can to make life on Earth utterly miserable for everyone. People on the 'far right' usually are aware of this, but people from the 'right' to the 'far left' usually aren't. Since most of these people have been memed and think in memes, a good way to reach them is through 'meme' words, such as Zionigs. Whenever you use the word Zionist, the immediate response is ANTI-SEMITE and their thinking shuts off. With Zionig, it racks up a new pathway of thinking ('Zionist? Niggers? What does he mea.... ") + it's spiced up with meme-humor, which strikes the like-chord of the brainwashed, who will in turn are more open to the concept that the word tries to achieve.

>>23049 It's not. It's just another term some terminally online glitterboy would use, a normal person reading that is just going to be alienated and think you're weird.

Wasnt part of IntelME and PSP for sake of tracking down the location of stolen laptops? I think I recall finding a video once on YouTube I can't find anymore of an Intel employee explaining how IntelME works and he said it only accesses the first slot of the RAM. So this makes me wonder if you just remove the memory from that slot and only use the others does this stop IntelME from operating? >>23034 Well there is one advantage to Apple computers is the company thought IntelME was too privacy invasive so even on Intel Macs their IntelME is a modified version with less features. You can still run Linux on a Mac.

>>23050 Normal people can't apply logic. They work on emotions which they rationalized afterwards and herd thinking. COVID-19 and the subsequent social behaviour of normal people showed as much. It's a waste of time to try and convince them with facts and logic, because they reject it if it doesn't fit in their worldview, which is based on being accepted by the herd or what they think the herd wants. A characteristic of normal people in the present age, is that they want to be entertained. Laughing at something is a product of being entertained, and it's something most normal people are addicted to. Since entertainment is getting increasingly more brutal, a term like Zionigs - however much you despise it - is entertaining. At a very basic level, this generates liking of the one conveying the message with the added bonus here is that it is informative as well, since Zionists are Niggers.

>>23055 i expected this reply, in this case you will just forever be viewed as the incoherent jabbering sperg you are and nobody will listen to you and humanity will continue marching into technological slavery

Do ARM cpus have anything like ME? OP could use a raspberry pi for his sensitive activities.

>>23059 The ARM architecture itself is not backdoored, but virtually every ARM CPU is backdoored. Raspberry Pis have their own backdoor, a Rock Pi would be more suitable.

They're not using IME to arrest people that's stupid, it's for espionage. In the cases where it has led to arrests you can assume the warrant necessary for it's utilization opens the big can of surveillance, at which point they don't need IME as the basis for the arrest; They develop sources adjacent to it's utilization. >Yeah it's crazy! We accidentally stormed the wrong address and found 30 billion in counterfeit dollars! What a hilarious, convenient coincidence, right guys? The kind of warrant necessary is probably above even using a satellite to take pictures of someone's day to day, so exorbitantly expensive and inappropriate per the task: Satellites are not classified Top Secret. That doesn't mean it's impossible, as even FISA can leverage TS assets, but you're gunna need a lot more CP and drugs to be that important, Lain. The IME backdoor is military, not law enforcement. That doesn't mean law enforcement can't use it, it means the military isn't going to lend their toys out for some drawl, petty bullkaf worth less then a billion in collateral. What could IME uncover that clamping on to your main couldn't? Are you behind a power conditioner? Go blackmail a politician if you want to see it in action, until then they can just tap your activity from the roadside utility connection that isn't even on your property, "Road work ahead."

>>23066 Increasingly information and techniques is being passed between governments and local law enforcement though. For example law enforcement employ stingray attacks at protests these days when that used to only be used by alphabet agencies.

>>23056 What is your proposition in educating normal people about the Zionists, their conspiracy and the powerful grasp they have over this planet?

>>23066 The entire electronic infrastructure can be used as one big surveillance web. I know here that from the 90's on, every electrical socket have gotten a switch built into it which signals when the electrical socket is being used, which classifies as electronic metadata. Using the system inherently makes you vulnerable to being surveilled, and it really doesn't matter if you install Linux on your airgapped machine; once you use the utilities provided to you by the system, they can tap into your house. The only way to get out of the system, is to be completely self-sufficient and airgap your entire house from the system, from the plumbing on up, and even then you're prone to being surveilled, with satellites spying on you from space, smartphones gathering data when they come near your place, drones flying around and surface technology being able to see what you do from the ground.. road work ahead indeed. Though you say you only become of interest to law enforcement when you have got rotten stuff lying around like CP or drugs, personal experience has shown me that the system becomes interested in you the moment you display you have power. Let's just say I've never had more than 10.000 bucks in my account, or have done dealings in CP or drugs, yet I've still become a high profile target of the system, because of my capabilities of being .. disruptive. >>23067 I think that's because they already have much more sophisticated technology that can be used for surveillance. For example, 5G was something that already was up and running by the military in this country in the late 90's (at least). Now almost 30 years later, local police gets to use it (which makes me wonder at what level of technology the Military is operating right now..) . Most people here already know that anything digital you use can be used as a surveillance tool against you and as technology becomes more ingrained in society, it will be employed more as a tool by law enforcement to do their appointed task. Police doing stingrays (I had to look up the meaning of that) is something which fits into that line, but as I said, there's much more sophisticated technology out there, with microchips (which I've seen people proudly displaying), self-assembling nanobots (you can be sprayed with stuff which can assemble while you're not even aware of it) , SuperAI's (the dwarfs..) and whatnot. And don't forget that the electrical grid that's operating, powers this whole thing, and has got its own capabilities of control.

>>23056 Your replies follows the string of what a typical agent of the Zionists would do when they spot something that they don't want: first there is agreement with the idea, but steadily it's leading you astray through various means until the idea is derailed or the person that proposed the idea, has no interest in furthering the idea. Really some Zionigging done by you

>>23072 No, when you throw out terms like zionig normal people look at that and wonder what the hell that means, and then they realize it means zionist and nigger, so they can assume the writer is racist, and they form a negative opinion of that person because they dislike racists. You yourself don't talk like this in the real world, if you did nobody would want to interact with you. You're using random internet speak that can only be found in the isolated dying corners of the once free internet like here, 8chan, and 4chan. If you actually want people to listen to you you'll reason your beliefs and not alienate people by using random internet speak. Either that or you'll just keep jabbering incoherently and nobody will listen to you, that's what you're doing right now. One is constructive, the other is not, regardless of whether or not people listen to either.

>>23074 Most people privately hold racist views, and are becoming more racist because they finally notice that there is a huge influx of migrants in countries that used to be >99% Caucasian. So now people are voting 'far right' in hopes of reversing the influx of migrants. This trend is noticeable in mainland Europe and America. However, the arrows are pointed at the pawn in this whole game, the migrants. The cause of the problem isn't the migrants since they are but a symptom of the problem. The cause of this problem are the people that are orchestrating this agenda, which is the Zionist cabal and their henchman and henchwomen. Racism is just another way to divide people, pit them against each other, so that those who are orchestrating this whole thing, can remain behind the curtain and keep pushing the buttons. I concur that the term zionig is severely lacking and I'd rather not use it. I signal it's a sign of the time (mash two words together in creating one word that covers both. haha, so smart, right??) but people need to be made aware that the problem isn't some nigger that's being coaxed into migrating, but the Zionists who have the agenda in attempting to destroy European societies. The term is used in hopes of at least making people aware of this, though as I said, it's a term I'd rather not use since it's is retarded. When one used a word like Zionist and the Zionist agenda, they immediately get labelled an anti-semite and get cancelled. When one uses a word like nigger and their unique talent of destroying societies, they immediately get labelled a racist and get cancelled. Yet both Zionists and their nigger-pawns are the biggest problems civilization is facing. What can we do in making people aware of this? Hence my question posed here, which I hope you will help in answering: >>23069

>>23067 >Increasingly information and techniques is being passed between governments and local law enforcement though Absolutely true. The mechanism for this is actually per some on the books "readiness pact" I can't remember the name of, but employees are often cycled between agencies to increase the proliferation of techniques, such as trading an FBI spec criminal psychologist with a Lain from the NSA. iirc certain lower level positions even require cycling at minimum every two years, and between the entire alphabet soup, not just the well known big three. Mission criticals, officers, and need-to-know/embedded individuals are logically immune from this process, but once they're no longer immediately busy, they're cycled. Think "task force" without a current task, the easiest to imagine being a SWAT team: Train for 8 hours a day and maybe do two actual missions per year. It would be logical to trade men out to swap tactics, and even moreso when those tactics involve higher learning, and trust me, those sweaty, door kicking, ooga-booga gorillas consider TDP higher learning. Because first thing's first you need to teach them how to count to three. >>23070 >the system becomes interested in you the moment you display you have power ..disruptive Absolutely true, my commodities reference was mostly a joke. A lad with a gigabit connection in an office building he purchased with bitcoin is going to be instantly suspect whether he fills it with employees or not. Passive surveillance is far more powerful then direct, and even just stratifying monetary transfers is a whole soykafload of data. I've heard deposits >=10,000USD have a specific list for audit, et cetera, but that really ain't kaf. Cops fuarrrking love lists, and stratifying any activity, really, gives a nice clean printout for further review. It only takes 7-9 seconds to tap a live fiber connection. That's a whole lotta lists. >>23072 >>23074 >Two COINTEL glitterboys talking to eachother Gj boys very effective go take lunch

I think this thread has become totally derailed

>>23076 It was pretty much over before it began anyway, the question was simple. Is the IME used to arrest people? No, there's never been any indication of it, nor has there even been an indication of it used in espionage people just say it because they assume it is happening covertly.

>>23060 Do you have any evidence for this?

>>23085 There's an obfuscated secondary OS that runs on the GPUs of Raspberry Pis. The developers say it's not backdoored or anything, and I don't disbelieve them, but it's not like it can't be backdoored. I thought it was something the OP should be aware of since he was concerned with backdoors in general. >>23079 Not cointelpro, I just like poking glitterboys with sticks. I can't even reply to him without getting blocked now, yet lainchan won't remove our posts derailing the thread. Anyway I'll just leave it now, I'm not gonna blow my ideas for how to reach out to people and educate them about problems the world faces with technological slavery on a sperg on an imageboard. >>23070 There isn't even a need for any sockets to report usage, usage can be determined by power companies. I still believe all of this to be superficial though. At best, a general determination can be made on what activity is occurring in a domicile. What caliber of device a person is using, a fan, a lightbulb, a computer, and fluctuations in power usage can indicate when one individual thing is using power to some extent. People can try using batteries but that's just a palliation as opposed to actually having control over a power grid. Ultimately it just shows whether or not somebody is at home, the data is far less valuable than information produced by computers, phones, and cameras. There's probably only a decade or so left until information in databases like the UDC is read en masse. I'm sure secretly the NSA can selectively break AES-256 encryption, but for now there's not any indication they can do that at all, let alone on a mass scale, unless they have some highly classified capabilities. Maybe they do but I'd think there would be some information to prove that eventually. Supposedly a couple weeks ago somebody broke AES-192 with OpenAI, if that wasn't bullshit there's probably only a few years left. People can switch to stronger encryption but that's just a palliation like with generating your own electricity and using batteries to power certain appliances. The only solution is for the people to have control over the grid. As the government becomes increasingly authoritarian those palliations will become less effective anyway since people don't control the grid. Anonymizers like Tor will protect somebody's identity most of the time they are used for now since world governments don't control enough nodes to reliably execute timing attacks to deanonymize users. And even still there is nuance, timing attacks only selectively deanonymize people, the data that is produced is not inherently compromising, but it very well can be. But those anonymizers are only as effective as they are allowed to be. The usage of Tor, i2p, and Lokinet is permitted in most of the world, but it's not as though they couldn't be derezzed, they can be. The traffic of any protocol can be blocked selectively, even VPNs, people think that somehow VPNs are superior to Tor in countries like China and Iran but they aren't any more superior outside of how they are viewed by the government. Normal people use VPNs all the time for banal activities. Normal people use Tor sometimes for banal stuff, but Tor is also heavily associated with being used for highly sensitive activities, whatever they may be. But OpenVPN and WireGuard can be blocked, in fact they are sometimes, I knew a guy in Iran who couldn't use a VPN because of it. SSH can be blocked too, but it's not usually scanned for. Anything can be blocked, the connection doesn't need to be broken its protocol just needs to be identified, all that takes is people looking for it. There are still means of obfuscating Tor connections with Tor bridges, but those aren't entirely effective. I've heard that in Russia most of them have been blocked by now. The government can simply amass a list of Tor bridges by exploiting the Tor Project's system of distributing Tor bridges, there's actually people doing it right now, on github you can download databases of thousands, even tens of thousands of Tor bridges. There's no need to perform packet inspection, or research the servers people connect to in order to determine if they're allowing somebody to obfuscate a connection to an onion network. Once the minority of people use anonymizers through their regulation it will become much easier to monitor whatever users remain. There's already a sizeable potential for the monitoring of targeted individuals through TEMPEST attacks. TEMPEST attacks exploit the very nature of all electronic devices. Electronic devices emanate electromagnetic frequencies in their operation. The frequencies they emanate can contain highly sensitive information. Digital computers operate using square waves which are known as digital signals. Square waves do not occur in nature. All frequencies in found nature will be sine waves which are round and curvy unlike digital signals which are straight lines, so digital signals end up sticking out like a sore thumb allowing for their easy identification. The transformation of a digital signal operating on one level switching to another cannot be represented by any mathematical formula. For example, a signal can be represented as x = 3 for one level, and x = 5 for another level, but the switch from 3 to 5 and 5 to 3 cannot be represented mathematically. This creates a discontinuation. There must be a jump from one to the other. And this is what happens in computers. When a computer has to switch levels in its operation it does so, and it has to do so rapidly. This rapid change requires an amount of energy greater than what would be used in normal operation (due resistance in switching and discontinuity) in order to switch between levels. So there's an influx of power to the circuit, the excess energy of which has to get released. Most of it (probably 90%) is radiated as electrical signals, some of it is used to maintain operation, and some of it is released as heat. When the excess energy is released as signals they're called compromising emanations, because the signals usually contain information about the operation(s) the computer is conducting. They can be highly compromising, for example, encryption keys can be captured, messages relayed over the internet by a targeted computer can be decrypted in real time, graphic displays can be viewed remotely. These signals can be captured. All that is necessary is a receiver, storage media, and a computer. A phone has all three of these things. Phones have the ability to capture signals, and store them since they have an SSD. From there the computer can process the signals. The captured signals must be reconstructed for the information contained within them to be read by an observer. What's to prevent a nation state, or even just a corporation (nation state puppet) from installing a low level, undetectable software on systems running proprietary OSes e.g iOs, Mac, Windows which would be designed to record the emanations generated by devices in their vicinity and reconstruct the information present upon them before telemetering said information to databases? Nothing. Does that mean it's happening? No. But it very well could happen, and absolutely could happen on a small, precise, targeted level. If they were to do that on a mass scale there'd be an enormous amount of data produced, I mean the very processing of compromising emanations can produce them so theoretically there'd be a feedback loop of devices causing one another to produce and process data. It'd be too much for them to handle, probably, but they could do it at a targeted level. Think about just how many dumbasses using Tails thinking they're safe and anonymous keep their phone at their desk with their computer running? Plenty. Funnily, it is not legal for a U.S citizen to take effective measures to protect theirself against TEMPEST attacks. And knowledge about TEMPEST is highly guarded, to have any actual information on it you need to be given special clearance and training by the NSA. I'm operating off of documents I have, they're basically just boiler plates like with MK ULTRA, the information is somewhat useful but they're all old documents with redactions. What is certain is TEMPEST is considered a serious threat by the NSA and is treated accordingly. If you read documents on TEMPEST you can learn about how they separate and shield cables processing classified and unclassified data, and how they regulate the distance of wireless devices in controlled areas. They don't (or didn't) allow wireless devices within 10 meters of sensitive equipment. It took me a few days to pore over them.

>>23089 >I'm not COINTEL >Proceed to post about TEMPEST like it isn't from World War II Really good post though. The limitations of emanation gathering is really the sensitivity of the equipment, and I almost added Biological computing to my former post given we're schizoposting itt, but the reality is that bio&analogue computing is definitely the current standard for any expectation of maintaining TS. As far as relevant emanation shielding cat8 and an independently conditioned ground are likely as good as it gets, classified or not, with a further stipulation of lowest possible power being the new metric for similar styled RF defense codes/sop; Low resistance, lowest possible power, and to a certain extent we can even expect to find fiber lines in the most mundane, hilariously low throughput applications. Another immediately interesting style of transmission only recently garnered by the public is ultra-coherent lasers, where atmospheric conditions, such as the atmosphere itself, previously prevented precise vector targeted communication. That's no longer the case, to include surface-satellite transmission, the nature and sop prior being broadcast obfuscation and receiver autonomy(BORAT). One could even, very easily, speculate the necessary wavelength to transmit with minimal thermal scattering. An adversary would need high resolution thermal imaging to identify this particular emanation. Picrel. TEMPEST? More like HEAT.

>>23079 No, i'm not cointelpro. I take a lot of flack from former feds because I started cracking their power base some years ago. I'm not ignorant of the fact that some of their flak oozes off me and seeps through in my posting, and I am still learning what of that attention I have to take notice of and what I must ignore, both for my own sake and that of others. Anyway, you also replied to me with this >Cops fuarrrking love lists, and stratifying any activity, really, gives a nice clean printout for further review. It only takes 7-9 seconds to tap a live fiber connection. That's a whole lotta lists. Many cops love to rule over the common people, and having lists that can have consequences for those that are on the list, is the best for them. Especially in the current digital age where those with the power to monitor any and every activity online, cops can just sit at their desks and click on a button and see all those lists and just throw a dart at the list to see what they will pursue. Must be heaven for them right now. Still, I'm not going to soykaf over all cops, because I know there's many good cops out there as well, doing the best they can in trying to curb the degeneracy that is running so rampant in our societies. The weapons they have at their disposal can be used for both good and bad. >>23089 >I can't even reply to him without getting blocked now, By who? The admins? >I'm not gonna blow my ideas for how to reach out to people and educate them about problems the world faces with technological slavery on a sperg on an imageboard I don't have aspergers, you half-baked noodle. If you only knew how much successful punches I've landed on the system.. it's probably why you get blocked because in the last days I've had the authorities making it very clear to me again that i am under 24/7 surveillance, because they won't want me wreaking havoc again. Really, we're on the same side, but it's best if you keep what you know for yourself right now. Just do something, instead of being armchair about it.

>>23112 It's OK to bump the thread. Sage is to show respect; Your post is entirely on topic, after all. >The weapons they have at their disposal can be used for both good and bad I take the existential third position insofar as the surveillance mechanism is an important aspect of the Panopticon, the psychological terror requisite to maintain power over fiends and wolves: Privacy is like gun ownership, where the overwhelming majority are peaceful, domesticated humans who deserve to defend themselves with lethal force against the same wolves and fiends who see order as an exploitable weakness. And I do mean lethal. For a man to attack another, he should be met with instantaneous death broadcast to the world: This is what happens if you step out of line. Is that psychological terror? To instantiate order under the threat of consequences? I don't believe so. And if a law abiding citizen killing a violent subhuman is virtuous, the surveillance mechanism actively threatening those same subhumans with instantaneous consequences is, too. Violence and the threat of consequence are necessary aspects of civilization, and always have been, and always will be, so simply effective that they're even the basis for rearing children. There must be order, and until every wolf, fiend, subhuman, you pick the word, are eliminated from society, we're on the brink of failure to take the next step. Social evolution will occur, as it always has, and these "mechanisms of terror" as described are only necessary to destroy the last inklings of necessary violence - To include monitoring the police themselves. "Nothing to hide, nothing to fear" is only a valid social principle if applied equally to everybody, something I adamantly believe in. Is Orwell necessary to achieve Huxley? It depends how hard egoistic subhumans are willing to fight, rape, cheat and steal to maintain their 'freedom' to fight, rape, cheat and steal.

There are two reasons you didn't hear about it: 1) Intelligence is not law enforcement. NSA, CIA, etc do not necessarily care about "crime", and may even foment it. Their cooperation with FBI and local LE is contextual and occasional, but not consistent. 2) Parallel construction When law enforcement uses a "secret" tool to apprehend a suspect (or more typically, uses illegal methods that won't hold up in court), they do two investigations. First, they do the real investigation, using illegal tactics. Then, they do use the ill-gotten intel to construct a fake investigation to find legal ways that they could have obtained the same intelligence, retroactively. This is why so many narco leaders happen to be apprehended during "routine traffic stops". LE already knew where they'd be, but they can't reveal how they know (because they used illegal tactics), so they tell a cop to pull over a certain car. And wowzo bango, it just happens to be El Chapo Bin Laden! Well, how lucky, let's just arrest him right now.

>>23117 I wasn't sure what I was saying was on-topic, but the conversation interested me, so I continued while using sage. I'm all for granting power to civilized people to defend themselves against barbarians. This creates the strongest society, since a society is as strong as its civilians are. While this is something that is written in American society- as far as I know the only society worldwide that has this in its constitution - it has been written out of the society where I live in some 100 years ago. Shortly summarized: the State is the only one that is able to use force against a human being, while civilians are only permitted to do so under special circumstances (read: when they are being attacked by someone else). The State also is the only one able to wield guns, while civilians can only do so after approval of the Police. The consequences of this has been a people that is under control of a Police State and that the same State has run rampant with its power, leading to many deplorable and retarding things happening, resulting in the fact that this country is dealing with a corruption in all spheres of its society. Again, I note that I know there are many good agents inside the system and that there is a silent war going in eradicating the corruption that is plaguing our societies, but the point still stands: the State can not be the only one having this power over others, since it will eventually lead to corruption of its agents; history has repeatedly proven that power corrupts, and absolute power, corrupts absolutely. This will not be different for the agents on the 'good' side in this war. "You either die a hero, or live long enough and you will see yourself become the villain." note: with "die" here, I don't mean actual physical death, but a metaphysical one i.e. retiring from your position. How do you tackle this inherent consequence of power? Is the Panopticon a solution? Perhaps it will work for the executors of power, since they know that the System knows all and will devour them if they step out of line. But is it a solution for the barbarians and psychopaths? To me it seems that you name it as it is something that is necessary to inhibit this behaviour. However, to me the logical consequence is that it will reach the opposite effect of what it wants to achieve: it will work for people that don't have to be surveilled because they are civilized, and won't do the the bad stuff whether they are being watched or not, while it won't work on the people that do not care if they are being surveilled or not, since they will do all the vile stuff anyway. The critique of every ideal system that has been designed, is that it becomes corrupted the moment humans take control over it. In order for the Panopticon to reach its intended goal, there has to be someone that acts on what the Panopticon shows. Something that will work in the service of the Panopticon, while not having the power of operating it. The solution here is that something operates the Panopticon that is incorruptible, and the only thing that I can think of, is a computer system. It is incorruptible, because it does not crave power, and only does the task it is programmed to do. This solution is posed as a hypothetical, but it's with an almost absolute certainty (>99.9%) that I say we already have a fully functioning computer-ruled Panopticon, ever-present in every machine-ruled society, worldwide. This computer-ruled Panopticon is designed as a 'black box', meaning that outsiders can't look into it, to see what's happening inside while this simultaneously means that it's not possible for programmers to program in new code, since that would mean the flawlessly programmed program can be bend towards the wills of others. This is the most obvious and workable solution of a Panopticon: the computer-panopticon monitors, but doesn't act and only generates output. It gives the output of what it monitors to the agents that have proven to be able to wield power, while the computer-panopticon constantly monitors these agents as well, keeping them in check. These agents can then decide on what they act on, while they also can keep a check on the computer. This is the most sensible trade-off It's still dangerous, since no system designed is unable to be hacked, or influenced by malevolent forces, but is there a better solution to a workable Panopticon? I can't think of any. >Is Orwell necessary to achieve Huxley? I've only read 1984 and it painted such a horrible picture. I guess with Huxley you mean 'Brave New World'? Haven't read that one yet, so I can't give a good answer to your musing here. >It depends how hard egoistic subhumans are willing to fight, rape, cheat and steal to maintain their 'freedom' to fight, rape, cheat and steal. The paradox of freedom. Also, I wonder: >we're on the brink of failure to take the next step What is this 'next step'?

>>23033 It's a good question but there's more you should know: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction Basically if a person got found out through a backdoor, the cops would cover their tracks by busting the person through other more logical and legal evidence breadcrumbs they left behind. Such as "An informant tipped us off of a cache hidden here by the defendant" or "we got an anonymous tip about" such and such. Before all this happens you can start the process of removing the backdoor on an x230 laptop like Snowden does, https://osresearch.net/Clean-the-ME-firmware/ However as the other poster above points out, you'll just get fuarrrked with TEMPEST (MIL-461-STD) solutions. Which is a platinum tier level glownigger tech matured over the last 60 years. But as other users have pointed out, faraday cages, batteries and fiber optic cables are low cost solutions beyond EMI filters and proper grounding countermeasures.

>>23117 >>23143 >>It depends how hard egoistic subhumans are willing to fight, rape, cheat and steal to maintain their 'freedom' to fight, rape, cheat and steal. The paradox of freedom. How did you both come up with this idea? Is that in Huxley/Orwell? Because as far as I can tell this is what the glowniggers are doing to us everyday.

>>23033 >Expose massive project intented to spy on on governments confirming to other governments that you have been acting in bad faith all along to catch a schizo posting about Epipen Island Governmental enemy collectives are more important than local enemy, especially if exposing one basically fuarrrks up the other one.

>>23153 Which governments though? When we look at the BRICS countries, we know they, or at least Russia has these capabilities and countermeasures. As they've discovered resonate cavity bugs in their embassies and had a press field day about such. So having being able to detect such implants, they clearly have the know-how to be aware of computer emanations as well. I think most everyone (nation-states) knows about the capabilities but simply doesn't acknowledge them for the hope that many compartmentalized employees who have no knowledge about such capabilities will leak info adjacent to those who do have knowledge. And to protect their collection opportunities on their populations for control. So I really think you got it backwards.

>>23154 Let's say there is a 100% detection rate for advanced countries. Rogue nations, North Korea, Iran, Hamas, South Africa, Mexico cartels. Lots and lots of higher profile targets that can be left out of the loop by not attacking some random ass wipe.

>>23154 As you omit, why wouldn't Russia and China share this information with NK and Iran?

>>23151 I am just tailing along with what my conversation partner is proposing. It doesn't necessarily mean that I am in agreement with it. I think that any and all mass surveillance completely defies the purpose of a proper society. I wrote something about that in this line about the Panopticon: >However, to me the logical consequence is that it will reach the opposite effect of what it wants to achieve: it will work for people that don't have to be surveilled because they are civilized, and won't do the the bad stuff whether they are being watched or not, while it won't work on the people that do not care if they are being surveilled or not, since they will do all the vile stuff anyway. In what I see as an ideal society, humans have no urge to fight, rape, cheat or steal since Golden Age humans don't have an urge to fight, rape, cheat or steal. Defending the freedom to do such things with the same means that one tries to annihilate.. that's a cognitive paradox. I usually calculate that when dealing with glowniggers, you have to take in account that they are cognitively dissonant. I think the the best solution that can be employed into making something disappear, is by doing the polar opposite of it. It's mathematically sound as well, since -1+1=0. I was fairly sure that the one I was talking to, was a glownigger (or perhaps some AI that was run by a glownigger (as was the first one that employed the standard repertoire of glownigger tactics out the moment I used the word Zionigger)), and your observation made that probability come a lot closer to 1. It's one of their tactics: when you crack the first one, a second one comes up that agrees with you and still tries to tally you along the path it wants, in this case proposing that a Panopticon society where the Benevolent Big Brother watches over us all in order to safeguard us, is a sound solution. As I stated, I am almost 100% sure that this is already the case and many posts in this thread have already verified this thought, with the capabilities of governmental agencies to surveil their citizens, but that they can't flaunt it because it would mean that they have to verify that they are attempting to implement a Totalitarian state, which would mean that their negative Order would be met with resistance.. and they can't have that Resistance, not yet, because they are So Close® of having total control.

>>23143 >This computer-ruled Panopticon is designed as a 'black box' I like this a lot. Technocratic governance is definitely in our future, but this 'black box' is the specific ideal we should work towards, though it's mostly impossible. As the civilian facing surveillance mechanism, this would be the near perfect execution. The Panopticon itself, however, it's more psychological then executive, where even if the black box is off, or 'the guard tower is unmanned,' people still feel observed and beholden to societal expectations, and therein the endeavor is even moreso cultural then otherwise. In tandem with the mechanism, I'd like to see anonymized, jury style audits, where all identity is removed from all parties, but we haven't reached the cultural foundations for this implementation yet. Just as an example, the NSA employees caught using the mechanism to "google" their romantic partners, etc, had absolute power: They were safe from audit because that aspect of surveillance is classified, and their boss would only have given them a slap on the wrist; They were shielded from the psychological Panopticon, and that 's why they stepped out of line. This is unacceptable. And yes, I was referencing A Brave New World. Succinctly, Orwell's society was ruled by chains, Huxley's society was ruled by happiness. The next step is persistent accountability being the basis of every thought: "Can I get away with this?" needs to be deleted from humans' potential repertoire of thought as a persistent, absolute guarantee of "No, never, impossible." Can I get away with running this red light? Can I get away with taking this ladies purse? Can I get away with stealing tax dollars? The Panopticon is only necessary to instantiate the order needed to make those desires obsolete, A Brave New World being the perfect example of giving everyone everything they want all the time, making the Panopticon obsolete. We're a long ways off. >>23151 >Because as far as I can tell this is what the glowniggers are doing to us everyday And I agree with them, but most of all I want them subject to the same exact pressures of 100% surveillance. "Can I get away with this?" - "No, never, impossible." Sociopaths are drawn to power, so it's important that the psychological implementation is even worse for people in those positions. Where the normal civilian's discipline ends at 'I can't get away with this' anyone with power needs to be constantly and permanently be reminded >"oh god oh fuarrrk they're always watching they put microphones in the walls and they're reading my thoughts" But they don't have anything to hide, right? Then they have nothing to fear. Any moral, law abiding individual in a position of power wouldn't care if their thoughts are being read. Normal people who want privacy don't need exorbitant pressure like this, but people in power do. The unfortunate reality is that certain integral aspects of both the psychological panopticon and the surveillance mechanism are necessarily secret to catch rats, and it's more convenient to leverage sociopaths against our enemies then to deny them access to power.

>>23033 The point of operations like that isn't to arrest someone who buy weed but to steal the private data of government members, key official or administrators to blackmail them or just to know what to say to convince them. Mind you, the NSA told Boris Elsin who was conspiring against him so he was able to foil the coup made by the old guard of the communist party and prevent the USSR to be reinstalled. That was on the early days of echelon. Alternatively, they can steal some techs or use it for a commercial gain, that was the point of inQtel. No one will arrest you because of that.

>>23158 >even if the black box is off, or 'the guard tower is unmanned,' people still feel observed and beholden to societal expectations, and therein the endeavor is even more so cultural then otherwise. You say this with the conviction that this effect will last forever. It's more likely that it won't, since humans adapt and so the effect of being constantly surveilled will die out eventually. People will know when they're not watched, or when they are being watched, will simply stop caring for being watched. >I'd like to see anonymized, jury style audits, where all identity is removed from all parties It's the individuality of each member that makes a jury work. "A society is as strong as its citizens." If you want to make the jury work, it will work if you make the citizens that are on the jury, strong of mind, heart and spirit. >but we haven't reached the cultural foundations for this implementation yet That's an inventive way of saying "There needs to be a revolution". >Just as an example, the NSA employees caught using the mechanism to "google" their romantic partners, etc, had absolute power: They were safe from audit because that aspect of surveillance is classified, and their boss would only have given them a slap on the wrist; They were shielded from the psychological Panopticon, and that 's why they stepped out of line. This is unacceptable. Yes, that is unacceptable, but implementing a Panopticon - or something similar that has the same effect - to stop such behavior, is a bad solution, since the solution is in upholding a respectable work ethic, by the employees for not using their powers for personal gain and by their superior for administering the proper discipline. You don't need some all-seeing eye for that. >Orwell's society was ruled by chains, Huxley's society was ruled by happiness From this, and what you previously said ("Is Orwell necessary to achieve Huxley?"), I take it that what you have in mind as the utopian society, is a society where people are forced to be constantly happy. This I consider immature thinking. Sometimes you are unhappy, and there's nothing wrong with being so. Will you feel happy when you hit your knee? No. You will feel bad and its logical for you to do so. Such things happen in life, and so sometimes you will feel unhappy. Trying to 'eradicate' unhappiness displays an unwillingness to deal with the unpleasant parts of life, which is avoidance, and attempting to force it on others because you think that others have to be happy all the time, is pushing your own desires on others, which is selfish. >The next step is persistent accountability being the basis of every thought: "Can I get away with this?" needs to be deleted from humans' potential repertoire of thought as a persistent, absolute guarantee of "No, never, impossible." What you are saying here, is that there has to be a "thought police", which you want to brute force on people so that it will become self-thought police. This is what the pushers of the 'cancel-culture' are trying to achieve. >Can I get away with running this red light? Can I get away with taking this ladies purse? Can I get away with stealing tax dollars? The Panopticon is only necessary to instantiate the order needed to make those desires obsolete. Absolutely untrue. What you are proposing is that you can eradicate thought through oppression, and an external one at that. Tyrants have tried to do so for thousands of years, and it won't work because the human spirit can not be oppressed. >A Brave New World being the perfect example of giving everyone everything they want all the time, making the Panopticon obsolete. We're a long ways off. And will always will be, because when you give someone everything they want all the time, you get a human that's greedy and is unable to deal with not getting what it wants. An uncivilized child so to speak, and if your entire society is filled with them you get a society of children. It's been insightful exchanging thoughts with you. However, I am in total disagreement with your proposed methods and end-goal, since amongst other things, you're proposing the destruction of individuality, free will and personal thought all in order to implement some totalitarian communist utopia, where 'big brother' surveils all the time if everyone is constantly happy, all the time because they get what they want, all the time, and when they aren't, 'big brother' will supply, all the time and if someone interferes with this through their undesirable behavior, 'big brother' will punish those,.. all the time. Is this the next step you were alluding to earlier?

>>23168 >People will know when they're not watched So don't give them that options. See: Cellphones. >It's the individuality of each member that makes a jury work And it's anonymous bureaucracy that allows audits to work. This isn't a trial, it's a check for people with power, such as law enforcement or the NSA. >That's an inventive way of saying "There needs to be a revolution" And revolution is just an inventive way of saying change. >You don't need some all-seeing eye for that. "But people will know when they're not watched." >forced to be constantly happy. No one was forced to be happy in Huxley, the ending of A Brave New World very specifically describes that some people, specifically our highest performers, are never truly happy, because they're our highest performers - Scientists working at the cutting edge will never be satisfied. >What you are saying here, is that there has to be a "thought police" What I'm saying is there has to be cameras. >What you are proposing is that you can eradicate thought through oppression Exactly like how you raise children to look both ways before crossing the street >because when you give someone everything they want all the time, you get a human that's greedy and is unable to deal with not getting what it wants. Unless you're cloning batches of humans who don't act like that, like in the book I was referencing, "We're a long ways off." And how is it that you ignore your former distinction? Why have you invented a world without consequences? Isn't that the basis of what I'm saying, that consequences are guaranteed? Not only is your point not found in the book, it's not even found in my post. >However, I am in total disagreement with your proposed methods As above, you didn't get even a single one correct. You're apparently obsessed with the libertarian mentality that allows for unchecked sociopathy that inevitably leads to tyranny, and their obsession with surveillance is a crucial piece of the currently existing Panopticon. >Is this the next step you were alluding to earlier? The next step is a world where humans CAN'T prey on each other. The step after is a world where people DON'T. The final step is a world where people WON'T. You've enacted my ideals as an implementation of power, but my ideals are the destruction of absolute power, simplified as "Power, Money, Freedom. Pick two." The Panopticon already exists in it's infancy, simplified as "Was Snowden a leak or an op?" Further, you say "Big Brother" like that isn't the system I'm destroying, to put it into libertarian terms >I can't be free until everyone is free Is Bachunin libertarian enough for you? As long as a system exists where federal employees aren't subject to the same exact surveillance expected of a first world country, they are above you. Why, how do you think it's incorrect to monitor law enforcement, politicians, etc, every second of their lives? The fact that those powerful institutions were above the law is the basis for 1984, and I've just outlined a distinct method to ensure unchecked institutions never exist. >Working for the ministry of Love, in his office, he reached over to his Telescreen and turned it off >"One of the many pleasures of working for the ministry." I appreciate your post but it was erratic and non sequiturial; You're obsessed with the identity of ideas instead of the ideas themselves.

>>23169 >You're obsessed with the identity of ideas instead of the ideas themselves. Admittedly true: it can be one of my shortcomings when reading something online, or when I am in conversation with someone; I think that since you are proposing these ideas, you are in agreement with those ideas, while that does not necessarily has to be the case: that's not the case for me (p.e. I proposed the idea of how we can get a working Panopticon, while not necessarily being in agreement with it), so why wouldn't you be able to do the same? It was a very selfish approach to the conversation of me. So yes, my mistake. I let my personal view of things take over, and wanted to let it know what my view of the things we were discussing were, while we were just having an exchange of philosophical ideas, and to see how something could hypothetically work. The concepts we've discussed are of interest of both of us (and they are even on-topic!). It's one of the limitations, I think, when talking online to someone through messageboards, because if we'd've been in a 'live' conversation with each other, I probably would've asked "Wait, do you really believe these things?" and you would've said "No, i'm just discussing ideas" and that would've been the end of that. For now, I will take some time to reflect on what you've said and our conversation so far, and see if I can add something worthwhile to this conversation.

No, there aren't. people who go schizo over it should not be taken seriously. The lack of evidence actually plays into their belief. "There is no evidence, so therefore it MUST mean it's being covered up by the feds!!" It's conspiratorial bullshit that you see from flat earthers and qAnon morons. The absence of anything to support their claims just further strengthens their conviction.

>>23158 After I re-read your post and my reply, I noticed I got some crucial things wrong. Also, I think it's important to note that showing my 'political colours' in my reply, as far as I did show them, didn't add anything worthwhile to the talk about our ideas. So you critique was valid and I will heed for it in this conversation. If you are still willing, we can continue. In reply to your post: jury styled audits, meaning an audit chosen as a jury is chosen? I don't know that much about the American jury system (other that it was haxxored and the juries chosen the past few decades, were not random, but able to be chosen by those who haxxored the system), but this seems a good solution to the inherent flaws present when people who know each other, audit each other (the flaws here, amongst other things, being sympathy ('but Jeff's such a great guy') and politics, either personal ('what if Katie will rat on me when I discipline her?' or career-wise ('If I don't discipline this agent, I have absolute power over this agent'). >The Panopticon is only necessary to instantiate the order needed to make those desires obsolete, Is it possible to change these desires with a Panopticon? I don't think it is. I've taught classes and presently 'classroom management' and the associated behaviour psychology is a big part of running a class. When you want someone doing something, the best way to achieve this is not when it's externally motivated (i.e. I get punished if I don't do this or teacher says so, so we'll do it), but through internal motivation (i.e. I do this because I want to do this) In the foreseeable future, there will always be people who have those desires we were talking about, and punishment - an external motivator - might subdue the behaviour for a while, but never indefinitely. I've seen that happen many times, that the moment the teacher steps out of the class or loses their grip, the unwanted behaviour is back in a heartbeat. Surveillance, being watched, is an external motivator and so I'm really not certain it will achieve the goal of the changing behaviour. So when you say in this post (>>23169) that >The next step is a world where humans CAN'T prey on each other. The step after is a world where people DON'T. The final step is a world where people WON'T. It's something I am not sure is not a possibility with a Panopticon, even when you just want to use it as an instrument used for the phase between the society we currently live in and the society you have in mind; there's many more things needed to achieve that and I am in high doubt that it's something that can be achieved with the current stock of humans. >As long as a system exists where federal employees aren't subject to the same exact surveillance expected of a first world country, they are above you. Why, how do you think it's incorrect to monitor law enforcement, politicians, etc, every second of their lives? I never said that and I was under the impression that we were in agreement that when an instrument as the Panopticon exists and is operational, those who wield its power, are to receive the exact same treatment as for which the Panopticon was designed, meaning yes, they are to be monitored every nanosecond of their lives and to receive the same punishment when stepping out of line. Also, I am under the impression that this has already happened in the past decades and that this information is being used by that select group of people that truly run this show. Obviously, you're not stupid, and you've seen what has happened in the past years in the American political landscape. A thing I'm not certain I understand in your post is the following: >You're apparently obsessed with the libertarian mentality that allows for unchecked sociopathy that inevitably leads to tyranny, and their obsession with surveillance is a crucial piece of the currently existing Panopticon. Do you mean to say that the sociopathy and subsequent tyrannical abuse of power that is so prevalent amongst those in power has to be kept in check, and that the Panopticon we are discussing can help in doing that?

>>23175 >It's conspiratorial bullshit that you see from flat earthers and qAnon morons. If you were in front of me I would spit at your face and fuarrrk you up, fuarrrking nigger

>>23200 Spit is very valuable and not worth to waste on some baiting glownigger

>>23205 >glowing *and* baiting baiting to do what exactly? rage baiting? butthurt baiting? well, possibly. but *glowing* **and** baiting. i don't understand. explain, please?

We've been under technocratic governance for quite some time, at least in its imperfect form. Since about the mid 19th century, governments have tried to design, manage, and operate society based on so-called scientific laws. Panopticism was simply one principal applied everywhere. Today its slowly being phased out or at least the system is being diversified. In a panopticon, prisoners are made to comply with regulations through the threat of punishment and perpetual fear they are being surveilled but they always have the option of non-compliance. In the social control of the future, we will have no such option. Instead, the "prison" will be like an enclosed network, an open world game, where you have theoretical freedom of movement but your always trapped inside the walls of that network, unless allowed to leave. Instead of an option between compliance and non-compliance, you have more than two or three options all of which are a form of compliance anyway. It's like your parents allowing you to pick your food, but giving you a narrow set of convenient options and they know full well that putting the choice in your hands pressures you to go through with it. The model for social control in the future will no longer be the panoptic prison, but the highway: you can move along the network however you want, in whatever direction, and stop at any point on the highway. You think that choosing between a set of pre-defined and restricted options makes you free, this gives you internal motivation to comply with the highway code and while you drive you are continuously producing metadata which is collected to monitor your behavior. In Afghanistan, the US government begun targeted killings based on metadata. They collected a vast amount of data from cellphones and electronic devices and fed this to a program which determined, according to predefined parameters, the likelihood of a person being a terrorist. This included reading news sites unfavorable to the US, frequent travel, search history etc. If a person's behavior was determined to be abnormal they were fast tracked onto the kill list. It won't be long before a similar system will be brought to our streets albeit for policing not mass murder.

>>23200 ooooh how scary! id love to see you try to fuarrrk me up with your cheeto-encrusted hands :)

>>23035 Although the PSP is not as well understood as the IME, AMD CPUs may be more desirable. The PSP doesn't have a networking stack as far as I know. It doesn't appear to connect to the internet or anything, maybe it has some more covert means of connecting to the internet. Anyway at a base level it would appear that the PSP cannot facilitate remote administration of computer systems unlike the IME, at least for the time being. I seriously doubt the IME has been used to deanonymize people on any meaningful level so far. I've never seen any cases of criminals being caught that would suggest some hidden usage of the IME by law enforcement. They can't just connect to any computer system with it anyway, they need to actually have a way to identify a specific computer in order to abuse its IME. It's pretty easy to isolate it anyway, simply disusing onboard NIC is enough to isolate the IME and AMT, sometimes your BIOS will even warn you of that itself.

>>23033 Nope. The only somewhat related case to that was when conti tried to fuzz ME for vulnerabilities which they never used officially (we know that from their leaked chat). https://www.cpomagazine.com/cyber-security/conti-ransomware-develops-proof-of-concept-code-for-firmware-attacks/ >if it was really being used as a backdoor since 2008 It is not a backdoor at all. This is a myth popularized by tech-illiterates. Unless you are the next Snowden, you probably should not care at all. If you do, consider getting a device compatible with heads and Qubes https://osresearch.net/

>>23070 > I know here that from the 90's on, every electrical socket have gotten a switch built into it which signals when the electrical socket is being used Where is that? Sounds like a very expensive system for no gain. They could figure out when you turn things on/when you're home/when you're asleep pretty easily by just looking at the overall electricity usage of the whole house. >>23158 >Succinctly, Orwell's society was ruled by chains, Huxley's society was ruled by happiness Huxley's was a little more insidious than that. They weren't just given drugs and sex to be happy, everyone in the society was genetically engineered for their roles, raised without parents by the world state. Really it's just a more advanced version of the society presented in 1984, in my opinion, one where the Party has finally succeeded in turning all of humanity into empty vessels and won the war. This makes sense because it's also set in a much farther future. >>23289 It is possible that IME controllers could simply be passive observers, silently watching everything and flagging / transmitting anything deemed worth reporting according to some internal ML system. PSP likewise could do the same, but would require active participation from the host OS to do so. However, given that these controllers have access to the entire memory space of a processor, the PSP could easily* just hack the network stack and slip their packets in undetected. *not that easily to be honest, it would take a monumental amount of effort to make this work across multiple builds of the linux kernel. But you could easily just target Ubuntu LTE and a few other popular distro's kernels. >>23209 >Instead of an option between compliance and non-compliance, you have more than two or three options all of which are a form of compliance anyway. This does nicely characterize the world of today, and the world we're headed to. One just has to look at the evolution of various youth subcultures to see how everything goes now: anything even remotely transgressive is popularized and cannibalized, turned into a harmless outlet for transgressive emotions. This isn't even a new technique... it happened to Christianity thousands of years ago, just using different means. Now we have the internet so it will happen faster and in more cringey ways, on TikTok.

>>23292 Why do you trust the Qubes devs to build a secure operating system, but at the same time call them tech illiterates for not trusting the proprietary firmware blobs running in ME?

>>23292 Lol snowden is an actor I doubt that there's a group of cyber police monkeys sitting behind a monitor, reading your soykafposts and laughing at your porn searches People are lazy and generally try to do as little as possible to earn their wages and chuck e cheese tokens

Can't wait for my CPU to come with a built in 5G modem that connects automatically to a prepaid account and lets intel monitor everything I do via the ME.

>>23301 >Snowden is an actor weird that he's exiled to Russia then

>>23033 The NSA developing the first weaponized MD5 collision is proof they don't even have a secret backdoor in Windows nevermind your CPU. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flame_(malware) >>23295 >Why do you trust the Qubes devs to build a secure operating system, but at the same time call them tech illiterates for not trusting the proprietary firmware blobs running in ME? Why do you maliciously misquote people? He said only tech illiterates call it a backdoor. There are plenty of other reasons to not want it around.

>>23049 > With Zionig, it racks up a new pathway of thinking ('Zionist? Niggers? What does he mea.... ") + it's spiced up with meme-humor, which strikes the like-chord of the brainwashed, who will in turn are more open to the concept that the word tries to achieve. Lmao imagine actually thinking like this. Bro you can’t even string together words to make proper sentences.

>>23316 Lmao, imagine actually double-spacing after periods in a variable-width font face. Bro, you can't even punctuate the vocative properly. Themes? What th--

>>23317 Imagine allowing variable width fonts on your machine wasting precious RAM so you can pretend you’re Steve Jobs.

>>23315 In this paper Joana Rutkowska, the founder of QubesOS summarizes several ways Intel could plant a backdoor. Sure, she doesn't say "they 100% did exploit the opportunity to do so", because it can't be proven without reversing the firmware, which is almost impossible to obtain. I'll give you that. But I don't see why you should base your decision if you call someone expert or tech illiterate purely on their opinion on whether the American intelligence community will use technology exports to backdoor almost every PC worldwide when given the opportunity to, and I am pretty sure Rotkowska and others fall into the category of those who believe that the perfect opportunity to create a backdoor will not be left unused.

>>23315 >The NSA developing the first weaponized MD5 collision is proof they don't even have a secret backdoor in Windows nevermind your CPU. Also this is bullshiet. Do you really think they would burn their best exploits on every target? Using a Windows exploit let alone an Intel ME exploit comes at the risk of fuking over lots of American citizens too, if the exploit gets detected. See "Operation Triangulation" if you don't believe me that exploits get detected in the wild. Next time maybe its not a group of ethical researchers that finds it, but maybe the North Koreans or Russians who would gladly use it for sure.

>>23320 Really interesting paper Lainon. Thanks for sharing. From my understanding after reading it, this project could potentially mitigate a number of potential firmware/CPU/ME vulnerabilities, and in addition help protect against evil maid. https://osresearch.net/

> is there any 'hard evidence' that the secret police are using secret techniques and not-trying people in secret courts? alice... get a clue

there are computers without these backdoors... various ARM systems, lots of older computers, Raptor Talos/Blackbird machines, etc I run a Blackbird because I'm a free software freak, but there are big security implications too

>>23336 That's a lot of money and time to spend on a false sense of freedom and security

>>23341 What's so false about it?

>>23316 My syntax game is pretty ace, so that insult raelly doesn't hit the mark, as opposed to my lame insult-word,.. which does.

real cybercriminals brag about their sim swap fortunes cammed up on dischud, any thought to opsec beyond not hitting licks on the school chromebook is a way to spot larpers

You can put a radical diff middle machine sniffing traffic while you use a vpn controlled by yourself ( for give some network work ) with a proper configured fwll. If something comes in or out out of the vpn you got it. Anyway if that happens I can't do much about it because I did my duties. I only can send them a "welcometomyhome" in a client hello or something.

>>23033 It's a research exploit. It's not being actively exploited because of the high requirements for exploitation. There is no real risk it's just security researchers jacking off their resume.

I compiled Linux with all mitigations disabled and https://leaky.page/ still cannot show me whatever it is trying to do.

>>23043 They wouldn’t even need to kill them, they could just use IME to plant CP on the device and arrest them for that.

>>23048 Divide et impera. What's wrong with using the word zionigs? At least it's better than calling them the j-word. That term just lumps everyone together. Even though the majority of them aren't even zionigs and just want to live peaceful lifes. I dig the term zionigs.

>>23873 >what's wrong with using the word zionigs? I think I made that pretty clear in my post. It reinforces red versus blue thinking and it also sounds like something only a terminally online NEET would say. Kinda like 'femoid'. Like, imagine actually using it in a sentence out loud. Imagine how much of an idiot you'd sound like.

>>23033 I'd assume for these kind of backdoors typically the glowies will use a backdoor to identify someone, then wait for that person to fuarrrk up in another way (poor opsec somewhere along the way), then they pretend that is how they were caught

the thing you have to understand about LE is that they have jobs just like everyone else where there are different layers of bureaucracy and politics involved in things like being able to pursue particular cases. I guarantee that the vast majority of people who do stuff like coreboot their laptops to disable IntelME (which to be fair includes me) are neckbeards who have never broken a law in their life other than pirating animes. the feds aren't going to come after someone like that, certainly not by using the IME backdoor, because the truth is that none of you are worth their time. BUT, if you're someone important enough for the FBI or CIA to actually make use of any of the backdoors that exist like IME, you are going to get disappeared because at that point you're probably a political organizer or terrorist or maybe someone who is doing investigative work into things the feds don't want you to know about. if that happens it will be a completely extrajudicial thing -- no trial, no arrest, just being executed by the glowing gestapo. no one will know what happened to you, there will be no news stories about any of it, and even if people post about it online it will be suppressed. that's why you never hear about any of this soykaf.

I like to mention some tidbits of knowledge that I have whenever this subject pops up. I've said these things in some other threads on lainchan. There are no known cases of people being apprehended through exploitation of the IME, and there don't seem to be any that would indicate an exploited IME was concealed through parallel construction. People have monitored traffic generated by computers with active IMEs and never observed packets being telemetered by the IME. It is active, but doesn't seem to do anything interesting. People never think about how the IME is exploited. The NSA doesn't just "use it" and deanonymize you. First off, afaik only machines equipped with AMT can be remotely administered, so the IME probably will not suffice on its own. Secondly, they have to be able to identify you. How do they access a backdoor that they don't know how to interface with? Once you've been identified, they can determine the identification code pertaining to your machine's IME and interface with it remotely. But I don't think there's an easy way for them to do that without first needing to weed through a large pool of potential people you could be, unless they have physical access to your machine (or are in close proximity to it), or have documents you'd receive on a computer purchased at a store. If they can pinpoint your machine, you're dead anyway so it doesn't matter much. IME and AMT network over NIC, if you use PCI then they can't network. You could also use USB, like a USB-ethernet adapter, this will just go over PCI but I guess it could be considered an added measure in case the government secretly designed the IME and AMT to network over PCI. You can use me_cleaner to kill the IME's networking stack.

>>23045 >>23045 Peak schizoposting. This is true of literally all tech not just Israeli tech. I also like how you see Israel as the master and not an extension of the Leviathan that is US foreign policy.

>>23045 yes, I recall with the British Solution to Germany's Enigma in WWII there was a huge effort to parallel construct plausible excuses for many of their enigmatic discoveries. If its heard a U boat is in XYZ area then a patrol plane has to sweep through there before an attack can be made, that sort of thing. Of course that sort of work makes the use of such a concealed power much more expensive, so its used less often and only when considered quite important.

>>24133 If the NSA or Mossad has a CPU level backdoor into every Intel processor why didn't they use it against Iran's nuclear program? Why did they have to use a USB zeroday in Windows instead?

>>24303 get it through your thick skull. you can't publicly demonstrate such an exploit if you hope to keep it useable. You either have to make it look like you used something else when you used it in fact(parallel construction), or you refrain as much as possible from using it, because if you do use it, you will reveal that you have it and drive people to change their practices. This and obviously its hard to use even a very good backdoor if you can't actually access the machine you're trying to diddle around with. Even if I have your root password I can't just use it if you never open an SSH port, same would go for any IME type attack.

>>24303 Iran's system was airgapped, they had to pay a guy to plug in the USB anyway. Windows exploits are a dime a dozen comparatively and if that's enough to get the job done, then that's what you use. >>24288 That didn't work very well though. Too many coincidences. There were many people, especially in the navy, that said enigma had been broken. High command was just overly confident and ignored them. People are always eventually going to find out when you're using an exploit, and the longer you sit in it the more likely it is that your enemies figure out the same exploit or find your backdoor. So I think fears that the NSA has some huge corpus of exploits that they never use, or that they have a working 10k qbit quantum computer and literally everything is parallel construction, are unwarranted. Probably they have a couple trump cards, such as IME backdoors or some weird side channel attacks, that they are keeping in their back pocket. Keep in mind that they are mostly worried about other spooky intelligence agancies figuring things out, not criminals or squares. People in FIVEYES countries are so docile they're practically begging to be hacked by their oh so benevolent governments. A few dissenters on an imageboard literally don't matter, we can just get branded as pedophiles and dismissed. Plus cops are almost always retarded compared to spies, they'd probably brag about how they hacked your laptop.

>>23034 You are obviously not aware of the Macintosh exploits, vulnerabilities, back-doors, etc. which currently exist: https://www.tomsguide.com/computing/macbooks/unpatchable-vulnerability-discovered-in-apple-m1-m2-and-m3-chips-what-you-need-to-know As much as I love and daily drive Unix systems, please understand that nothing is definitely secure. Now that being said, I am not a fan of Windows. >>23033 OP, you shouldn't have to worry about a backdoor on your personal device. I am assuming you are not likely a sought after individual with value, importance, criminality, etc.

>>24379 That post was i think was before the M series chips were found to be exploitable. Unless that anon was talking about what was mentioned in another post how Apple's Intel series before they had the M series had a more stripped down Intel management engine. I do hope RISCV would somehow be more easily patchable than other current architectures. Would be a pain to have to get a new processor all the time.

>>23033 Illegal spying is illegal but still useful for glowies. meaning how they 'found' information isn't always public but the information they found is. I'm sure they trip and fell into getting a warrant for the exact piece of illegal information on your machine.

There is much more to hardware security than simply ME/PSP. For example, a few years ago a security researcher fuzzed x86 CPUs and found hundreds of undocumented instructions. Now whether these were real undocumented instructions, or improperly implemented microcode is unknown. A prominent security researcher showed me a ~16mb Windows image he acquired. He hasn't been able to find any public information about it. He thinks it might be used to get early I/O to let a user enter a password to decrypt disk on boot in some cases. >>23034 Is Apple seriously paying sh1lls to invade lainchan too now?

>>23033 bait, but w/e. The actors that have access to those backdoors are too smart to burn them. Instead you use them for parallel construction - use it to find a plausible different path to the same result, and use that as a scapegoat.

>>23033 I'm guessing you don't know about minix and project odin lol.

>>23033 > people being caught you think they use "omega level" backdoors on soykaf eating plebs?

>>23053 >I think I recall finding a video once on YouTube I can't find anymore of an Intel employee explaining how IntelME works and he said it only accesses the first slot of the RAM. So this makes me wonder if you just remove the memory from that slot and only use the others does this stop IntelME from operating? Aren't BIOS systems hardwired to use the 0 slot as well? So you may be unable to boot your computer at all. I wonder if this would vary between manufacturers.

>Just because the evidence wasn't used in court doesn't mean it wasn't used to apprehend a suspect. sure, but it supposedly existing for 17 years with zero evidence of parallel construction in spite of being a special interest among security autists points a pretty valid finger at it not being the serious threat in the first place. its rare when backdoors exist for this long especially backdoors that would have been leaked by edward snowden, declassified after 10 years or available under FOIA. when they do, it tends to be newsworthy. >>23089 >this will only get worse until people have control over the grid this 1000x. the power grid should be in the hand of people. >tor stuff >tempest stuff surprisingly sober opinion on the topics that internet pseuds / feds push doom about. I've heard that there was some new wifi protocol that adds 3D mapping of the person's house / bodies to them, it sounds TEMPEST related. is this real or FUD? I think our strategy at this point should be to see attack chain of what tools we currently have at our disposal to complete control of the power grid in the hands of the people. we have some assets - tor, encryption, FOSS, VPNs, hacktivists, an overwhelmed political lobby, a couple of wealthy individuals who care about freedom of speech and privacy.

>>25866 >new wifi protocol that adds 3D mapping of the person's house / bodies to them Technically possible to map space using em waves, but I don't know how is it supposed to be related to wifi protocol. A crude shape of your house inside is not very useful to your adversaries anyway, and can probably be obtained by just finding your house's project. Sneaking a camera in would also be way easier than this. Hardware for such a thing would be horrendously complex and expensive, it's just all around a bad idea.

People who are serious about security don't use wifi.

>>25872 Is van eck phreaking and tapping into ethernet cable that uncommon these days?

>>25871 > it's just all around a bad idea. Assuming that familiarity with the layout of the rooms in a building is worthless is an utterly ridiculous bullshit. Estimating where stairwells, elevators, technical rooms and roof exits lie is the first and most important thing a burglar or intelligence agency operative thinks through to make his job easier. Sometimes even looking at the size of the windows is enough. E.g. stairwells have the highest windows, sometimes more than 3 meters high, or several ones above the other and technical rooms typically have no windows at all. Besides, it is useful to estimate where the fuse box is and which way to go around the room where there may surveillance cameras be. Typically dining areas are free of cctv. We are talking here not only about single-family houses but also office premises or corporate headquarters. translate whole page with google and read this: https://payload.pl/najwyzsza-izba-kontroli/

>>23049 This. "Zionig" is a useful term because it helps filter out people like >>23046 who might otherwise undermine pro-freedom and anti-surveillance movements with incessant mission creep (which is what their oversocialized, people-pleasing mindsets demand of them). Dr. Kaczynski said a proper anti-technology movement must seek to exclude most leftish types, partly for this reason. The same could be said (and often is, on less polite sites with overzealous jannies) of movements that aim to preserve user privacy, anonymity and security. >>23150 This. They probably don't even need to resort to now-public shizo tier techniques like measuring EM emissions from RAM to exfiltrate your data, plenty of other ways to cover a CPU backdoor. https://arxiv.org/html/2409.02292v1

>>23089 >Funnily, it is not legal for a U.S citizen to take effective measures to protect theirself against TEMPEST attacks. Where can I find information about this being illegal. A quick search online can't find any information on this. Where can I find information on TEMPEST countermeasures? TEMPEST countermeasures may especially be useful information for some people I know who live in authoritarian nations.

>>25972 >Funnily, it is not legal for a U.S citizen to take effective measures to protect theirself against TEMPEST attacks. Not illegal. Don't let a glowie trick you into believing so. What was deemed illegal is back in as far back as I think 70s or 80s when ATMs became a thing, some old school phreakers showed the press that they could capture the CRT screen and skim peoples ATM bank card details just using an antenna and their phreaking setup. Then ofcourse some k i k es saw this as a business opportunity and started selling this phreaking kit pre-packaged. That's what became derezzed and made illegal, selling tempest hacking gear prepackaged. Considering TEMPEST or spurious emissions, there are non-military and scientific reasons to have rugged MIL-STD-461 laptops and other devices that are certified to filter negative EMI useful in laboratory where sensitive equipment and scientific outcomes would be negatively impacted by non-certified equipment.

>>23033 You should be more concerned by CompuTrace/LoJack/Absolute module that is used to catch people stealing computers as one a person logs onto wifi it makes a call to send the IP to Abolute servers and also uses WiFi Positioning to triangulate the device since GPS is not something found in computers. Acktually it might if the stock WWLAN card has that capability. There was also rootkit malware named "LoJax" that would change the hardcoded server to one to get malware from to install. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/01/8-months-after-its-discovery-unkillable-lojax-rootkit-campaign-remains-active/ https://github.com/Kippykip/Computrace-Mitigator https://gist.github.com/NewEraCracker/9fc65c356db013bc51a1f1ba389c7100 The fact that many DXE modules in the BIOS add an attack vector (on purpose imo) and the fact that stock BIOS now is locked to Intel Anti theft which prevents running open source bios should tell you the crossroads where at. https://github.com/linuxboot/fiano?tab=readme-ov-file#dxe-cleaner Actually I take back my first statement is YOU SHOULD BE CONCERNED about IME due to the shear fact that the reason it was patched in the first place is hackers found ways to exploit it due to them leaving the vuln un-patched for corpo/leo/govt agents to use. They will never tell you if it has/was used in any legal cases. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-00086.html Exploits like the ANT Catalog where "BAD USB's" where estimated to cost $20,300 in 2008-09 now cost $5-100 dollars depending on things added like adding network capability for creating a hidden wifi access point to exiftrate data from. So Intel Management Engine and PSP exploits that used to cost $$$ to exploit might be less $$$ to do now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANT_catalog

>>25996 Based infoposter chad

>>25996 Most BIOS malware comes from exploitation of DXE modules

>>26026 >https://hothardware.com/news/uefi-firmware-rootkit-moonbounce-found-by-kaspersky >This infection chain worked by leveraging the CORE_DXE portion of the firmware, which is called during the Driver Execution Environment phase of the boot sequence. >https://www.techradar.com/news/your-motherboard-could-be-infected-with-some-seriously-sneaky-malware >the compromised firmware images came with a modified CSMCORE DXE driver >https://blogs.vmware.com/security/2021/06/detecting-uefi-bootkits-in-the-wild-part-1.html > UEFI modules (DXE driver and UEFI application if any) Yes DXE modules are threat vector and UEFI was a mistake (on purpose some would say)

>>26026 >>26218 This is my first time hearing about "DXE" all I know is linux... but I do know that somehow I deleted my UEFI boot entry and was unable to boot into my partition

>>23034 Jay Louis Irwin? here??

>>25830 what is project odin?

>>25871 >A crude shape of your house inside is not very useful to your adversaries anyway The info whether you're home, and are sitting behind a running decrypted PC is very valuable info https://www.zmescience.com/feature-post/technology-articles/computer-science/wifi-router-sees-people-through-walls/ >This is not the first time researchers have attempted to “see” people through walls. In 2013, a team at MIT found a way to use cell phone signals for this purpose, and in 2018, another MIT team used WiFi to detect people in another room and translate their movements to stick figures. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5EM3pd4Y6w (sry for the yt link)

>>25871 They can monitor your heart rate and breathing by the subtle changes in your chest. They can monitor hormone levels and mental state by skin reflectivity. They can monitor your thoughts by detecting subvocalization. They can monitor ambient sound by either interference patterns, or 2.45 GHz interactions with water vapor in the air. This is literally 1950's tech. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Signal

>>23169 I've thought for a long time about this post, and I have a question about >Power, Money, Freedom Does Influence fall under Power?

>>23033 Is the AES Instruction Set for x86/x86-64 processors safe? I think it would be pretty good place to put a backdoor. Another candidate is RDRAND RNG instructions - just like Terry Davis said! >https://wiki.osdev.org/Random_Number_Generator

>>26301 >They can monitor your thoughts by detecting subvocalization "I'm the ubermensch because I have to verbalize everything before I can even perceive that I'm thinking, which means I 'm not an NPC" monologuelets on suicide watch This is the dawning of the age of the visual and unsymbolized thinker

>>26892 > monologuelets > visual I do both but I can't replace one by the other. When I try to not verbalize, it's kinda possible, but for very short sequnces of thoughts and it feels like verbalized in stealth mode rather than fully unverbalized.

>>26301 > They can monitor your thoughts by detecting subvocalization. Which page of your file is covering this?

>>26898 It's not in that file, that has to do with what came out of the Moscow Signal, which did detect such things. Just search subvocalization detection or IR / laser microphones. You can do it through wi-fi (which can detect heartbeat and breathing), you can do it through growing something on the skin surface (shewanella, nanotech modified yeasts, etc). They're not going to directly and openly publish results that fully encompass the scope or mechanism of pickup. You have to piece that together yourself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subvocal_recognition

are there really people arguing for a surveillance state in this thread? has the board culture here died? any idiot arguing that the state will optimize for anything other than retaining their power is an idiot and must be called out as such. surveillance states are a reward hack for this.

>>26901 I'd be very eager to get my hands on unintrusive SVR, but the tech is simply not there. We don't have sensors with adequate resolution. If I was allowed to point house-sized radar arrays at your domicile I might be able to sift through enough data to do SVR, but I'd need a datacenter to process everything. It's not economically viable for mass or even targeted surveillance. what's more, subvocalization is not the same as reading your mind, so unless you walk around like that kid from Malcom In The Middle, you're safe from the alphabet boys you claim are stealing your memes. No, they're more likely to take other measures to spy on you. tldr schizo soykaf, i wish it was real.

>>23033 Not as far as I know, but I also haven't heard very many cases of Tempest style attacks being used to catch people either so clearly we're not hearing about everything that happens. Btw look up TEMPEST.

>>28157 that was someone 'in power' who has a direct benefit from the surveillance state . they often paddle their ideas on imageboards to stress-test it or get new ideas. >>23874 that's a fair point.

>>28421 >"in power" retarded take. they're accelerationists (also retarded)

>>28434 Accelerationism is a psyop I swear.

>>28435 >Psyop Useful idiots don't need to be tricked. Tell them >bad thing is good thing and they take care of the rest

>>28436 >>28435 What if instead of authentically engaging in reality and therefore feeling despair, I convince myself that "after the collapse" everything will be better?

I think there was a ransonware attack that did. and then there is pegasus, which uses a hardware-level vuln on desktop computers, but I don't remember if it was related to the me or to the main cpu