[cryptome] Re: How reliable is this new Detekt?

  • From: In Harms Way <11414150173@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 15:39:37 +0300

Thanks, good idea.
Since as John pointed out the search of the tool goes into the last
corners of your system, we would need to look at the code to see if it
also harvests and/or sends something. The idea to install "security
tools" which actually are spyware has been implemented already. If
detekt is one of them needs to be checked.


Aftermath wrote, On 24/11/2014 05:26:
> wouldnt be hard to find out.. just have a screen recorder running,
> then download it twice then slow down 
> then playback of the video you just recorded
> On Sunday, November 23, 2014, Shaun O'Connor <capricorn8159@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:capricorn8159@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>     hmmm  missed that one..probably a counter of some sort..funny how
>     it whips past very quickly  as described though maybe no one is
>     supposed to notice it. it would be an interesting experiment to
>     find out if every download is preceded by the same sequence of
>     digits or otherwise...could be a correlation counter.of course, i
>     am guessing.. perhaps i am totally and utterly paranoid!!
>     atb
>     Shaun
>     On 23/11/2014 18:56, In Harms Way wrote:
>>     Did anyone else realize that when you download detect.exe from
>>     https://github.com/botherder/detekt
>>     then just before the download resolves as detekt.exe very briefly a 10
>>     or so digit number appears and disappears.
>>     Is that just a download counter or an identifier?
>>     IHW
>>     John Young wrote, On 22/11/2014 18:50:
>>>     Dopplegangers, its Google which goppledangs.
>     -- 
> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/when-time-comes-we-need-be-ready-fight-tpps-secret-anti-user-agenda

We have nothing to hide, but something to protect: 
- and the people, whose human rights these are.

Other related posts: