[cryptome] Re: OpenSSL bug explanation

  • From: John Young <jya@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 10:37:36 -0500

Good pointer. Fingers a slew of alleged suckers of NSA, allegedly
making amends. "Allegedly," how handy that cop-out cover-up.

There is a frenzy of efforts to patch comsec in response to Snowden's
revelations, limited as they are, with dread of what may be coming
about long-running deceptions supported by those with dual-use
contracts, dual-purpose participation in comsec standards, designing
and selling dual-clothed, back-doored (malware) protection concealed
by official secrecy.

On comsec fora there's a good bit of tongue-twisting to shade complicity,
appearing as "let's not rush to judgments, much of this was long known,
no need to condemn having to run a company doing whatever it takes."
With fingerpointing, scapegoating, blacklisting, stigmatization in full force.

Stinks of McCarthyism, Hollywood blacklisting, Manchurian Canidate
propaganda.

Whoa, why you stigmatizing, what you hiding, Mr. Cryptome, what's
that deodorant you're selling.

Evolution is a sweet bitch for the predators. NatGeo pornographs
the prey. Yeah, there's porn being shot on comsec sets. Allegedly
baring money shots but is it really like that, so loveless, so mean,
so unbelievable, so easy to find on the lonely Internet spying
billions.






At 10:01 AM 12/22/2013, you wrote:

http://marc.info/?l=openssl-announce&m=138747119822324&w=2&x=1



Other related posts: