Ah! Shaun,You shouldn't be so cryptic...:-). Did you know that....according to @war...(available on Cryptome). The United States and its allies won the war in Iraq and Afghanistan! And this was accomplished after the "surge" which happened after "Mission Accomplished". (Forget IS or ISIS, this successful insurgency happened after the book was published). Not only that, but there was a major change in the USA in gathering and using intelligence, which brought together the local and national intelligence of the forces on the ground, which aligned itself with the organisations back in the USA. This enabled them, through the use of drones, and other forces on the ground, such as human terrain, to overcome, to delete, or in US parlance, to remove, certain members of the Muslim rebels from the conduct of the war. It was all a question of networks, analysing the networks, finding out who was on them and who they were and then taking over those networks and sending out deceptive messages which would confuse them; and killing those who were on the networks, especially the leadership.
And it worked,and the Muslim hordes have been defeated, due to superior technology. In other words, the insurgents were defeated...by sigint, comint, humint and all that stuff! Does that seem strange to you? Is that the real world? I would think it isn't, because ISIS is very much back on the agenda. A huge group of Muslim militants who are using a completely different strategy in their communications and in the way they operate their military and other activities, in controlling the local situation and the international situation. They want the USA, they encourage the USA, they create an agenda through skilfull propoganda, to bring back USA troops to Iraq. Viva the Republicans. They want to kill the "grunts" and are using any and all methods to get the USA, and its allies, to return. Does it remind you of the "Holy Wars" in medieval times when Christians were pitted against Muslims? Same ole stuff. Reminds me of Vietnam and all those Vietnamese who used to live under Da Nang airbase...didn't bomb them!
The book mentions the major lessons which have been learned by the USA, how to control insurgency, to "take out" networks" on the internet and on the ground...using electronic and local information....using drones, where appropriate. They were very successful, apparently. Just as successful as the Chinese were in gathering information on the USA's latest fighter plane. All kept quiet, of course, all done through exploiting the private companies involved in defence procurement, a bit like farting, notice the smell, but don't mention it. The Chinese made a point, according to the book, of organising an exhibition, to which they invited representatives of the American government; where they showed how they had adopted the features of the aeroplane to work within their own parameters when producing the counter to American "offence" or is it "defence". You won't read such stuff in USA newspapers, but you can read it on Cryptome. Terrible website, they should ban it, or shut it down....:-). Trouble is...that so few people on this mailing list actually read what John is posting...but there you are. Aren't they all experts in their own little areas...:-). Of the 600 who are members of this newsgroup. I reckon that at least 550 are, what we call in Scotland...lurkers.
ATB Dougie. On 28/11/14 22:07, Shaun O'Connor wrote:
Hi Douggiethe way things are going at present, absolutely nothing surprises me any more.... as for any interesting reads... still ploughing through Bamfords books ( current reading pretext for war).Things are getting quite, erm interesting here in the uk, a piece of legislation is being rushed through our parliament, but heres the interesting bit although it is being rushed through it is not classified as urgent. also comments have been made to the effect that, for a draft bill. parts appear to be very well developed. even more intriguing is that this piece of proposed legislation dealing with widening powers perportedly in the name of counterterrorisim. appears to be supported by "stakeholders" a rather odd anomaly for a government bill supposedly drafted in conjunction with or on the advice of the UK security services. I think I have the pdf's somewhere both of the proposed bill, the explanatory notes and a draft committee meeting discussing the bill.ATB Shaun On 28/11/2014 21:21, doug wrote:Hi Shaun,Do you remember that US program encouraged by DARPA...TIA or Total Information Awareness? I thought that they had got rid of it, but I see that it is back again in a different form, but with a vengeance.There is another cypher system where two or more identical books are used which are only known to the users as this information is exchanged previously using some other secure method, such as WOMB. Once this information is set up, then the users can communicate by using sentences or words from the book, i.e. (page) 6...(line) 10... (sentence) (word) 5 etc. Pretty foolproof but clumsy and requires recipients and senders to have a special relationship, like knowing and trusting one another. Once book is compromised the cryptography fails. If transmitted over the internet, suffers same problem as any other encryption sent over the internet. Ball squeezing, same problem. Mind you, using such a system might actually be more secure than any of those what we have at the moment...:-). I can see us having to educate internet users into Book Literacy. Read any good books lately...:-).ATB Dougie.P.S.One Time Pad: Make sure that the password isn't longer than the message. It might be "perfect" cryptography, but it is subject to the same "metadata" problems...Is there an electronic version of a one time pad? If so, subject to operation security just the same as pgp etc.P.P.S. I seem to remember that our current most favourite political asylumee, at present resident at the Ecaudorian Embassy in London, and living in the vain hope that the European Arrest Warrant might be overturned, invented a cryptographic system which he called "rubber hose", which apparently, like Truecrypt can hide itself within itself, so allowing plausible deniability... provided that another form of rubber hose aint used on the spherical objects...On 28/11/14 20:44, Shaun O'Connor wrote:On 28/11/2014 20:08,...but don't use it for long narrative and member...1) don't use an electronic random number generator( much less an on-line one) dice are good. 2) ensure that, to the best of your ability , you are not being observed in the creation of said otp. 3) write on a single sheet resting on a hard surface( you don't want to leave tell-tale indentations lying about. 4) DO NOT use the same cypher key twice!!!( or should tat by number/letter sequence?)for OTP to work effectivel there must be a high degree of trust between the parties involved. if you leave your pad so someone else can find it your fucked.jd.cypherpunks@xxxxxxxxx wrote:Looking for Perfect Cryptography: The One-Time Padhttp://www.cs.utsa.edu/~wagner/laws/pad.html <http://www.cs.utsa.edu/%7Ewagner/laws/pad.html>Simple and Secure. Have Fun! --Michael--*_PRIVACY IS A BASIC RIGHT - NOT A CONCESSION _* https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/when-time-comes-we-need-be-ready-fight-tpps-secret-anti-user-agenda--*_PRIVACY IS A BASIC RIGHT - NOT A CONCESSION _* https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/when-time-comes-we-need-be-ready-fight-tpps-secret-anti-user-agenda