Pre-92 stega hardware encryption…

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.4789.pdf

So these computers would be useful to communicate WITHOUT clowns having an easy time "listening in"

>>2550057

Also- it would be very useful for generating uncrackable Tripcodes.

>>2550350

OOOPS wrong thread! too many tabs!

>>2550057

Isn't this the scam that CBTS (Pamphlet & Baruch) we peddling at inflated prices supported byh meaningless claims about their security?

They are just army surplus,

encrypted networks,,, deep dives….

Hocus Pocus meant to fool the technically uninformed.

Hardware encryption requirements hahaha

If that is true what encryption algorithm is it using

If you are talking about SiphrNet you are purely repeating bullshit, and have no idea how it was built, managed and how it is architected.

I call bullshit - Your last sentence is 100 untrue

1) you couldn't build one without knowing what it required

2) The military doesn't sell crypto gear "at salvage" unless is is from WWII

This is why normies ( who actually know about these things) laugh at the bullshit posted here

>>2550366

>Isn't this the scam that CBTS (Pamphlet & Baruch) we peddling at inflated prices supported byh meaningless claims about their security?

You can't find these things for sale in normal areas so your assertions are 100% false.

Interesting that you only have to talk about one of these things for a few minutes before a disinfo shill shows up….

>>2550057

That is the story CBTS was peddling, right?

It is all fake. to take suckers money

Sounds like you know as much about encryption as you do about what trump had for lunch today

Nothing!

If you want a critique about your misinformation let me know

>>2550087

56-bit DES is the same nomater what platform is used on. It is a standard (old) algorithm.

2^56 bit long binary number, with a standard mechanism to engrypt and decrytp (e.g. for 8 char password/tripcode

>>2550431

>That is the story CBTS was peddling, right?

Nope… NO YOUTUBERS or STREAMERS have discussed these… You are entirely full of shit, shill, and the fact that you're lying about one thing means you're lying about everything else.

>>2550399

You were peddling bullshit.

Where can you find them ?

Only from CBTS? hahahaha

>>2550491

By all means, spend all your money on them.

I could careless if you get ripped of by your own stupidity.

Buy them all now, then tell me how much you can do with them.

That is all the proof I offer to dumb asses

>>2550494

>>2550366

>"Isn't this the scam that CBTS (Pamphlet & Baruch) we peddling at inflated prices "

You glow in the dark, shill

>>2550529

Spend your money & prove me wrong.

Apparently some here think they are very valuable

Buy now - going fast!!!!

See - now I shill for the hucksters.

Happy?

>>2550804

Show me one person who was selling these in CBTS, you lying piece of shit

Someday you and the people you work for will be lynched in the street, shill.

>>2550804

https://archive.is/wNr4l

BROADCOM FOUNDER BILLIONAIRE BUSTED IN LAS VEGAS … FOR ROOM STOCKED WITH DRUGS

….who makes the wireless modem that is in 99% of computers?????

BROADCOM

BOOM!!

>>2550811

I'll be waiting.

Shall I buy beer for the lynch mob?

Will you be leading them big boy??

Do the big kids still steal your lunch money?

Lynch them too

>>2550873

Still waiting for any PROOF OF YOUR LIES, SHILL

Show us all where CBTS crew posted anything about these systems

>>2550880

BTW You Mom called and said you need to bring her dress and underwear back ASAP.

She has a date, so you will have to find another outfit

>>2550880

Tick Tock

Still waiting poseur.

>>2551157

Oh wow, all you found were more posts by shills like you

Still no ACTUAL EVIDENCE

I can go around saying you're a tranny dicksucker down by the railway tracks, doesn't make it proof that you're giving blowjobs until someone actually shows you, giving beejs for quarters

>>2551157

And I decided to go to the pages you showed in the screenshot- standard shill tactic, use images so people have a harder time going to the actual page to check facts.

First link: someone mentions being invited to the qanon discussion on that website, the post in that thread about the P4-15-NB is UNRELATED to CBTS.

Second link: A poster there is asking why archive.is is blocked on the website. Someone else posts a link to a "want to buy" ad in that thread.

Third link: someone is reposting a cuckchan copypasta that they found on cuckchan- one that sound suspiciously similar to the shill narrative you're pushing.

Not to mention, why are you searching for ar15 specifically? Pushing the "ar15.com is the source of qanon" conspiracy theory?

>>2551157

And I decided to go to the pages you showed in the screenshot- standard shill tactic, use images so people have a harder time going to the actual page to check facts.

First link: someone mentions being invited to the qanon discussion on that website, the post in that thread about the P4-15-NB is UNRELATED to CBTS.

Second link: A poster there is asking why archive.is is blocked on the website. Someone else posts a link to a "want to buy" ad in that thread.

Third link: someone is reposting a cuckchan copypasta that they found on cuckchan- one that sound suspiciously similar to the shill narrative you're pushing.

Not to mention, why are you searching for ar15 specifically? Pushing the "ar15.com is the source of qanon" conspiracy theory?

>>2551275

>You said:

>"Show us all where CBTS crew posted anything about these systems"

>I did. so that makes you the shill.

NONE OF THOSE WERE CBTS CREW, YOU SHILL

Take a chill pill anon, the shill is QPredictedPiss (reddit) QPredictedThis (twitter). Note his reddit spacing, his obsession with ar15.com, and his definition of “CBTS crew” to include anyone who looked at a Q dump once.

He is one of the people pushing the theory to discredit these systems and has been spreading it ever since they came out. Just ignore him. He thinks he’s head shill since Jack Posobiec tweeted out his Reddit manifesto on how we’re all scamming people with a laptop that doesn’t even get sold outside the dark web.

>>2551374

>that 3rd one that refers to "hyped up again by the CBTS "insiders"

You mean the cuckchan copypasta I referred to? The one with no basis in facts whatsoever?

>>2551388

Everything you posted had no facts, only incorrect opinions about network security and encryption but I already posted refutation of those.

Note: Your incorrect belief and opinion does not equal "facts"

You offered no proof of any of it.

Apparently you didn't even realize it with your head firmly up your ass?

You are too boring, - think I'll go look for a smarter adversary.

You are too easy to whip into a frenzy

>>2551448

Yeah that’s what I thought

If you AREN’T QPredictedPiss (you probably still are tho) maybe go ask him for some more talking points cause you seem to have swallowed his main ones hook line and sinker LMAO

And if you aren’t him you’re basically a cuckold repeating another shills ideas instead of your own

>>2550057

>Use a secure browser (OP is a little paranoid) in incognito mode to search for the model number.

Incognito mode offers zero protection.

Either Tor browser, or proxy up with plenty of security add-ons and a spoofer (and no, don't use fucking Chrome). Going Incognito is like wearing a bag over your head for invisibility: it doesn't work, and it doesn't do what most people expect it to do.

>>2550431

>Sounds like you know as much about encryption as you do about what trump had for lunch today

Sounds like you made an uninformed assessment of the situation.

But I wouldn't expect anything less from mil-int.

I know Media Matters don't give a shit and your pretend tough guy attitude screams 'military male'.

American. Southern.

Just need to work out what department.

Tough guy attitude would suggest front-line work, so I'm guessing HUMINT.

I suppose all we need to know is which department ordered the chips and we'll know where you're from.

Don't need no backdoor to suss your ass.

>>2550873

>I'll be waiting.

At least he admits he's a shill. No work to be done exposing this guy.

Thanks for confirming it's not a scam.

You should lay off the alcohol, it affects your judgement.

>>2551448

>Everything you posted had no facts, only incorrect opinions about network security and encryption but I already posted refutation of those.

Pro-tip from one shill hunter to another: shills purpose is to distract you, waste time, drive you off-topic, bait, ad hominem and do everything they can to stop you from covering the topic.

Your technique should be simple:

1) Expose as shill (done it for you, no need for any further work)

2) Return to topic and dig out as much in-depth research

Their attacks should provoke you to provide even more quality research. In turn it discourages the attacks.

My money is he's from the NSA (they always seem to breed arrogant know-it-all pieces of shit) and this backdoor hardware is their own designs along the lines of the clipper chip or the Intel Management Engine.

Keep digging into it. His only job is to 'scare off' people from adopting the technology (they're trying to prevent their intel stream from 'going dark'). Most people can sense his emotional desperation and rhetoric, and cold hard facts coupled with curiousity will always win out.

He must not know the human race very well because calling something a scam doesn't stop most people from adopting it (think of how much money people waste on useless shit that doesn't work or bad investment schemes or tax money gobblers like that guy).

So continue ahead. Just be sure to provide quality research, facts, links and other interesting useful information: it'll sharply contrast against his verbal bullshit and people are smart enough to see for themselves.

Don't bother 'winning' the argument because he's wasting his fat ass until retirement and isn't worth winning over. If he was a true patriot he'd defend the innocent citizens against being spied upon by a Stasi like government.

>>2551985

Thanks man, these shills are out of control.

Q if you are reading this, please confirm that the DS/Cabal are afraid of us learning more on this subject, we are following the crumbs!!!!!!!

>>2603668

Um, no? I can't really understand what you think you did here. Coming in and acting like you contributed something and saying "here you go." when we already know what post triggered the attack. You screenshotted a bunch of shit, including shills.

It was this one

>>2601250

As is observed here:

>>2601380

Every link to this thread was pointing that out, and linking DIRECTLY to those individual posts, so I'm not sure how you missed that.

Please engage your brain before posting again and "trying to help." Maybe leave this to the real autists, ok?

>>2551985

Damn. You’re the most interesting poster I’ve seen post outside of Q. Wish I could buy you a beer

Anyone know anything else about these?

>>2606036

templeos military grde

centos - dod sec standards (kek)

>>2576033

Make that co-planar and I'll buy TWO.

>>2551953

>>>2550057

>>Use a secure browser (OP is a little paranoid) in incognito mode to search for the model number.

>Incognito mode offers zero protection.

>Either Tor browser, or proxy up with plenty of security add-ons and a spoofer (and no, don't use fucking Chrome). Going Incognito is like wearing a bag over your head for invisibility: it doesn't work, and it doesn't do what most people expect it to do.

TAILS The Amnesiac Incognito Linux Shit

(spouseanon brought home some booze and I am, very atypically, drunk. I rarely drink at all … but Hurricanes taste pretty good and pack an unexpected kick. It's a sneaky chick drink with balls.

C_A, if you want me, you've got about an hour!)

Be aware that some sites apparently won't allow the use of TOR. Not sure how they detect it, but I suspect that they are simply filtering entire countries for reason of copyright laws or treaties.

>>2612282

IMHO (I'm still drunk) TOR needs to move up to a user-selectable (or randomly chosen) bounce count of at least three and perhaps as many as 7 AND allow the intermediate servers to add 1-3 additional bounces unknown to the original sender. I think that having routes of unpredictable and variable length would throw a wrench into the timing attacks. For instance, as a relay, every 20 minutes I could roll the dice and use the mod of a random number (or any point within that number) to determine how many bounces the next packet would take.

That makes for craziness for anyone trying to identify that packet based on its origin and destination times.

TOR can be slow, but it's the best, apparently, available at the moment. VPNs are inexpensive to run. Most of the commercial ones are owned by the alphabet agencies and are totally ineffective as a means to mask your identity.

TAILS (imperfect) and pre-arranged multiple layers of encryption look to be the best generally available at the moment. Also, encrypt everything … even unimportant crap … just to increase the volume of encrypted traffic past the point where it can be decrypted in a timely fashion.

I don't care if my plan to rule the universe one crumb at a time is decrypted so long as I am already dead of natural causes at an advanced age when it happens.

The more encrypted traffic there is, the less any of it stands out.

First my recipe for chocolate chip cookies has to be identified from the chaff of other recipes and THEN I want a successful decryption to look exactly like a failed decryption. Multiple layers of varying length keys makes for a very long time to decryption.

Rule of thumb? By the time you see anything in the MSM (including the tech media) it's probably broken.

I'm a boomer, and I find it impossible to get my millennial family to use encryption. AT ALL. And no, "Telegraph" isn't secure.

FWIW

Since we are talking computer security …

Older computers do not have compromised hardware and Linux will run on it.

As for your phones? Find a source of older phones and root them with Linux.

HELLO … if you want secure communications you will have to expend a little effort and tolerate some inconveniences.

With only a couple CPU foundries in the world, at the moment, there is no way to buy your way out of the problem by buying modern hardware.

The reason my ZTE is on the no-no list is because it sends my details to China, not Ciana. At the moment, I think I'm safer with my data in China (not part of 5Is). That may change.

That is all.

they look like Faraday cages.

Q made a few more nods to this thread.

Look at drops.

"Military Grade."

>>2551238

This is the first post I've read on this thread and it is so fucking ignorantly structured that I can tell it is in Streisand effect inducing outsider.

>>2551403

>You only have 45 followers on Twitter LOL

found the normie