On 10/09/2015 08:31 PM, Michael Best wrote: >> >> If that's true, JYA was being either unimaginably stupid, or >> unimaginably weird. Still, there was no need to publish the logs just to >> make a point. Redacted excerpts and hashes of the files would have been >> enough, no? > > > True and documented, and as I said in my last email - I DID REDACT THEM. > John *still* denied they were real and accused me of faking them.
In my world, people don't publish stuff that puts their [friends, allies, fellow travelers, etc] at risk. Even to make a point. Even if other assholes have already put that stuff out there. Documenting JYA's fuckup was fine. Just as with any bug, vulnerability, etc. But as I've said a few times, publishing the data was unwarranted. > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 10:25 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Send cypherpunks mailing list submissions to >> [email protected] >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> https://cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> [email protected] >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> [email protected] >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of cypherpunks digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: [cryptome] Cryptome has been leaking its user logs for >> over a year (coderman) >> 2. Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] (Shelley) >> 3. Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] Yay: [cryptome] (coderman) >> 4. Re: [cryptome] Cryptome has been leaking its user logs for >> over a year (Mirimir) >> 5. Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] (Mirimir) >> 6. [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] (Michael Best) >> 7. Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] (Shelley) >> 8. Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] (Mirimir) >> 9. Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] (Michael Best) >> 10. Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] (Mirimir) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 16:28:42 -0700 >> From: coderman <[email protected]> >> To: Michael Best <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Cryptome has been leaking its user logs for >> over a year >> Message-ID: >> < >> cajvra1rojbtn4oaoxykchtys7lwxgthpqmr5tud4kwhuepv...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> On 10/9/15, coderman <[email protected]> wrote: >>> ... >>> 0eb8551d977dde4f4193b3a16dedcd18f01e854e371e96623d33dd5b9519e413 >> USB-1.rar >> >> >> see attached. then xref with Tor exit db :P >> >> >> best regards, >> -------------- next part -------------- >> # USB-1/Disk >> 2/07-Cryptome-org-13-0702-cartome-directory/07-Cryptome-org-13-0702-cartome-directory/07-Cryptome-org-13-0702-cartome-directory/awstats >> e013b32176f9ebfb6a235de6929a38cd3b1ba3fd9546fa633a4380519577da34 >> ./.access.pwd >> b16367d1eb9ca9ace9d21f8b96d703d9e336037c41586f5d66ec9adc4e66b43c >> ./.htaccess >> 093154a05f46ed7de77882e6dd3fb90c9fee53deb3cf46cf3e13a4f23fcff6ed >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.alldomains.html >> 0392478bb58c6e0e7c41064185bd485fd799b86ee0db03b0eeda08c6003f3c7a >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.allhosts.html >> a5ffab80b59fe8d1ab17e115895d2da077b9f1cf96ed05b9f936e676f1933e0e >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.allrobots.html >> afa0ab42cd92f5d1aec75b0051596488721349657865a8da63be3e6f54375c5e >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.browserdetail.html >> 6c4ce20030bde571b90315874d416583dd38c0031c264a586e8bb1ca9b7c6ac5 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.errors404.html >> 0da1dd9013f9ce75b202d3390246bdfe70aad28bcf09f9737aaa65f73925433d >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.html >> d6d43d9bedb2c7ce6ec4d374c09aca4a26ffd57e027f197bb7d0bcf000b12ae4 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.keyphrases.html >> 9cb4e5d1048950ac31df9e5a526282845e07f25a3ad9889fc0dcd1f1d57a242f >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.keywords.html >> 767e9e5dd846c0164cda3063ce7e34ffd53459d1864516fe66614c954f4e8ea6 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.lasthosts.html >> 812c69144792dbd8affb3d8b9df24ab1003bd6fe1423d3d775c04dc6ed7d9ce1 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.lastrobots.html >> f1b46b8773c00e7e27f5fe1db205921354a4ffcc69c09fcf4c66f43300f49dd9 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.osdetail.html >> 01a0f300f2a64ef28a7e390f573f9e6504ee2ee09b39788ac07fab8daaea7d04 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.refererpages.html >> 9bba7b9051506cf92bf32695874eec135dbb1cef393bc226326eba7063e5ad9a >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.refererse.html >> 5d8c3adb9ef936cc776bbd18e83ed10ac97262c3040405ada63c3908d65f6a45 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.session.html >> 657bb65f55e400c9f72336b1e0720b3183bb1443dc234b8b76c56be59be30c2d >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.unknownbrowser.html >> 57d92684a428c4404a8c682e37269b9c2b99b87910b10c97d504a4f2e7bc04bc >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.unknownip.html >> 51e2187129764052a89238531bff22d392d1ca9699760810201c3b08dba56297 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.unknownos.html >> c0b24345644ff1ceb098afc12aeea58168c82d67a9896997e038098f0f70e739 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.urldetail.html >> 8f5b9e621b454998f6a9b6eb2e10f81870017768fa931f2ffb92ee4b0bbda955 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.urlentry.html >> 4b8049714a8c624ad40cc939010b0d8120b7b80102dcf5519d9c6710a38f3846 >> ./0911/awstats.1331504.0911.urlexit.html >> 90ff363dc17bdb7759d14e88d08253b99d5aa999adf31f91650de314e41e9966 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.alldomains.html >> 3d2a6b84c3bf389a2f2bf934248a633a9759167b8109b4c55794c8130727516f >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.allhosts.html >> c362b92e89a8ecc318eb9d1719c12c37ea0e5b237566909d456ad3e3109c64de >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.allrobots.html >> 7017e889300cbcc97248c7c2c32e165b11cfc94c38f9f06c305e8cf26e89c01b >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.browserdetail.html >> 1f6e66cf38c020ff906e63bbea8414d0ba7a7202d49ddca68f21342e516adc08 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.errors404.html >> a10938ca659219aca3b92320df067620fa25f54521b40ad12a6317834ce9f907 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.html >> 2aa3fcbcb718bc168f1070e57cb1fa56c1d8af4942db0440474365384b32d450 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.keyphrases.html >> 4586b26a15c438e6097d030348999b35afe449f36ed118b24f7a8068b4e4f1f9 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.keywords.html >> d655e302ff1932e164285f2acf9f6f8fc5f25ec07b7b8cf1f717e3d4866f6d40 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.lasthosts.html >> e5552fe792a89e6a0a2b57d58f9a05ddd4021bbfc8fa49e6beb7c57143af61f6 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.lastrobots.html >> b76f831c0f19c982ab0995905409834398c86b8e028a199c77191b38773857ac >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.osdetail.html >> 3ba12be58934af927a8e1566852b597d565fb78f2276744b5f522e07f8ada2a3 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.refererpages.html >> 005bfb081373d35d07d3f329eb4b8db47bd61791431394a71ee88d9a9ca5f5f1 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.refererse.html >> 65ba86283c7c7fccc5121f793cb243ec4a1f90420d974184b8f071d0e0e481f8 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.session.html >> 57eb923ebc24dcb84f935439f8c6effe1d04831ae75697e165dde5b29c34defb >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.unknownbrowser.html >> db3440a22d88de276c9e11b9fdf7eaa02f4bacd7ee06f330fd24dffdb0a9003d >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.unknownip.html >> f59114337febac80c8b3858279ff7ebf86be03bf3d593096ffdae032c86601f2 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.unknownos.html >> 082b4b9ae63feae2d702ae73f37463800f7a894e4ef1cbe354087efa3d66325b >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.urldetail.html >> d8aff4ad7912674367f7391cc744620149d00b8ec2a1365d58df64c3b45de07e >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.urlentry.html >> 82501cc39e6293f977ef8d86f30ee8edd1d1a0b3edce25abc5c0cdea0131f694 >> ./0912/awstats.1331504.0912.urlexit.html >> e8a0e056e9e12b866cc7aabd7728b671517de4a6ec8dec3cfa0dfdcd9e0e6444 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.alldomains.html >> fa54f88bedbd0189caa08fc9ab186ddce35912f850cde471d2187f4f96569230 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.allhosts.html >> b8f53e33f661fe8f839169a6cedcb1a61cba8fd5a06899b798c995c750041474 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.allrobots.html >> 61640584a4c7663d9a30fecd2bd799d69ddcebf5a1ef613ce7edee5acd3f12b5 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.browserdetail.html >> 71fd4e2b1691e5986af439449e63739a3f936cc482a5f3790099b64fe4e63583 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.errors404.html >> b7e4b96d48fc13e3c609caf906a7e253935d7706b2536dbc4304faf46425b5fe >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.html >> 6f3bddc212e2c65b9925dc4c1623cff4cbff07da861b7dba4e534ef9fcbfcaf7 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.keyphrases.html >> 0015c0ab3939609d14155c9a91fc00401b64671cdfedb6f0d423e00e81cdd7a7 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.keywords.html >> 77a2b7feba2a16fcbe85b64842be87a6e0cd5f4fd81941024bc18093b24fa61f >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.lasthosts.html >> 0a54a2f660fb0a42bcd0cd7455ddb9ef254fc23ea7d98e6890a9d4e31d4e17af >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.lastrobots.html >> 54631e64a1598b7ae79f7e6145cae0992c349a79e66831c692e0fa4290e0827a >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.osdetail.html >> 2a00b1f4e076ecaf4a219604c2639d9d9fd35dc6e158dffc0e85032a24599d3c >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.refererpages.html >> 094245d75c2d30632b77abececcda00b73512f9f2c3ae38d0fcffa9f7233b5f6 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.refererse.html >> 7bcae1a8c6646d66ed272ee23f9fc248b4ab518e0f1674fc73fd7434aab60cc0 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.session.html >> ec7a8253ab7f87bfa21bc7ed94b149a0fa73ea6cf0b3625c53242431ebd85dd3 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.unknownbrowser.html >> 181b5a65d932e391105d03370cc2b414e359eaa5e529f14e4c113a04a9de994d >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.unknownip.html >> e13a30e1e59841bc3640d9985812b64048b0593e283fd861047c915b589df482 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.unknownos.html >> 7ce962d8af7cd20e7bfa01a101a7ce11e97911501784475ce731a595cb2f09b5 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.urldetail.html >> e71bea2c31a1f6b92e9efa66f5f368317d74a5adbb6a0e7ac4c61eff9a09d1bf >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.urlentry.html >> 7568f77dfb2d82f1869271e78dac155332b01b2b21a09b8eaa8501bc2f1f7783 >> ./1001/awstats.1331504.1001.urlexit.html >> f122d66dddb0db4fe9638a367534acfada27bae8817539a51d49e37f347f1f80 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.alldomains.html >> 822d32e8e9c6a7a0a6a1fdacc3a0ef5a6f174ebf6218173c5731872e19a11dcf >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.allhosts.html >> 55151f629d4225f04da2f48746baca073e397cb304d72e4f0b796bee02c8a8f4 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.allrobots.html >> 3739537b56693a4a4e99c4b51f332a71f80d8e69211f6242d4105a0a9babbece >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.browserdetail.html >> 38efdd07afb1dfeaccb8ecdf6095d1203f5099b57018fbd7444241c91fbfedbb >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.errors404.html >> f9bb9a6963978389f6d76bf7beb2e1ea412ae45ae8456a8c9d7fa3eb6d5c6a10 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.html >> 2a4bec20b989206450df7088e955caf5888bfa3ce312c6845d6d5d790b407b5c >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.keyphrases.html >> e1b474e5fd34d779a18c3c96ee491053473b28529eea855b39256c3daac6d4a0 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.keywords.html >> d18a9391192421b9a9b5ea2eccb4454d60464be2b3e024cc79808770db595200 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.lasthosts.html >> 2b779689dbdb4f06a2dee05729652ab372a478e8466690e1901813180c2579f2 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.lastrobots.html >> 562a3650781c9cd8c838a966e4009305e6dbf2675fe8211cc74356d726a6a87a >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.osdetail.html >> 4dc01a2b257c8bb990d51ee401c83cf32a5ed2d64c252836fcebe104560478aa >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.refererpages.html >> b39fea3d48dd4ad1c2dbf66c49192c8a81c712c96cd8713e6aa074c76da62dc4 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.refererse.html >> 32a245c1f2bd3a401591421e8c702171a69422710fe0b8b49418eae81a8e8a39 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.session.html >> d29d9e03719791a6b93aa030297296081c8941ac00997a56051c0704099f35ee >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.unknownbrowser.html >> e3f5ea1979185a151cd4b462f9cd34ae9d14adfe68015ff67ac91de9ccb7a949 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.unknownip.html >> ced842b15611280cbf100f03bfe968e3f33d4a9b94b031890767574553e6f1f9 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.unknownos.html >> a283f036d8bec217f464928cab38e0094989a97512a41e69ff9a58f0cc4eba88 >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.urldetail.html >> 49ca822cbead501fc7fd40f54014ee46683243c32f72ac346136d9fa161f876a >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.urlentry.html >> e46803840d5d34491934ca3ce80f5fccf09a92ec73a69ab43caca8efe124845b >> ./1002/awstats.1331504.1002.urlexit.html >> eb2f5c5eb20bcba52e734627bab051b1f9a7bad5f4616bc4125c2dc8162ce7a9 >> ./awstats012010.1331504.txt >> 085f1defec15f4ffd41e07491257a90b768cc67b06a7319764aa30878f1f41f7 >> ./awstats022010.1331504.txt >> 04abf0d9ca23a3a4e8616c952d30576d8d71e7ab621d8ee941a5936051ec0ca0 >> ./awstats112009.1331504.txt >> 6a3b781bb9b2c53a8b51b6d3a4b918493b425324d1a641185ae912196f24d7cc >> ./awstats122009.1331504.txt >> fdbb1f8f8befa5ffb1251d2bc54adbec48713c44b907fb8b90c31a0470266fa5 >> ./home.htm >> f3abfdb5362d02f2d6601e3dadb97f4329bcc46fa3de39d4e155914352f305eb >> ./index.shtml >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 17:22:21 -0700 >> From: Shelley <[email protected]> >> To: <[email protected]>, cypherpunks <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >> >> On October 9, 2015 4:51:44 PM Jeremy Compton <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I am not surprised that GCHQ does what you claim it does. >>> >> >> Have you read about this from the beginning? If so, you'd know that Mike >> Best is not the one claiming that the GCHQ slide is real. He is trying to >> establish whether nearly anyone could have made the slide with the logs >> Cryptome leaked/distributed/whatever, unwittingly or otherwise. That's >> all, and I don't know how a researcher trying to verify data has become a >> giant shitstorm. >> >> -S >> >>> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:11:50 -0400 >>> Subject: [cryptome] >>> From: [email protected] >>> To: [email protected] >>> >>> To the original point, the GCHQ Snowden slide. Cryptome accusing me of >>> faking the data was a diversion. Only had to verify it because of the >> GCHQ >>> slide. >>> From: Jeremy Compton <j.compton@xxxxxxxxxxx>To: "cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" >>> <cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 12:00:48 +1300So, now you >>> have named and shamed Cryptome for this grievance you have, whereto >>> know? >>> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 17:30:21 -0700 >> From: coderman <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: cypherpunks <[email protected]>, [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] Yay: [cryptome] >> Message-ID: >> < >> cajvra1t16mgyuwyp7etk2+pyn_hsfr+iajmg4zidims-66a...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> On 10/9/15, Shelley <[email protected]> wrote: >>> ... I don't know how a researcher trying to verify data has become a >>> giant shitstorm. >> >> the precariousness of life is exactly why i savor such enjoyments, >> such as this turd turbulence in the absurdist library... >> >> :P >> >> >> best regards, >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 18:58:39 -0600 >> From: Mirimir <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Cryptome has been leaking its user logs for >> over a year >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >> >> On 10/09/2015 03:52 AM, rysiek wrote: >>> Dnia czwartek, 8 października 2015 20:45:50 Mirimir pisze: >>>> On 10/08/2015 07:42 PM, coderman wrote: >>>>> On 10/7/15, Michael Best <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Let me begin by saying that Cryptome initially denied the leak, then >> that >>>>>> the data was stolen, then that the whole thing was a fake "a lie by >> [a] >>>>>> spy-newbie." >>>>> >>>>> the lie is assuming these requests over plain-text were ever private :P >>>> >>>> That is the key point! >>>> >>>> And anyway, all traffic to all websites is public. >>> >>> Oh for fucks' sake. There are fuckers who do listen in and surveil, etc, >> but >>> it is *not* okay to make their work easier. And it is *not* okay to make >> one's >>> server logs broadly available in such a context. >> >> Look, Cryptome did fuck up. First, by keeping logs for more than a day >> or so, whatever necessary for debugging and responding to attacks. >> Second, by sending them to a third party. And third, by being so obtuse >> with that third party that he felt compelled to publish them. >> >>> Why the fuck are people on this list slamming Snowden and freedom.press >> for >>> using Cloudflare, and at the same time defending JYA for sending out >> server >>> logs with dates and IP addresses? >> >> You'll never catch me slamming Snowden or defending JYA ;) And I gotta >> say, Cloudflare starts looking good when your site is getting DOSed. >> >>> The hell is this bullshit? >> >> Bullshit, mostly ;) >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:10:34 -0600 >> From: Mirimir <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 >> >> On 10/09/2015 06:22 PM, Shelley wrote: >>> On October 9, 2015 4:51:44 PM Jeremy Compton <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>>> I am not surprised that GCHQ does what you claim it does. >>>> >>> >>> Have you read about this from the beginning? If so, you'd know that >>> Mike Best is not the one claiming that the GCHQ slide is real. He is >>> trying to establish whether nearly anyone could have made the slide with >>> the logs Cryptome leaked/distributed/whatever, unwittingly or >>> otherwise. That's all, and I don't know how a researcher trying to >>> verify data has become a giant shitstorm. >> >> Maybe because Mike _published_ the fucking logs, just because JYA was >> doing the mirror shades thing about whether the archive was or was not >> genuine? I mean, JYA can be a very funny man. For sure. But does that >> justify publishing Cryptome access logs? >> >>> -S >>> >>>> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:11:50 -0400 >>>> Subject: [cryptome] >>>> From: [email protected] >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> >>>> To the original point, the GCHQ Snowden slide. Cryptome accusing me of >>>> faking the data was a diversion. Only had to verify it because of the >>>> GCHQ slide. >>>> From: Jeremy Compton <j.compton@xxxxxxxxxxx>To: >>>> "cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>Date: Sat, 10 Oct >>>> 2015 12:00:48 +1300So, now you have named and shamed Cryptome for this >>>> grievance you have, whereto >>>> know? >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 21:19:39 -0400 >> From: Michael Best <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected], [email protected] >> Subject: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] >> Message-ID: >> < >> canfta0-qpf1vhatedggbwruxtrua4h7fqvxjvgsg+upx-ww...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >>> >>> Maybe because Mike _published_ the fucking logs, just because JYA was >>> doing the mirror shades thing about whether the archive was or was not >>> genuine? I mean, JYA can be a very funny man. For sure. But does that >>> justify publishing Cryptome access logs? >> >> >> I published them to verify the data, *AFTER JYA publicly accused me of >> FAKING it.* I only raised the point of the logs because of the GCHQ slide. >> *If >> *John had verified it a week earlier, or not accused me of faking data >> (with ZERO evidence, and the data turns out to be legit) *they never >> would've been published. * >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: < >> http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151009/3541f896/attachment-0001.html >>> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 18:21:55 -0700 >> From: Shelley <[email protected]> >> To: Mirimir <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >> >> On October 9, 2015 6:16:10 PM Mirimir <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Maybe because Mike _published_ the fucking logs, just because JYA was >>> doing the mirror shades thing about whether the archive was or was not >>> genuine? I mean, JYA can be a very funny man. For sure. But does that >>> justify publishing Cryptome access logs? >>> >> >> When the logs have been distributed by Cryptome via USB and torrents as >> part of the archive for over a year? Yeah, it's fair game. >> >> Note that he removed those files once JY finally gave an explanation. >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 8 >> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 20:15:01 -0600 >> From: Mirimir <[email protected]> >> To: Michael Best <[email protected]>, [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >> >> On 10/09/2015 07:19 PM, Michael Best wrote: >>>> >>>> Maybe because Mike _published_ the fucking logs, just because JYA was >>>> doing the mirror shades thing about whether the archive was or was not >>>> genuine? I mean, JYA can be a very funny man. For sure. But does that >>>> justify publishing Cryptome access logs? >>> >>> >>> I published them to verify the data, *AFTER JYA publicly accused me of >>> FAKING it.* I only raised the point of the logs because of the GCHQ >> slide. *If >>> *John had verified it a week earlier, or not accused me of faking data >>> (with ZERO evidence, and the data turns out to be legit) *they never >>> would've been published. * >> >> Publishing them was still unwarranted. You could have published a >> redacted version. You could have polled this list, and verified selected >> lines. Whatever. Yes, JYA was being a jerk. But still ... >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 9 >> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 22:21:11 -0400 >> From: Michael Best <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] >> Message-ID: >> < >> canfta09zamgyy2jv0lbr+aur+lapgo764r1lx9xxh2fm8-_...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >>> >>> Publishing them was still unwarranted. You could have published a >>> redacted version. You could have polled this list, and verified selected >>> lines. Whatever. Yes, JYA was being a jerk. But still ... >> >> *Umm, I *did* post a redacted version first.* JYA said it was faked >> and refused to verify it until days after it had been published in its >> entirety. I even told him before hand that if he didn't verify it, I'd >> have to post it. He still called it disinfo and fake until well after >> it'd been released and confirmed as the files being un multiple >> releases, including an old torrent. >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Mirimir <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 10/09/2015 07:19 PM, Michael Best wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Maybe because Mike _published_ the fucking logs, just because JYA was >>>>> doing the mirror shades thing about whether the archive was or was not >>>>> genuine? I mean, JYA can be a very funny man. For sure. But does that >>>>> justify publishing Cryptome access logs? >>>> >>>> >>>> I published them to verify the data, *AFTER JYA publicly accused me of >>>> FAKING it.* I only raised the point of the logs because of the GCHQ >>> slide. *If >>>> *John had verified it a week earlier, or not accused me of faking data >>>> (with ZERO evidence, and the data turns out to be legit) *they never >>>> would've been published. * >>> >>> Publishing them was still unwarranted. You could have published a >>> redacted version. You could have polled this list, and verified selected >>> lines. Whatever. Yes, JYA was being a jerk. But still ... >>> >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: < >> http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151009/ff3fbdcf/attachment-0001.html >>> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 10 >> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 20:24:59 -0600 >> From: Mirimir <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: [cryptome] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 >> >> On 10/09/2015 07:21 PM, Shelley wrote: >>> On October 9, 2015 6:16:10 PM Mirimir <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Maybe because Mike _published_ the fucking logs, just because JYA was >>>> doing the mirror shades thing about whether the archive was or was not >>>> genuine? I mean, JYA can be a very funny man. For sure. But does that >>>> justify publishing Cryptome access logs? >>>> >>> >>> When the logs have been distributed by Cryptome via USB and torrents as >>> part of the archive for over a year? Yeah, it's fair game. >> >> If that's true, JYA was being either unimaginably stupid, or >> unimaginably weird. Still, there was no need to publish the logs just to >> make a point. Redacted excerpts and hashes of the files would have been >> enough, no? >> >>> Note that he removed those files once JY finally gave an explanation. >> >> True. But publishing them was still unwarranted. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Subject: Digest Footer >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cypherpunks mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> End of cypherpunks Digest, Vol 28, Issue 32 >> ******************************************* >> >
