Replies

> “Good advice...its hard to see how anyone with a real background in intelligence, as Q purports, would fail to keep their comms secure.”

Very simple to understand, very much part of cyberwarfare. You set trap doors, you leave certain backdoors open.

When a hacker enters a backdoor, they leave a trace behind them. Sophisticated hackers can clean up before leaving but real-time recordings capture their info before they wipe it.

They can also be tagged with ‘beacons’ that transmit where they are, what location they are returning to or originated from.

A full list of available cyber tools and weapons are not in the public domain. How do I know this? Contacts related to five eyes doing cybersecurity and custom IT jobs. I knew a relative of a retired PM who was still influential. I participated in seeking contracts for the group.

Secondly, and easy to understand, Q is not going to be using top security to communicate with Anons because Anons have to have account access; giving them high level security accounts is not going to happen.

Thirdly, Q has now been doing this for almost a year with very few incidents and quick response when incidents do occur. It’s not like break-ins are going to penetrate national security infrastructure.

I can put up a spare server not linked to my network, completely unlinked in any way, and I can let hackers try all they want to break in. In so doing, I can test and evaluate security prototypes, patches, countermeasures, monitoring and tracking capabilities.

If I invite a group to chat with me via my server, I can put out keywords that will attract cyber snoops and then proceed to put them through a test program to see how my tools work. My security is faulty by design to see how hackers act and react to what I allow them to do.

"Very simple to understand, very much part of cyberwarfare. You set trap doors, you leave certain backdoors open."

That wasn't a back door, that was the front door that Q left wide open. DES was crackable 20 years ago. You don't even need to crack that stuff, rainbow tables compiled at the time made less then 10 character passwords just the simple matter of a database look up.

"When a hacker enters a backdoor, they leave a trace behind them. Sophisticated hackers can clean up before leaving but real-time recordings capture their info before they wipe it."

Watching the hacker work on your system in real-time before he cleans up his traces is not going to help you track him back to his origination. It will let you know how he got in and what he did while he was there, but it won't help you find out where he came from because he was never there.

Any state sponsored hacker will have a well developed network of constantly mutating cutouts that keeps his location untraceable. There simply is no tracking a hacker back to his location when he is routing through commercial VPNs, dark VPNs, hacked routers and custom networks designed by the intel agency itself - unless he makes an error and gives it away himself. And, in the rare cases where you can track him back to his location, it is just as likely that you tracked him back to the location that he wanted you to find. Before you do the crime, decide who the patsy is going to be.

"They can also be tagged with ‘beacons’ that transmit where they are, what location they are returning to or originated from."

Nope, those days are long gone. State sponsored hackers are not revealing their locations with "beacons." Nowadays hacking is done by large, distributed, automated systems that profile and fingerprint their targets over a span of time and locations that make backtracking, especially with beacons, impossible.

"Secondly, and easy to understand, Q is not going to be using top security to communicate with Anons because Anons have to have account access; giving them high level security accounts is not going to happen."

Seriously? The anons couldn't have handled any security better than DES with 8 character passwords. And the published "tripcode" used to verify each Q post? Talk about a structural error. Why not just give the hackers a way to use their high speed crackers off-line? Oh, that's right... they did - not that they needed them with the security Q was using.

"Thirdly, Q has now been doing this for almost a year with very few incidents and quick response when incidents do occur. It’s not like break-ins are going to penetrate national security infrastructure."

The hackers didn't break in. They deciphered Q's password which allowed them to post under his name. If Q has more than posting rights on the web site he's using then he's making another serious error. Compartmentalization. It's a good thing. Of course, anyone using an 8 character password while saving the world is probably making more than a few errors.