UK government wants a backdoor into encryption to decrypt and censor. Signal refuses.
Then all funding is pulled.
Based on this, I an thinking, Tucker was hacked in a different way. He may very well have a keyscore (Wolfcreek; Angelfire) on his device.
see Q2998, Q1877, Q1876
How would one know? Rootkits are very problematic. Normally, rootkits are used " maliciously, to control a device. But for data collection, control is not necessary, as the only thing you want is to know what happens, as an observer.
There is a reason for considering that whatever we do on the internet, the spread of these type of things usually happens based on our own behavior. In certain cases, these rootkits can probably be planted via other means. Tucker is often very naive. And it would not surprise me that he is rather lax on OPSEC with his devices.
The thing is, hacked by whom? It seems like Tucker would be a high enough level asset that he'd have awareness of Q, or am I overestimating him? Surely he knows the NSA/cabal/Signal battle lines?
I figured he was just being used to deliver a message/reminder in a public manner.
Well, I have followed him for these last 24 years. At the very least, his act has always been asking questions, be the agnostic. Although he has been flirting with libertarianism, treated Ron Paul well, Ii always got the sense that he has a hard time confronting the fact that his worldview differs from the facts.
And only these last two years sees him making moves.
And, I forgot what exactly the matter was, but he was sending or had been send some USB sticks with data .... he lost it.
It shows a clear and present failure in OPSEC. I think this is based on his worldview. The government cannot be this bad. Impossible. The very fact he acknowledged to find out he was hacked, is a shocker to him in and of itself, and part of the moves he has made.
Who is saying they did? What they did is divulge they have information on him. That fact alone leave the question of: how? How did they come by it?
Means and methods.
While NSA is tremendous capabilities, it not by default means they did actively hack him/ his devices.
It may very well be it was done by someone working in his team. I would not put it pass Tucker to be totally oblivious on how these things work. But let' s assume for a moment, it was done by someone working on his team, whistling on him to his bosses at FOX. This creates a different digital stream of data, to which the NSA then could become privy.
This video speaks of rootkithunters. The reason I post this video is not because of that, but because of another issue the maker of the video points out: many, including himself, having knowledge of penetration testing and attacking other devices, are often oblivious of their own vulnerabilities.
In a schematic of communication, you not always need to hack the device itself, but rather the central communication hub. This then is also the value of what Q posted. How do you deploy a capability? Directly or indirectly. For a spook, indirectly is much more rewarding.
With this, again, I am not saying he was NOT hacked. All I am saying is that the means and methods may have been different.
Note however the following:
Based on this, I an thinking, Tucker was hacked in a different way. He may very well have a keyscore (Wolfcreek; Angelfire) on his device.
see Q2998, Q1877, Q1876
How would one know? Rootkits are very problematic. Normally, rootkits are used " maliciously, to control a device. But for data collection, control is not necessary, as the only thing you want is to know what happens, as an observer.
https://wikileaks.org/vault7/
https://linuxsecurity.expert/security-tools/linux-rootkit-scanners
There is a reason for considering that whatever we do on the internet, the spread of these type of things usually happens based on our own behavior. In certain cases, these rootkits can probably be planted via other means. Tucker is often very naive. And it would not surprise me that he is rather lax on OPSEC with his devices.
for reference: u/#q2998
u/#q1877
u/#q1876
The thing is, hacked by whom? It seems like Tucker would be a high enough level asset that he'd have awareness of Q, or am I overestimating him? Surely he knows the NSA/cabal/Signal battle lines?
I figured he was just being used to deliver a message/reminder in a public manner.
Well, I have followed him for these last 24 years. At the very least, his act has always been asking questions, be the agnostic. Although he has been flirting with libertarianism, treated Ron Paul well, Ii always got the sense that he has a hard time confronting the fact that his worldview differs from the facts.
And only these last two years sees him making moves.
And, I forgot what exactly the matter was, but he was sending or had been send some USB sticks with data .... he lost it.
It shows a clear and present failure in OPSEC. I think this is based on his worldview. The government cannot be this bad. Impossible. The very fact he acknowledged to find out he was hacked, is a shocker to him in and of itself, and part of the moves he has made.
You understand though that Q posts indicate NSA is white hat run though? So why would white hats hack him and expose the fact they did?
Who is saying they did? What they did is divulge they have information on him. That fact alone leave the question of: how? How did they come by it?
Means and methods.
While NSA is tremendous capabilities, it not by default means they did actively hack him/ his devices.
It may very well be it was done by someone working in his team. I would not put it pass Tucker to be totally oblivious on how these things work. But let' s assume for a moment, it was done by someone working on his team, whistling on him to his bosses at FOX. This creates a different digital stream of data, to which the NSA then could become privy.
https://invidious.io.lol/watch?v=sFOKz_fd0SA
This video speaks of rootkithunters. The reason I post this video is not because of that, but because of another issue the maker of the video points out: many, including himself, having knowledge of penetration testing and attacking other devices, are often oblivious of their own vulnerabilities.
In a schematic of communication, you not always need to hack the device itself, but rather the central communication hub. This then is also the value of what Q posted. How do you deploy a capability? Directly or indirectly. For a spook, indirectly is much more rewarding.
With this, again, I am not saying he was NOT hacked. All I am saying is that the means and methods may have been different.