Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - kmfkewm

Pages: 1 ... 109 110 [111] 112 113 ... 249
1651
Security / Re: what if LE took over tor?
« on: January 09, 2013, 11:02 pm »
Other than people "blowing the whistle," as it were: no, there's nothing in place to prevent this.  I think about it quite often, actually; I don't really expect it to happen, but I'm always cautious with updating Tor and where I actually get the archive from.

Tor is actually partially funded by the military, and the lead developer has frequent contact with the FBI.  Some of them use it too, apparently.

The Tor developers strike me as a pretty libertarian bunch. They do have frequent contact with the FBI, but it is mostly just telling them the basics of how Tor works and why they cannot help them trace people who use Tor. The lead developer of Tor went to school at MIT and then worked for the NSA for a brief period of time, after he quit the NSA he implemented Tor with another person from MIT. The original concept for Tor came from the US navy, however the actual implementation of Tor does not have a direct tie to the US military other than the fact that the lead dev briefly worked for the NSA.

1652
Before you can legitimize your money you need to disconnect it from illegal activity. IMO both steps are part of the money laundering process.

1653
Off topic / Re: how much safer would drugs be if they were legalized?
« on: January 09, 2013, 10:51 pm »
You act like all drug users are in trouble and need help. How about instead of being a flaming fucking hypocrite you go to rehab and stop coming to silk road?

I should go to rehab for what?  The pharmasuasca I took on Saturday?  The three times I took ecstasy last year?  Yes that makes sense.

I don't think all drug users are in trouble and need help.  I do think that if we sold drugs over the counter to the general population without restrictions that it would lead to a lot more societal problems that people in this thread are simply not recognizing. 

There are many potentially positive aspects to the decriminalization of drugs - specifically the flow of money in better directions and away from organized crime and the ability to focus on proper research and care for negative side effects and people with addictions.

But to just sell this stuff OTC in any old pharmacy is begging for trouble.  Especially drugs like H, C, meth, etc.  The ones that have have high addiction rates.  You would wind up with a lot more little kids doing it well before they should be.  You would wind up with a swath of the population who become obsessed with drugs and become apathetic about work, supporting themselves, or contributing anything meaningful to society.  And all of these people would probably try to be on unemployment and welfare and blah blah blah.  I am not going to pay any higher taxes to support a bunch of meth heads sitting at home tweaking all day

And then there is the fact that it would change our entire society.  Especially our interactions with LE.  LE would never know if someone is on PCP or meth and would probably just treat everyone like they were 100% of the time.  The repercussions of this throughout society would be vast, especially in the US, if this were to happen.

Listen, I like drugs, I support freedom.  But there are two sides to every story and many people that have posted in this thread acting like complete unrestricted regulation of drugs is some panacea are not considering the negative impacts, of which there would be many.

This would be a lot more convincing to me if I wasn't smoking meth with my friends when we were 14, taking massive doses of DXM and generally ordering whatever the fuck we wanted off the internet or from older kids on the street. Drugs being illegal has not stopped me from using anything at all, it hasn't stopped my friends from using anything at all, even when we were barely teenagers. I had an easier time getting meth than I had getting alcohol, not that either was at all difficult to get. All drugs being illegal has done is made it more dangerous for us, more of us are in the prison system, more of us have died from overdoses. So you can hold whatever belief you want, but the reality is I knew 13 year olds who were injecting oxy and getting tweaked out and the fact that it was illegal meant fuck all. All it meant was we were exposed to hardened criminals, we were sent to prisons and we were forced to use drugs in the least safe and least educated ways possible. That is reality.

1654
Off topic / Re: how much safer would drugs be if they were legalized?
« on: January 09, 2013, 10:41 pm »
Sounds good to me! Free the slaves and Limetless and the DEA agents can go flip burgers for us.

Lol yeah and you can touch some more kids and really start the revolution maaaaaan! You're like a broken record kid. Like I said, go shoot some cops and then I'll take you serious. Otherwise it's just pretentiousness and false ambition.

Like I said as soon as I buy one of your tanks off you I will get right to that

1655
Security / Re: Why can't PGP be cracked?
« on: January 09, 2013, 04:41 pm »
generally asymmetric cryptography is used to transfer keys used for decrypting symmetrically encrypted messages

1656
Off topic / Re: how much safer would drugs be if they were legalized?
« on: January 09, 2013, 03:19 pm »
Sounds good to me! Free the slaves and Limetless and the DEA agents can go flip burgers for us.

1657
Off topic / what should be done about recreational drugs?
« on: January 09, 2013, 03:16 pm »
vote away

1658
Off topic / Re: how much safer would drugs be if they were legalized?
« on: January 09, 2013, 03:03 pm »
legalization and sale over the counter would solve every problem.
as far as a know there are three problem categories with drugs:
Illegality
Stupid users
Dishonest dealers
and these could be solved with legalization and otc selling.
Purity would be no problem, no more sugar in your speed. And you would get what ever you want. No fake shit. Properly prepared without leftover chemicals, pharma grade iv ready drugs. sold with syringes if needed.
The drug cartels, underground organizations would collapse because there is no need for them anymore. drug money would go into health care.
And we could educate users. On the spot where they buy the drugs. No more browsing around the net for dosages of a new rc chemical. Instructions are written and given to you on paper.

But what about the people with IQ's of 60 who only know how to sell drugs and arrest drug users? Wont somebody please think of the retards!

1659
Off topic / Re: how much safer would drugs be if they were legalized?
« on: January 09, 2013, 02:27 pm »
listen, if you look at how america treats the legal drugs, you'll realize its kind of a shitty idea to just let it be open to the public. people drink as much as possible and make a competition out of it. some people smoke close to 40 ciggs a day! some people drink multiple pots of coffee in one day! i could go on.
 if this is how people treat drugs, legalizing things like meth, cocaine, heroin, etc is just a terrible fucking idea!
humans are animals, driven on instinct.
they tend to consume as much as possible and i think it would be a disaster.
not to say that some of us dont have self control because im sure some do, but the vast majority will "do it till its gone"

I agree that drugs should not just be blanket legalized.  It would lead to WAY too many issues in society due to the many weak willed people who will get addicted and/or do ridiculous things while on them that endanger other people.

For many years now I have envisioned the best method of decriminalizing drugs would be to invent an a completely government regulated industry around it.

Basically it would work on a licensing system similar to drivers licenses or professional licenses.  There would be instructors of classes on the varying drugs.  All of these instructors would have to be certified as experts on a given substance they are teaching others about.

If an individual wanted to use said drug they would have to become certified by attending a course led by one of these instructors that reviews all currently known scientific information about these drugs.  People would also consume these drugs as part of the course in a controlled setting.  These classes and the certification fees should have a high cost to ensure that only people who are already leading responsible lives and have the money to pay can become licensed.  We don't need any more homeless people in the world because we legalized drugs and everyone starts wasting their last dollars on them. 

After the licenses are issued then we can put drugs in pharmacies and require a proper license to buy them.

Clear rules would have to be established that people are not allowed to resell stuff they get or risk losing their license completely and face huge fines - not jail time but monetary punitive damages.  Also the pharmacies could control and track how much they are distributing to any individual user making it easy to prevent someone from becoming a big time dealer this way.

Proceeds from course costs and drug sales could then be used to pay for these programs and to further research on drugs and to establish recovery facilities for those in society who do get addicted - whether they be licensed users or still users obtaining drugs illegally that need help.

Regardless of whether drugs are ever legalized, the world needs to move away from the current tactic of imprisoning people for drugs and move to a model of discouraging use and helping those in trouble instead of punishing them.

Nice cover story on Time about this today:  http://world.time.com/2013/01/07/u-s-marijuana-laws-ricochet-through-latin-america/

You act like all drug users are in trouble and need help. How about instead of being a flaming fucking hypocrite you go to rehab and stop coming to silk road?

1660
Off topic / Re: how much safer would drugs be if they were legalized?
« on: January 09, 2013, 02:24 pm »
This escalated quickly.

Why would I give a monkey's nut about people who I have NEVER even met and NEVER will?

I would take that as a warning to all of Limetless' future customers.

No you see this is the difference that people do no understand. One is professional with clients because it is good for business, but they are not your friends it is purely a business transaction and you extend the care and responsibility that that entails. However, if you have no business or personal relationship with someone.....of the many fucks I have in my pocket, I'm not giving any out because well I'd be a bit of a tool if I did. It's also completely dishonest for anyone to say that they actually feel any other way than this.

Please KMF, explain to me why I should have any thought about you or anyone you know. I have never met, nor ever will meet you and I am sure I would have nothing in common with you. Why should I invent emotion when there is none that genuinely occurred? Would you rather me lie and get on a pedestal and talk a load of shit about how I think all prisoners are political prisoners held against their will by a savage regime? No, because then I'd be a disingenuous fuck like you because well yano, I don't really think you are the revolutionary you claim to be. Like I said, just some autistic geek with big ideas and too much to say without a lot of life experience to back it up.

Yes yes Limetless it is clear that you are a psychopath you can stop pointing it out. Also again I will point out that if it were not for anarchistic computer geeks, you wouldn't even be here, because every single bit of technology you are using right now was created by autistic computer geeks (including Tor, although the theory for it did indeed come from the military, it was implemented by some hackers from MIT). I know that you are not the brightest bulb in the bunch though, so I don't much care what you think. Also you know absolutely nothing about my life experience, the people I know, the things I have done or my run in with authorities. But go ahead and speculate away and paint whatever picture you want in your little head, because at the end of the day I know that you are just some dumb fuck pig dick sucker selling some research chemicals on the internet and pretending to have military vehicles and be a big coke lord (lol ya right).

1661
Off topic / Re: how much safer would drugs be if they were legalized?
« on: January 09, 2013, 02:12 pm »
Who cares, we are making money this way.

Ahhhh, the old Slave Driver, Human Trafficker, Pimp excuse. :P

I don't give a fuck, I'm not here to start a revolution or change the world. I want to make a lot of money and then retire and go legit.

And KMF you need to suffer because you fuck kids. Also I don't know your friends in prison so I don't give a shiny shite about them either (if they aren't imaginary which I suspect they are). Why would I give a monkey's nut about people who I have NEVER even met and NEVER will? Why should I care about you, your hopeless cause (because your anarchistic wet dream is about as likely to happen as you deciding to want to have sex with fully developed women overnight). And yeah, actually, I fully accept the potential consequences of my activities. If I get nicked, that's my ass but that's the decision you make when you decide to do that first line, smoke that first spliff and think "Shit, might be a few quid in this". The problem is you want your cake and eat it and also, I sense that if you got done over in the street or your house was burgled or your wife attacked I know the first thing you'd do and it wouldn't be rally the revolutionaries, it'd be call 911 because you are all chat and no balls.

Like I said on another thread, if you're such a bad mother fucker, go out and shoot a pig and YouTube the mother fucker. Oh shit......that isn't gunna happen is it? Because you're just another autistic computer geek who has big ideas but has fuck all knowledge of how the real world works. What you also fail to understand is that most people do not take drugs recreationally and why should the minority impose it's will on the majority. Don't get me wrong I think it's fucking ridiculous that a powder is made illegal but would I want it being done in places where children could see it in open view? Fuck no. Would I wrap a brick round someones head if they offered it to my children (if I have any at all). Yes. Am I glad this thread makes KMF sick? Certainly. :)

Spoken like a true psychopath! Also love being dissed for being just another autistic computer geek. Considering autistic computer geeks are the entire reason why you can sell your drugs on the internet, getting paid in bitcoin, using Tor to hide your location, etc. You sure love to bite the hands that feed you, considering your technical skills are probably about on par with my cats. As for my friends in jail who you don't think are real, well plenty of people here can verify that I have friends in prison facing lots of years for drug trafficking that is a lot bigger time than what your cute little self does with your mephedrone lol. Additionally, why would I shoot a pig when that would be about the worst way possible to attack government officials? See a dumb brute such as yourself may think that is a good way to go about things, but if I wanted to attack them I would use my superior intelligence to construct a remote controlled flying bomb. Also my house has been burglarized and I didn't call the police because I refuse to associate myself with the police. Furthermore I have no interest in fucking kids, but for what it is worth a large amount of people in my country think that your country has legalized the fucking of children, so perhaps you shouldn't throw stones if you live in a glass house?

Also Limetless what exactly are you if not all chat and no balls? I don't see you doing jack shit either except acting like a tough baller on the internet. How have your military vehicle sales been going brah? How about we get some pics of your armored hummer? Oh you don't really have one because you just like to look like a big shot on silk road but really the extent of your balling is selling mephedrone whoooaaaaa you are one fucking bad ass dude.   

1662
Security / Re: How would SR attack LEO
« on: January 07, 2013, 03:01 pm »
Well I guess the first step would be identification of targets. Who are some big name people supporting the prohibitionist agenda? Karen Tandy comes to mind, 'Karen Tandy is senior vice president of Public Affairs and Communications for Motorola' is her current position but she used to be head of the DEA. I wonder how good her security is? I mean does her limo take a predictable route on her way from her mansion to her place of business? How hard is it to make a mini UAV rigged up with some plastic explosives?

That would be one strategy anyway. Assuming that she (or any other person in her position) has adequate security, you can always move down the list until you find one that doesn't. The best thing about prohibitionists is that they tend to work for these really centralized agencies with headquarter buildings and such. I mean , wiping out an entire building is certainly possible although it does carry the potential for a lot of collateral damage and that is something more fit of our enemies to accept than us.

If enough small targets are identified a simultaneous attack against all of them would be of equal if not greater significance than an attack on a more highly protected bigger name target. For example, once identified a thousand law enforcement mailing addresses, dropping enough bomb packs to hit all of them is in the realm of possibility. Still brings up the issue of possible collateral damage though, we really shouldn't let anymore innocent people die from the war on drugs than already have. Wouldn't want DEA agents daughter to open up a bomb packet meant for her cockroach father, not that her cockroach father cares about the daughters who are dying from impure drugs.

The best bet would of course be to maintain anonymity , you can have all the guns in the world and you can't match an army , but you can make a thousand bomb packets and anonymously mail them out in one go. Thinking in terms of traditional symmetric warfare would mean that we don't even do anything because we will be completely annihilated, but reality has shown that combatants who fully utilize certain strategies can successfully oppose much larger attackers. I guess one mans terrorist is the next mans freedom fighter would never be a more applicable statement.

1663
Off topic / Re: how much safer would drugs be if they were legalized?
« on: January 07, 2013, 01:20 pm »
this thread makes me fucking sick. I love how it is always me who needs to suffer for others, who cares about my dead friends or my friends dying in fucking prison so long as limetless can make an extra buck right? DEA win with their jobs and limetless wins with his meph money. It is so nice knowing that two sides of evil want to enslave me and have my friends die for their profits. Of course wanting to not be enslaved is the most insane thought possible. If they want me to go to prison then it is my fault for upsetting them! And really who cares, I mean people have to have jobs and make money right?

I hope they are all shot and bleed together.

1664
Off topic / Re: The History of Online Drug Marketplaces
« on: January 06, 2013, 11:36 am »
DZF was the first forum that went down, although to be fair it was operated by the FBI. They busted several of the vendors on it, particularly they seemed focused on people selling opiates. Other than DZF and TFM I don't think any other forum has had an entire operation against it or substantial busts related to it. Of course individual members on several forums have been busted due to interceptions, but as far as actual operations aimed at internet drug dealing forums go, DZF and TFM are all that I am aware of.

Of course I am speaking in terms of recreational drug forums, there have been two other major operations against online drug dealing communities though. The first of which was operation webtryp which targeted vendors selling research chemicals (although no forums, they operated from their own independent websites), the second of which was operation raw deal which targeted the steroid forums.

1665
Security / Re: Securing hidden services
« on: January 06, 2013, 01:32 am »
That is pretty much the ideal setup. If you do a colocation and send the server in yourself, which of course has a lot of risk of its own, you can use chassis intrusion detection switches. Many modern motherboards support that. Then you can have the server run some script that shuts down / memory wipes as soon as the case is opened. Additionally you could put the RAM in encapsulation material. Tor via Tor is great for hidden services, at least while they are still allowing it anyway. It should add quite a lot of anonymity for hidden services. Hardware based isolation how you describe is a good way to go about things as well to prevent hackers who root the hidden service from determining its external IP address. Mandatory access controls like SElinux provides are great for server security as well. A lot of modern processors have nifty security features that you can use to further isolate things as well. Of course you need to use a 64 bit OS so that you get the full advantage of ASLR. And you need to pick the right OS, possibly hardened Gentoo would be nice although there are other things to consider as well.

I have not heard of a more secure method of hosting servers, I think that is pretty much the diamond standard. Of course you need to make sure you keep everything patched as well, intrusion detection systems can help identify hacking attempts prior to the hackers totally pwning the system as well. There may be some advantage to adding yet another layer of isolation with virtualization, or it might not be worth the disadvantages this brings since you already have hardware based isolation anyway.

Pages: 1 ... 109 110 [111] 112 113 ... 249