Options for the Hacker

Options for the Hacker. The presence of hackers in our world has changed the nature of communication. It could force us back to paper communication. From a recent report*, Russia is planning to adopt a foolproof means of avoiding global electronic hacking by reverting to paper and typewriters, each having its own signature. Even still, there are non crackable encryption techniques that can work and do work. We just don’t use them. Businesses under fund their IT departments and security personal to save money. But they lose privacy, and privacy is an asset; make no doubt. This is a story to illustrate that making security assumptions at almost all levels is misguided. It is a sad story. Yet, this story should be told.

If you had a number of damaging emails that could be the ruination of a public leader, or anyone else, you have options.

1.       You can release these in the spirit of disclosure of questionable behavior to the citizenry.
2.       You can release them in the interest of doing harm.
3.       You can destroy them, in the interest of keeping public confidence in its leaders, possibly saving your future as well.
4.       You could make them available at private auction.

In the case of the presidential election, it seems that Clinton's emails from several sources may have been hacked. Some have been released. More are promised. What is important is that the emails have not been challenged as bogus even by the senders. Even the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has been hacked, with 20,000 emails released.

It now appears (8/18/2016) the National Security Agency (NSA) has been seriously hacked****. The NSA is the nation’s ultimate security agency for the protection of information. It is also responsible for the USA’s own hacking operations. This is serious. With access to such information as the NSA holds, the hacker knows our most important information secrets.

What we have not seen is any hint of a revelation of emails from Trump and team. Or from the Republican National Committee (RNC). A natural guess suggests that if one could read them, some nasty comments may be found. Have they such advanced security to be non-hackable? In fact, this is likely so. It is not difficult to do if your IT manager manager has basic security skills.

We do not really know the identities of all the hackers, but remember, a significant percentage of hacking arises internally**.

In my days as a low-level administrator, I didn't send any email that I wouldn't mind the world to see. This was a rule of thumb we all used. All the important stuff was done by letter or in private conversations. I guess when you go up the ladder, less discretion is necessary. It is an interesting side note to point out that political party conventions were originally held so that participants could communicate in strict privacy.

What has happened is that perpetrators of the DNC hacks have been first suggested and then determined (I know not how) to rest at the doorstep of Russia, and specifically to Vladimir Putin. Both Wasserman-Schultz and Nancy Pelosi (D) have supported this claim, the latter calling it an “electronic Watergate,” just today for Pelosi (8/11/16)***. Putin has been elevated. I can almost see Vlad saying to his staff, "I can do that?" Putin must be feared by other leaders believing he can do this to them. He is now widely regarded as the most powerful leader in the world, having power he doesn't even have. (But its not what you have in this game, its what they think you have.)

It was Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, who released 20,000 emails from the DNC. This precipitated the fall from power of DNC chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. A few other DNC staffers were also fired. She charges Russians were the perps. The murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich has been cryptically hinted by Assange as the source of emails. Assange is clever; he protects his information with the ultimate threat of a timely release if untoward events occur.

So, it appears there are a load of emails out there. Whose, we don’t know. Will they be released, and if so why are they released?

*https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/russia-reverts-paper-nsa-leaks

** http://businessrecord.com/Content/Default/Archives/Article/Internal-hacking-poses-silent-threat-for-companies/-3/988/43875

*** http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/dnc-hack-nancy-pelosi-226903
**** http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/17/nsas-website-goes-down-amid-hacking-fears.html

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels. One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four. Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of information of any kind become a kind of truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget. Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view

First Blog

Search This Blog