Hi, I am wondering about how one would store Monero in an ultra paranoid fashion. I saw that the NSA deprecated elliptic curve cryptography for official government use, which leads many to believe that they might have found some vulnerability. In Bitcoin, I can do a p2pkh or "pay to public key hash" which means that even if somebody finds a weakness in ECC that can help recover private keys from public keys, my Bitcoin would be safe - because the public key isn't revealed until I spend the Bitcoin. However, in Monero, I can't seem to find a similar way to "pay to public key hash." Is there some other way I can hold Monero without revealing the public key? I know this is ultra paranoid and the odds of this happening are near negligible. Even further, the odds of an attacker knowing which public keys are mine are even lower. Cracking Monero addresses likely wouldn't even be on the radar of somebody who has discovered such a vulnerability - they would almost certainly go after higher value targets first (like foreign government secret communications.) However, does Monero offer a solution for an ultra paranoid user like me? Not that I'll stop using it if it doesn't! :)
Imagine if there was one desk that all stories could cross so that, at 4am, a media plan could be decided upon and disseminated where all news outlets coordinated to set the goalposts of debate and hyper focused on specific issues to drive a narrative to control how you vote and how you spend money; where Internet shills were given marching orders in tandem to what was shown on television, printed in newspapers and spread throughout articles on the World Wide Web. https://i.imgur.com/Elnci0M.png In the past, we had Operation Mockingbird, where the program was supremely confident that it could control stories around the world, even in instructions to cover up any story about a possible “Yeti” sighting, should it turn out they were real. https://i.imgur.com/121LXqy.png If, in 1959, the government was confident in its ability to control a story about a Yeti, then what is their level of confidence in controlling stories, today? https://i.imgur.com/jQFVYew.png https://i.imgur.com/ZKMYGJj.png In fact, we have a recent example of a situation similar to the Yeti. When Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch met on the TARMAC to spike the Hillary email investigation, the FBI was so confident it wasn’t them, that their entire focus was finding the leaker, starting with searching within the local PD. We have documentation that demonstrates the state of mind of the confidence the upper levels of the FBI have when dealing with the media. https://i.imgur.com/IbjDOkI.png https://i.imgur.com/NH86ozU.png The marriage between mainstream media and government is a literal one and this arrangement is perfectly legal. https://i.imgur.com/OAd4vpf.png But, this problem extends far beyond politics; the private sector, the scientific community, even advice forums are shilled heavily. People are paid to cause anxiety, recommend people break up and otherwise sow depression and nervousness. This is due to a correlating force that employs “systems psychodynamics”, focusing on “tension centered” strategies to create “organizational paradoxes” by targeting people’s basic assumptions about the world around them to create division and provide distraction. https://i.imgur.com/6OEWYFN.png https://i.imgur.com/iG4sdD4.png https://i.imgur.com/e89Rx6B.png https://i.imgur.com/uotm9Cg.png https://i.imgur.com/74wt9tD.png In this day and age, it is even easier to manage these concepts and push a controlled narrative from a central figure than it has ever been. Allen & Co is a “boutique investment firm” that managed the merger between Disney and Fox and operates as an overseeing force for nearly all media and Internet shill armies, while having it’s fingers in sports, social media, video games, health insurance, etc. https://i.imgur.com/zlpBh3c.png https://i.imgur.com/e5ZvFFJ.png Former director of the CIA and Paul Brennan’s former superior George Tenet, holds the reigns of Allen & Co. The cast of characters involves a lot of the usual suspects. https://i.imgur.com/3OlrX7G.png
In 1973, Allen & Company bought a stake in Columbia Pictures. When the business was sold in 1982 to Coca-Cola, it netted a significant profit. Since then, Herbert Allen, Jr. has had a place on Coca-Cola's board of directors. Since its founding in 1982, the Allen & Company Sun Valley Conference has regularly drawn high-profile attendees such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Rupert Murdoch, Barry Diller, Michael Eisner, Oprah Winfrey, Robert Johnson, Andy Grove, Richard Parsons, and Donald Keough. Allen & Co. was one of ten underwriters for the Google initial public offering in 2004. In 2007, Allen was sole advisor to Activision in its $18 billion merger with Vivendi Games. In 2011, the New York Mets hired Allen & Co. to sell a minority stake of the team. That deal later fell apart. In November 2013, Allen & Co. was one of seven underwriters on the initial public offering of Twitter. Allen & Co. was the adviser of Facebook in its $19 billion acquisition of WhatsApp in February 2014. In 2015, Allen & Co. was the advisor to Time Warner in its $80 billion 2015 merger with Charter Communications, AOL in its acquisition by Verizon, Centene Corporation in its $6.8 billion acquisition of Health Net, and eBay in its separation from PayPal. In 2016, Allen & Co was the lead advisor to Time Warner in its $108 billion acquisition by AT&T, LinkedIn for its merger talks with Microsoft, Walmart in its $3.3 billion purchase of Jet.com, and Verizon in its $4.8 billion acquisition of Yahoo!. In 2017, Allen & Co. was the advisor to Chewy.com in PetSmart’s $3.35 billion purchase of the online retailer.
Previous conference guests have included Bill and Melinda Gates, Warren and Susan Buffett, Tony Blair, Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Allen alumnus and former Philippine Senator Mar Roxas, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt, Quicken Loans Founder & Chairman Dan Gilbert, Yahoo! co-founder Jerry Yang, financier George Soros, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, Media Mogul Rupert Murdoch, eBay CEO Meg Whitman, BET founder Robert Johnson, Time Warner Chairman Richard Parsons, Nike founder and chairman Phil Knight, Dell founder and CEO Michael Dell, NBA player LeBron James, Professor and Entrepreneur Sebastian Thrun, Governor Chris Christie, entertainer Dan Chandler, Katharine Graham of The Washington Post, Diane Sawyer, InterActiveCorp Chairman Barry Diller, Linkedin co-founder Reid Hoffman, entrepreneur Wences Casares, EXOR and FCA Chairman John Elkann, Sandro Salsano from Salsano Group, and Washington Post CEO Donald E. Graham, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, and Oprah Winfrey.
https://i.imgur.com/VZ0OtFa.png George Tenet, with the reigns of Allen & Co in his hands, is able to single-handedly steer the entire Mockingbird apparatus from cable television to video games to Internet shills from a singular location determining the spectrum of allowable debate. Not only are they able to target people’s conscious psychology, they can target people’s endocrine systems with food and pornography; where people are unaware, on a conscious level, of how their moods and behavior are being manipulated. https://i.imgur.com/mA3MzTB.png
"The problem with George Tenet is that he doesn't seem to care to get his facts straight. He is not meticulous. He is willing to make up stories that suit his purposes and to suppress information that does not." "Sadly but fittingly, 'At the Center of the Storm' is likely to remind us that sometimes what lies at the center of a storm is a deafening silence."
https://i.imgur.com/YHMJnnP.png Tenet joined President-elect Bill Clinton's national security transition team in November 1992. Clinton appointed Tenet Senior Director for Intelligence Programs at the National Security Council, where he served from 1993 to 1995. Tenet was appointed Deputy Director of Central Intelligence in July 1995. Tenet held the position as the DCI from July 1997 to July 2004. Citing "personal reasons," Tenet submitted his resignation to President Bush on June 3, 2004. Tenet said his resignation "was a personal decision and had only one basis—in fact, the well-being of my wonderful family—nothing more and nothing less. In February 2008, he became a managing director at investment bank Allen & Company. https://i.imgur.com/JnGHqOS.png We have the documentation that demonstrates what these people could possibly be doing with all of these tools of manipulation at their fingertips. The term for it is “covert political action” for which all media put before your eyes is used to serve as a veneer… a reality TV show facade of a darker modus operandum. https://i.imgur.com/vZC4D29.png https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol36no3/html/v36i3a05p_0001.htm
It is now clear that we are facing an implacable enemy whose avowed objective is world domination by whatever means and at whatever costs. There are no rules in such a game. Hitherto acceptable norms of human conduct do not apply. If the US is to survive, longstanding American concepts of "fair play" must be reconsidered. We must develop effective espionage and counterespionage services and must learn to subvert, sabotage and destroy our enemies by more clever, more sophisticated means than those used against us. It may become necessary that the American people be made acquainted with, understand and support this fundamentally repugnant philosophy.
Intelligence historian Jeffrey T. Richelson says the S.A. has covered a variety of missions. The group, which recently was reorganized, has had about 200 officers, divided among several groups: the Special Operations Group; the Foreign Training Group, which trains foreign police and intelligence officers; the Propaganda and Political Action Group, which handles disinformation; the Computer Operations Group, which handles information warfare; and the Proprietary Management Staff, which manages whatever companies the CIA sets up as covers for the S.A.
…Those operations we inaugurated in the years 1955-7 are still secret, but, for present purposes, I can say all that’s worth saying about them in a few sentences – after, that is, I offer these few words of wisdom. The ‘perfect’ political action operation is, by definition, uneventful. Nothing ‘happens’ in it. It is a continuing arrangement, neither a process nor a series of actions proceeding at a starting point and ending with a conclusion.
CIA FBI NSA Personnel Active in Scientology: https://i.imgur.com/acu2Eti.png When you consider the number of forces that can be contained within a single “political action group” in the form on a “boutique investment firm,” where all sides of political arguments are predetermined by a selected group of actors who have been planted, compromised or leveraged in some way in order to control the way they spin their message. https://i.imgur.com/tU4MD4S.png The evidence of this coordinated effort is overwhelming and the “consensus” that you see on TV, in sports, in Hollywood, in the news and on the Internet is fabricated.
Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favour is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most likely develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'
When you find yourself feeling like common sense and common courtesy aren’t as common as they ought to be, it is because there is a massive psychological operation controlled from the top down to ensure that as many people as possible are caught in a “tension based” mental loop that is inflicted on them by people acting with purpose to achieve goals that are not in the interest of the general population, but a method of operating in secret and corrupt manner without consequences. Notice that Jeffrey Katzenberg, of Disney, who is intertwined with Allen & Co funds the Young Turks. He is the perfect example of the relationship between media and politics.
Katzenberg has also been involved in politics. With his active support of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, he was called "one of Hollywood's premier political kingmakers and one of the Democratic Party's top national fundraisers."
Last week, former DreamWorks Animation CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg’s new mobile entertainment company WndrCo was part of a $20 million funding round in TYT Network, which oversees 30 news and commentary shows covering politics, pop culture, sports and more. This includes the flagship “The Young Turks” program that streams live on YouTube every day. Other investors in the round included venture capital firms Greycroft Partners, E.ventures and 3L Capital, which led the round. This brings total funding for Young Turks to $24 million.
Hollywood activism long has been depicted as a club controlled by a handful of powerful white men: Katzenberg, Spielberg, Lear, David Geffen, Haim Saban and Bob Iger are the names most often mentioned. But a new generation of power brokers is ascendant, including J.J. Abrams and his wife, Katie McGrath, cited for their personal donations and bundling skills; Shonda Rhimes, who held a get-out-the-vote rally at USC's Galen Center on Sept. 28 that drew 10,000 people; CAA's Darnell Strom, who has hosted events for Nevada congresswoman Jacky Rosen and Arizona congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema; and former Spotify executive Troy Carter, who held three fundraisers for Maryland gubernatorial candidate Ben Jealous (Carter also was a fundraiser for President Obama).
Viacom, after splitting off from Les Moonves Les Moonves ' CBS , still holds Paramount Pictures, and that movie studio in December agreed to acquire DreamWorks SKG, the creative shop founded by the Hollywood triumvirate of Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg (a former exec at The Walt Disney Co.). DreamWorks Animation had been spun off into a separate company. Now it's time for Freston to make back some money--and who better to do a little business with than George Soros? The billionaire financier leads a consortium of Soros Strategic Partners LP and Dune Entertainment II LLC, which together are buying the DreamWorks library--a collection of 59 flicks, including Saving Private Ryan, Gladiator, and American Beauty.
Is Crypto Currency truly at risk due to Quantum Computers, and what can you do about it?
Is Crypto Currency truly at risk due to Quantum Computers, and what can you do about it?
There is no denying that the Quantum revolution is coming. Security protocols for the internet, banking, telecommunications, etc... are all at risk, and your Bitcoins (and alt-cryptos) are next! This article is not really about quantum computers[i], but, rather, how they will affect the future of cryptocurrency, and what steps a smart investor will take. Since this is a complicated subject, my intention is to provide just enough relevant information without being too “techy.”
The Quantum Evolution
In 1982, Nobel winning physicist, Richard Feynman, hypothesized how quantum computers[ii] would be used in modern life. Just one year later, Apple released the “Apple Lisa”[iii] – a home computer with a 7.89MHz processor and a whopping 5MB hard drive, and, if you enjoy nostalgia, it used 5.25in floppy disks. Today, we walk around with portable devices that are thousands of times more powerful, and, yet, our modern day computers still work in a simple manner, with simple math, and simple operators[iv]. They now just do it so fast and efficient that we forget what’s happening behind the scenes. No doubt, the human race is accelerating at a remarkable speed, and we’ve become obsessed with quantifying everything - from the everyday details of life to the entire universe[v]. Not only do we know how to precisely measure elementary particles, we also know how to control their actions! Yet, even with all this advancement, modern computers cannot “crack” cryptocurrencies without the use of a great deal more computing power, and since it’s more than the planet can currently supply, it could take millions, if not billions, of years. However, what current computers can’t do, quantum computers can! So, how can something that was conceptualized in the 1980’s, and, as of yet, has no practical application, compromise cryptocurrencies and take over Bitcoin? To best answer this question, let’s begin by looking at a bitcoin address.
What exactly is a Bitcoin address?
Well, in layman terms, a Bitcoin address is used to send and receive Bitcoins, and looking a bit closer (excuse the pun), it has two parts:[vi] A public key that is openly shared with the world to accept payments. A public key that is derived from the private key. The private key is made up of 256 bits of information in a (hopefully) random order. This 256 bit code is 64 characters long (in the range of 0-9/a-f) and further compressed into a 52 character code (using RIPEMD-160). NOTE: Although many people talk about Bitcoin encryption, Bitcoin does not use Encryption. Instead, Bitcoin uses a hashing algorithm (for more info, please see endnote below[vii]). Now, back to understanding the private key: The Bitcoin address “1EHNa6Q4Jz2uvNExL497mE43ikXhwF6kZm” translates to a private key of “5HpHagT65TZzG1PH3CSu63k8DbpvD8s5ip4nEB3kEsreAnchuDf” which further translates to a 256 bit private key of “0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001” (this should go without saying, but do not use this address/private key because it was compromised long ago.) Although there are a few more calculations that go behind the scenes, these are the most relevant details. Now, to access a Bitcoin address, you first need the private key, and from this private key, the public key is derived. With current computers, it’s classically impractical to attempt to find a private key based on a public key. Simply put, you need the private key to know the public key. However, it has already been theorized (and technically proven) that due to private key compression, multiple private keys can be used to access the same public key (aka address). This means that your Bitcoin address has multiple private keys associated with it, and, if someone accidentally discovers or “cracks” any one of those private keys, they have access to all the funds in that specific address. There is even a pool of a few dedicated people hunting for these potential overlaps[viii], and they are, in fact, getting very efficient at it. The creator of the pool also has a website listing every possible Bitcoin private key/address in existence[ix], and, as of this writing, the pool averages 204 trillion keys per day! But wait! Before you get scared and start panic selling, the probability of finding a Bitcoin address containing funds (or even being used) is highly unlikely – nevertheless, still possible! However, the more Bitcoin users, the more likely a “collision” (finding overlapping private/public key pairs)! You see, the security of a Bitcoin address is simply based on large numbers! How large? Well, according to my math, 1.157920892373x1077 potential private keys exist (that number represents over 9,500 digits in length! For some perspective, this entire article contains just over 14,000 characters. Therefore, the total number of Bitcoin addresses is so great that the probability of finding an active address with funds is infinitesimal.
So, how do Quantum Computers present a threat?
At this point, you might be thinking, “How can a quantum computer defeat this overwhelming number of possibilities?” Well, to put it simple; Superposition and Entanglement[x]. Superposition allows a quantum bit (qbit) to be in multiple states at the same time. Entanglement allows an observer to know the measurement of a particle in any location in the universe. If you have ever heard Einstein’s quote, “Spooky Action at a Distance,” he was talking about Entanglement! To give you an idea of how this works, imagine how efficient you would be if you could make your coffee, drive your car, and walk your dog all at the same time, while also knowing the temperature of your coffee before drinking, the current maintenance requirements for your car, and even what your dog is thinking! In a nutshell, quantum computers have the ability to process and analyze countless bits of information simultaneously – and so fast, and in such a different way, that no human mind can comprehend! At this stage, it is estimated that the Bitcoin address hash algorithm will be defeated by quantum computers before 2028 (and quite possibly much sooner)! The NSA has even stated that the SHA256 hash algorithm (the same hash algorithm that Bitcoin uses) is no longer considered secure, and, as a result, the NSA has now moved to new hashing techniques, and that was in 2016! Prior to that, in 2014, the NSA also invested a large amount of money in a research program called “Penetrating Hard Targets project”[xi] which was used for further Quantum Computer study and how to break “strong encryption and hashing algorithms.” Does NSA know something they’re not saying or are they just preemptively preparing? Nonetheless, before long, we will be in a post-quantum cryptography world where quantum computers can crack crypto addresses and take all the funds in any wallet.
What are Bitcoin core developers doing about this threat?
Well, as of now, absolutely nothing. Quantum computers are not considered a threat by Bitcoin developers nor by most of the crypto-community. I’m sure when the time comes, Bitcoin core developers will implement a new cryptographic algorithm that all future addresses/transactions will utilize. However, will this happen before post-quantum cryptography[xii]? Moreover, even after new cryptographic implementation, what about all the old addresses? Well, if your address has been actively used on the network (sending funds), it will be in imminent danger of a quantum attack. Therefore, everyone who is holding funds in an old address will need to send their funds to a new address (using a quantum safe crypto-format). If you think network congestion is a problem now, just wait… Additionally, there is the potential that the transition to a new hashing algorithm will require a hard fork (a soft fork may also suffice), and this could result in a serious problem because there should not be multiple copies of the same blockchain/ledger. If one fork gets attacked, the address on the other fork is also compromised. As a side-note, the blockchain Nebulas[xiii] will have the ability to modify the base blockchain software without any forks. This includes adding new and more secure hashing algorithms over time! Nebulas is due to be released in 2018.
Who would want to attack Bitcoin?
Bitcoin and cryptocurrency represent a threat to the controlling financial system of our modern economy. Entire countries have outright banned cryptocurrency[xiv] and even arrested people[xv], and while discrediting it, some countries are copying cryptocurrency to use (and control) in their economy[xvi]! Furthermore, Visa[xvii], Mastercard[xviii], Discover[xix], and most banks act like they want nothing to do with cryptocurrency, all the while seeing the potential of blockchain technology and developing their own[xx]. Just like any disruptive technology, Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies have their fair share of enemies! As of now, quantum computers are being developed by some of the largest companies in the world, as well as private government agencies. No doubt, we will see a post-quantum cryptography world sooner than most realize. By that point, who knows how long “3 letter agencies” will have been using quantum technology - and what they’ll be capable of!
What can we do to protect ourselves today?
Of course, the best option is to start looking at how Bitcoin can implement new cryptographic features immediately, but it will take time, and we have seen how slow the process can be just for scaling[xxi]. The other thing we can do is use a Bitcoin address only once for outgoing transactions. When quantum computers attack Bitcoin (and other crypto currencies), their first target will be addresses that have outgoing transactions on the blockchain that contain funds. This is due to the fact that when computers first attempt to crack a Bitcoin address, the starting point is when a transaction becomes public. In other words, when the transaction is first signed – a signed transaction is a digital signature derived from the private key, and it validates the transaction on the network. Compared to classical computers, quantum computers can exponentially extrapolate this information. Initially, Bitcoin Core Software might provide some level of protection because it only uses an address once, and then sends the remaining balance (if any) to another address in your keypool. However, third party Bitcoin wallets can and do use an address multiple times for outgoing transactions. For instance, this could be a big problem for users that accept donations (if they don’t update their donation address every time they remove funds). The biggest downside to Bitcoin Core Software is the amount of hard-drive space required, as well as diligently retaining an up-to-date copy of the entire blockchain ledger. Nonetheless, as quantum computers evolve, they will inevitably render SHA256 vulnerable, and although this will be one of the first hash algorithms cracked by quantum computers, it won’t be the last!
Are any cryptocurrencies planning for the post-quantum cryptography world?
Yes, indeed, there are! Here is a short list of ones you may want to know more about:
IOTA[xxii] IOTA uses Winternitz one-time signatures[xxiii]. As the name suggests, an address is considered compromised once it signs a transaction on the network, and, therefore, you can only send from an address one time before it’s compromised.
ADA (Cardano)[xxiv] The Cardano roadmap lists quantum resistant signatures using “BLISS.” While BLISS is a strong hashing method, it has an estimated lifespan with classical computers of 6000 signatures (usages)[xxv] but this number could be significantly reduced with quantum tech.
Ethereum[xxvi] The Ethereum network, as well as many more blockchain networks, use the SHA3[xxvii] hash algorithm which is superior to SHA256. Although this is considered by some to be resistant, it is not technically quantum resistant. There is talk of using Lamport Signatures[xxviii] in the future of Ethereum. Although it is not definite at this point, it’s great to see the developers proactive.
QRL (Quantum Resistant Ledger)[xxix] This blockchain concept was conceived in 2016 and is currently in beta testing. Using XMSS (Extended Merkle Signature Scheme) trees combined with Winternitz one-time signatures (but not one time!), it’s fast, salable and truly quantum resistant. If you have not yet checked out this project, I highly suggest you do. To understand why this project is truly post-quantum cryptography ready, do your own due diligence and read the QRL whitepaper.
Although I am in no way associated with any project listed above, I do hold coins in all as well as Bitcoin, Litecoin and many others. The thoughts above are based on my personal research, but I make no claims to being a quantum scientist or cryptographer. So, don’t take my word for anything. Instead, do your own research and draw your own conclusions. I’ve included many references below, but there are many more to explore. In conclusion, the intention of this article is not to create fear or panic, nor any other negative effects. It is simply to educate. If you see an error in any of my statements, please, politely, let me know, and I will do my best to update the error. Thanks for reading!
Evidence Points to Bitcoin being an NSA-engineered Psyop to roll out One-World Digital Currency
Eye I'm going to assume the readers who make it to this article are well informed enough that I don't have to go into the history of the global money changers and their desire for a one world currency. (If you don't yet understand the goal of the globalist banking empire and the coming engineered collapse of the fiat currency system, you're already about 5,000 posts behind the curve.) With that as a starting point, it's now becoming increasingly evident that Bitcoin may be a creation of the NSA and was rolled out as a "normalization" experiment to get the public familiar with digital currency. Once this is established, the world's fiat currencies will be obliterated in an engineered debt collapse (see below for the sequence of events), then replaced with a government approved cryptocurrency with tracking of all transactions and digital wallets by the world's western governments. NSA mathematicians detailed "digital cash" two decades ago What evidence supports this notion? First, take a look at this document entitled, "How to Make a Mint - The Cryptography of Anonymous Electronic Cash." This document, released in 1997 - yes, twenty years ago - detailed the overall structure and function of Bitcoin cryptocurrency. Who authored the document? Try not to be shocked when you learn it was authored by,
"mathematical cryptographers at the National Security Agency's Office of Information Security Research and Technology."
The NSA, in other words, detailed key elements of Bitcoin long before Bitcoin ever came into existence. Much of the Bitcoin protocol is detailed in this document, including signature authentication techniques, eliminating cryptocoin counterfeits through transaction authentication and several features that support anonymity and untraceability of transactions. The document even outlines the heightened risk of money laundering that's easily accomplished with cryptocurrencies. It also describes "secure hashing" to be "both one-way and collision-free." Although Bitcoin adds mining and a shared, peer-to-peer blockchain transaction authentication system to this structure, it's clear that the NSA was researching cryptocurrencies long before everyday users had ever heard of the term. Note, too, that the name of the person credited with founding Bitcoin is Satoshi Nakamoto, who is reputed to have reserved one million Bitcoins for himself. Millions of posts and online threads discuss the possible identity of Satishi Nakamoto, and some posts even claim the NSA has identified Satoshi. However, another likely explanation is that Satoshi Nakamotois the NSA, which means he is either working for the NSA or is a sock puppet character created by the NSA for the purpose of this whole grand experiment. The NSA also wrote the crypto hash used by Bitcoin to secure all transactions On top of the fact that the NSA authored a technical paper on cryptocurrency long before the arrival of Bitcoin, the agency is also the creator of the SHA-256 hash upon which every Bitcoin transaction in the world depends. As The Hacker News (THN) explains.
"The integrity of Bitcoin depends on a hash function called **SHA-256**, which was designed by the NSA and published by the *National Institute for Standards and Technology* ([NIST](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_of_Standards_and_Technology))."
THN also adds:
"If you assume that the NSA did something to SHA-256, which no outside researcher has detected, what you get is the ability, with credible and detectable action, they would be able to forge transactions. The really scary thing is somebody finds a way to find collisions in SHA-256 really fast without brute-forcing it or using lots of hardware and then they take control of the network."
Cryptography researcher Matthew D. Green of Johns Hopkins University said. In other words, if the SHA-256 hash, which was created by the NSA, actually has a backdoor method for cracking the encryption, it would mean the NSA could steal everybody's Bitcoins whenever it wants (call it "Zero Day.") That same article, written by Mohit Kumar, mysteriously concludes,
"Even today it's too early to come to conclusions about Bitcoin. Possibly it was designed from day one as a tool to help maintain control of the money supplies of the world."
And with that statement, Kumar has indeed stumbled upon the bigger goal in all this:
To seize control over the world money supply as the fiat currency system crumbles and is replaced with a one-world *digital currency controlled by globalists*.
"The attack allows an attacker to extract the secret crypto key from a system by analyzing the pattern of memory utilization or the electromagnetic outputs of the device that are emitted during the decryption process."
Note, importantly, that this is a 1024-bit encryption system. The same technique is also said to be able to crack 2048-bit encryption. In fact, encryption layers are cracked on a daily basis by clever hackers. Some of those encryption layers are powering various cryptocurrencies right now. Unless you are an extremely high-level mathematician, there's no way you can know for sure whether any crypto currency is truly non-hackable. In fact, every cryptocurrency becomes obsolete with the invention of large-scale quantum computing. Once China manages to build a working 256-bit quantum computer, it can effectively steal all the Bitcoins in the world (plus steal most national secrets and commit other global mayhem at will). (Video) Ten steps to crypto-tyranny - The "big plan" by the globalists (and how it involves Bitcoin) In summary, here's one possible plan by the globalists to seize total control over the world's money supply, savings, taxation and financial transactions while enslaving humanity. And it all starts with Bitcoin...
Roll out the NSA-created Bitcoin to get the public excited about a digital currency.
Quietly prepare a globalist-controlled cryptocurrency to take its place. (JP Morgan, anyone...?)
Initiate a massive, global-scale [false flag operation](http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_falseflag.htm) that crashes the global debt markets and sends fiat currencies down in flames (hoax alien invasion, hoax North Korean EMP attack, mass distributed power grid terrorism network, etc.)
Blame whatever convenient enemy is politically acceptable (North Korea, "the Russians," Little Green Men or whatever it takes…)
Allow the fiat currency debt pyramid to collapse and smolder until the sheeple get desperate.
With great fanfare, announce a government-backed cryptocurrency replacement for all fiat currencies, and position world governments as the SAVIOR of humanity. Allow the desperate public to trade in their fiat currencies for official crypto currencies.
[Outlaw cash](http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_globalbanking.htm#Cashless_Society) and *criminalize gold and silver ownership by private citizens*. All in the name of "security," of course.
Criminalize all non-official cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, crashing their value virtually overnight and funneling everyone into the one world government crypto, where the NSA controls the blockchain. This can easily be achieved by blaming the false flag event (see above) on some nation or group that is said to have been "funded by Bitcoin, the cryptocurrency used by terrorists."
Require [embedded RFID](http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/secret_projects/implants.htm#RFID) or biometric identifiers for all transactions in order to "authenticate" the one-world digital crypto currency activities. *Mark of the Beast* becomes reality. No one is allowed to eat, travel or earn a wage without being marked.
Once absolute control over the new one-world digital currency is achieved, weaponize the government-tracked blockchain to track all transactions, investments and commercial activities. Confiscate a portion of all crypto under the guise of "automated taxation." In an emergency, the government can even announce *negative interest rates* where your holdings automatically decrease each day.
With all this accomplished, globalists can now roll out absolute totalitarian control over every aspect of private lives by enforcing financial "blackouts" for those individuals who criticize the government. They can put in place automatic deductions for traffic violations, vehicle license plate taxes, internet taxes and a thousand other oppressive taxes invented by the bureaucracy. With automatic deductions run by the government, citizens have no means to halt the endless confiscation of their "money" by totalitarian bureaucrats and their deep state lackeys. How do you feel about your Bitcoin now...? Video by Mike Adams December 10, 2017 from NaturalNews Website Source
3 facts proving NSA/US Fed created Bitcoin. Challenge the 3 facts, I dare you.
We are often way too focused on the price of Bitcoin, to question Bitcoin’s origin. Yet the facts are right under the spot light, how 1 million of Bitcoin is kept in reserve, how SHA 256 is a baby of NSA, and how it takes less than $20 billion to crack Bitcoin yet the US Gov has done nothing 10 years after the invention of Bitcoin. FACT 1: "Satoshi" kept 1,000,000 Bitcoins for "himself". Satoshi is NOT a kind benevolent saviour who invented Bitcoin to save the world. Satoshi invented Bitcoin and kept 1,000,000 Bitcoin for himself, in hope one day when Bitcoin becomes the single world currency he/his organisation will at least own 5% of Bitcoin, aka 5% of global purchasing power, at least. The Fiat System is collapsing. If we crypto/bitcoin enthusiasts on the Reddit forum can see it, of course the guys at the top of the pyramid can see it, and they saw it long before we did. They did something about it, they invented Bitcoin. And yes, it would take more than one computer nerd to come up with Bitcoin. It would have involved many years of work in complete secrecy by many number of experts with a lot of computing power. Which organisation fits the bill besides NSA? And yes they kept 1,000,000 Bitcoin. FACT 2: Bitcoin's Sha 256 is a subset of cryptographic hash functions designed by the United States National Security Agency (NSA). SHA-2 (Secure Hash Algorithm 2) is a set of cryptographic hash functions designed by the United States National Security Agency (NSA). The SHA-2 family consists of six hash functions with digests (hash values) that are 224, 256, 384 or 512 bits: SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, SHA-512, SHA-512/224, SHA-512/256. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-2 BOOM! Yes people, NSA actually came up with the backbone of Bitcoin. It is right under the spotlight. Who else, besides from NSA, could have taken NSA tech and use it to create Bitcoin? FACT 3: If the Fed/NSA/US Government really wanted to destroy Bitcoin, they could have and would have done a 51% attack already, it is dirt cheap. But no, instead they sent a hairless patsy like Brad Sherman to whine about it in public. Do you really think Sherman is the US government's best shot against Bitcoin? To launch a 51% attack on Bitcoin, it only takes $8.4 billion USD in hardware, and a day run rate of $5 million USD to do so. https://gobitcoin.io/tools/cost-51-attack/ To put things into perspective, the Fed just sold $27 billion USD worth of US Treasuries on 8th of May. Apple's market value is $859 billion USD. Yes NSA/Fed/US Government could easily break Bitcoin if they wanted to. Once again. the 3 facts: FACT 1: "Satoshi" kept 1,000,000 Bitcoins for "himself". FACT 2: Bitcoin's Sha 256 is a subset of cryptographic hash functions designed by NSA FACT 3: If the Fed/NSA/US Government really wanted to destroy Bitcoin, they could have and would have done a 51% attack already, it is dirt cheap for the US government to do so. Conclusion: Yes Bitcoin is designed by the NSA/Fed/US Gov. That is absolutely fine because if anything it is actually sign that Bitcoin will actually flourish, given the implicit government backing Bitcoin has. They pulled it off with Fiat Money for 80 years. They realised the fiat game is ending. They started a new game - Bitcoin!
DISCLAIMER: As someone in their late teenage years, many of these mistakes have been made, and most of them have been learned from experience. This guide has been created to help educate anyone involved with drugs on how to best protect themselves against law enforcement, and to do this for a very, long time. However, despite this probably being the quickest and easiest method to generate money, the risk far outweighs the reward. You can put your family, friendships and personal life in jeopardy, and you will have to rely on too many stupid people not to get caught. If you or your friends don't mind that, then read this before you do:
-Keep business and personal life separate. This will depend on the anonymity of your business life. For example, keep your family separate by fabricating an alternate persona for your business life. -Don't get high off your own supply. Consuming your own product may reduce any profits you make. For example, you buy a bag of product but inject it all in one day, now you don't have enough money to buy more needles and expand your business. -Frequently test your product. Failure to do so in an unregulated business may eventually result in overdose, arrest and death. For example, you decide to sell a new batch of product your supplier has cut without reagent testing, and you are later arrested because your customer died of a fatal substance interaction. -Invest and sell in bulk. Only invest in large quantities of product that have the highest profit margins and rate of purchase, while reducing the customer base to bulk buyers. For example, products bought in bulk such as benzodiazepines, cannabis, opiates and amphetamines will generate the most income. -Trust no one. Don't engage in activities that require trust such as fronting people anything like money, or product. For example, if a junkie can't afford his addiction, don't fuel his debt. -Loose lips sink ships. Unnecessary disclosure of sensitive information can be used as evidence against you. For example, your customers think it is okay to short change you because you've boasted to them about how many gucci belts you own and how much money you earn. -Don't shit where you eat. Everything relating to your business should be dumped off your property or destroyed. For example, you should never be vulnerable if you get raided. -Better safe than sorry. Never get comfortable, always analyse and improve your security. For example, imagine you are the prosecutor looking for holes in your defence in court. -The aim of the game is to have no name. Make it known to your associates that you will not do business with anyone who discloses your name or any sensitive information. Cut everyone off who does, as this presents a major security issue for you. For example, if you have any unknown contacts for your business, then that is an indication you need to cut off one of your associates. -Ignorance is bliss. The less you pretend to know about anything related to your business, the better. For example, intent to possess or sell product is usually required for law enforcement to charge you with an offence.
-Only do business with virtually untraceable currency, such as cash or bitcoin. This will prevent law enforcement from using money as evidence for any purchase or sale of illicit products. For example, any cash that is seized by law enforcement requires evidence to determine if it is illegal money. -Never let anyone know your property. This is because your property will link back to your personal life and compromise your anonymity. For example, no one should know where you live, what car you drive or firearm you possess. -Never handover product first, without the handover of money. Customer could receive product without releasing funds. For example, you give a crack-head a bag of product and he runs away with it. -Don't do business with anyone you don't know. A verification system must be used to qualify people as associates such as customers, suppliers or employees, where a person requires at least one successful transaction to be able to make direct purchases or sales, and people without verification should not be able to contact you. For example, you can be relatively certain that a potential customer is legitimate if they have made a successful transaction. -Use third parties and dead-drops for high risk transactions. These techniques make it difficult for law enforcement to create links because they separate you from any transaction. For example, your middleman was able to retrieve your product because law enforcement did not have the resources to constantly surveil the dead-drop. -Never come under control by other people's property. Doing so reduces the chance of you being able to escape a robbery or arrest. This includes things such as cars and houses. For example, you give money to a person inside his car in exchange for product, then he hands you a bag of dog biscuits and drives away. -Dictate the location/time of every transaction. This reduces the chances of being robbed or arrested. For example, choosing a time closer to a transaction, and a location further away from a station would give less time for law enforcement to act. -Keep all transactions public and discrete. This reduces your chances of getting robbed. For example, think of creative ways to make a transaction in public more appropriate and efficient. -Don't use your vehicles for business. Vehicles have number plates which can be traced back to you through registration. For example, you can get pulled over and charged by law enforcement should there have been reasonable suspicion to search it.
Don't use unencrypted or any particularly insecure methods of communication. This includes anything that can be used to identify you with your business, such as mobile phone numbers, email services and social media. For example, you were arrested because your phone was tapped by law enforcement while under investigation, or you were caught selling product online when Facebook granted law enforcement access to your account. -Force any encryption onto electronic communication between yourself and anyone related to your business. This includes customers, suppliers and employees. For example, you can use encrypted anonymity tools for communication such as Tor and Wickr to conduct business. -It is best only with verified associates to discuss sensitive information in person. Using electronic communication in this case is more vulnerable than communicating face-to-face, given that you can't be certain of who is on the other side. For example, it is important to treat personal communication as a layer of security if you have reason to believe your electronic methods of communication have been compromised. -Never leave any electronic device to hibernate while you are accessing sensitive information related to your business. Other people can retrieve your sensitive information from devices such as computers, phones, hardrives or tablets while you are not present. For example, a house mate gains access to your sensitive information because you left your laptop to hibernate while you went to the toilet. -Use a logless VPN to change your IP address (physical location) to hide from your ISP (internet service provider) from your electronic devices when in use. This is so that your communications and browsing history cannot be linked with any of your business online. For example, accessing the same website through both business and personal ISP accounts without a VPN may link your personal internet traffic history to your business activity elsewhere, making you a potential suspect for law enforcement.
-Don't store your entire stash on your property. Even if the stealth was so impeccable that you could not find its location yourself, drug dogs in a search warrant will. -Keep all things related to packaging hidden and separate from product when not in use. This is so that they cannot be identified by law enforcement and linked with the sale of product. For example, written documents, clip seal bags, scales, mail, cutting agents, heat sealing devices and drug paraphernalia. -Ensure product during processing is disposable at all times. You should be able to dispose of product in the process of packaging before law enforcement can get to it. For example, you flushed the product down a toilet or sink before police could seize it during a raid. -Move stash frequently. Repeated visits to your stash creates a pattern which can be traced if you are under investigation by law enforcement. For example, the police followed you to your stash from home, planted cameras near your stash and acquired evidence for the stash being in your possession. -Don't let anyone else apart from yourself know where your stash is located. Doing so will most likely result in a robbery, and it can also result in your arrest if that person became a police informant. For example, your stash goes missing, your employee gets arrested or robbed, unable to return funds or product, and snitched on you after having informed him where your stash was located. -Wear gloves, hairnets and long cloths when handling business. Biometric evidence such as fingerprints, hair follicles and skin can be used to gather evidence for possession of product. For example, your fingerprints on that bag of product is evidence of you possessing it. Destroy (wipe) all digital evidence after use. You can wipe hardrives clean with programs such as DBAN, and wipe any digital documents and photo metadata with software like Tails, and learn how to factory reset your mobile devices. Ideally, all digital information must be temporary, amnesic and self-destructing. -Destroy (burn) all physical evidence after use. Do not dispose of evidence inside your property's garbage bins, as it is routine for law enforcement to search them. For example, if you dispose of evidence such as clip seal plastic bags and documents in your bins, it could be used against you as evidence after law enforcement have collected it during a search warrant. -Regularly wipe electronic devices that may contain information related to your business. This is so that law enforcement can't use that evidence against you if they have a search warrant to seize and analyze your digital belongings. -Build a team that live in the same property. Living with other people that work for you increases business availability, and ambiguity for the prosecution after a search warrant. For example, any product found requires evidence such as fingerprints to discover who exactly is in possession of it. -Remove all physical and digital evidence from property if you believe you are under law enforcement investigation. You must take every precaution necessary so that law enforcement cannot find a shred of evidence of your illegal activity if they execute a search warrant. For example, the prosecutor couldn't press charges on you because they found no evidence to support their case.
-Don't talk to police. Anything you say can and will be used as evidence against you. Suppose you said everything right, talking to law enforcement is still a no win situation. For example, you could have said everything right in the police interrogation, but the prosecution can still claim that you weren't cooperative since you had essentially denied everything. -Know your rights. State nothing except for your name, date of birth, and right to silence and an attorney when being interrogated by law enforcement. You will most likely incriminate yourself if you fail to do so. For example, police stopped questioning you when you exercised your right to silence and an attorney. -You know nothing. Do not admit to knowing or remembering anything. For example, if law enforcement ask you if you remember anything about a package they found in your property during a search warrant, your defence can be a complete lack of knowledge and intent for such a claim. -Play dumb. You don't know or understand anything about the law, the morality in breaking it or the likely risk of engaging in activities that do. The less culpable (guilty), and the more naive you are about the law, the better chance you have of winning in court. For example, defences such as mental insanity and impairment are successful when the defendant demonstrates that he does not understand the morality of the charges. -Don't appear guilty. Become void of all body language as not to raise suspicion of your guilt. For example, defensive postures, eyes that stray left and right and feet that point toward the door are all signs of guilt that law enforcement will detect. Leave all emotions out of the process, especially guilt. For example, you confessed in an investigation room because you broke down after being told how many years in jail you're apparently going to serve, and that all further charges would be dropped if you confessed. Don't be that guy.
You're in trouble
-Don't talk to federal agents. Say nothing of substance; anything you do say can be falsified, editoralized or misinterpreted. Believe it or not, at this level law enforcement are willing to lie in order to convict you. For example, a federal agent tells you that you won't hear from them again if you cooperate with police, then you get a call later from a prosecutor detailing your court date. -You are guilty until proven innocent. The investigation process is no longer about guilt or innocence. For example, federal agents at this level care more about catching you out on a lie than determining your innocence. -Don't deny anything or behave surreptitiously. Anything you say is now open to further investigation. For example, federal agents opened up an investigation on your associates because you avoided sharing information about them. -Always divert federal agents to your lawyer. Whether they are dropping their business cards on your car window, turning up to your front door, or in an interview with you, always have a lawyer to engage them on your behalf. For example, a federal agent threatens you with a grand jury-subpoena if you do not talk, you tell them to address your lawyer about it. -Record any encounters you have with federal agents. The only advantage you have over them is relying on their ability to lie or make errors, since they are not legally allowed to record you, other than in their peer reviewed notes. Next up is the NSA, and a guide to hacking and being a fugitive. That is, if I'm not in prison by then.
Is Global Warming a Narrative Being Used to Mitigate the Enormous Heat That Will Be Generated By a Fully-Realized, Global, CryptoEconomy?
First, the crypto system has us believe that in our mining we are solving pregenerated puzzles using GPU/CPU to basically crack the encryption on them. This is the dumb dumb person like me's understanding of crypto. If it's mostly right please refrain from smarter than thou type comments because, well, there's several crypto subs you can nerd out on. I strongly suspect that these puzzles are actually a REAL problem that someone (DARPA) is trying to solve I find it hard to believe that 'random puzzles created for no reason, but to waste precious energy from nonrenewable resources at the immeasurable cost of global warming, which, if unleashed fully onto the world would be a TOTAL DISASTER in terms of CPU/GPU heat generated to run a global crytopeconomy" is something that is SERIOUSLY being pushed by the political extreme Left--Silicon Valley liberals for example--while also screeching about global warming, as if we are to believe they are utterly clueless about the heat generated by their own bitcoin mining datacenters, which have cold air systems half as large attached to them in order to keep the rig from immediately burning out. In fact, some communities have outright banned crypto mining at scale because of both the power draw and the heat issues, as well as causing a disruption in the power market in favor of the power companies in terms of supply and demand (miners would induce higher power prices and thereby screw over all the non-miners / normal people who go to work and pretend that crypto isn't a thing) Here are some other things about crypto that make you go hmm: We also know that bitcoin is WAY older than they say; it's as old as facebook We know as of last month that 95% of the volume traded was faked....by ai bots self trading behind the exchanges using something akin to put options and manipulating the market We also know that just by looking at the graphs of crypto prices, that they are all based on the same trading algorithms (ie, with minor variance, they all follow nearly teh exact same graph over time with different trade volumes prices and starting points. Like if you drew a jagged line and then xeroxed it and then overlayed them on top of each other about 1" apart on the vertical We also have no idea if the inventor of bitcoin is a real person, and many believe he is a made up person and that bitcoin is a DARPA/NSA invention
So, I theorize about bitcoin (crypto generally) again that it's possible that Global Warming could simply be a hegelian dialectic ploy, a social psychology mindhack, a predictive programming campaign to prepare people for a crypto global economy, whose heat that will be created from it could very well cause all the mayhem they attribute to anthropgenic behaviors and fossil fuel use, and therefore 'could manufacture consent within a world culture for the deployment of a) geoengineering measures; b) highly technological, cybersteered (AI) social control grid; c) security state threat matrix application (palantifusion centers/sentient world simulation with individual dossiers and virtual citizen-person simulacra); d) a 5+G surveillance control grid; e) smart appliances and kill-a-watt type 'smart meters' for everything--water, power, poop, screentime, thought time; f) carbon market; g) oxygen meters installed on the face w/ governors to make you sit still if you consume too much oxygen
That last one was a little over the top but you get where this is going, right? It's the Get-You-To-The-Robot-Plan™ all over again Even if this is wrong, and Global Warming is Real, which it probably is, and probably IS partly anthropogenic, as well as partly solar minimum, partly chemtrails, largely nukes in space, all the above insulting our precious mother earth, etc etc, .... ....I can assure you that Global Warming and Bitcoin will be appropriated and bundled into a hegelian ploy to kontrol everything you do in the future. That is why we need to solve global warming RIGHT NOW but outlining specific measures of 'what is good', 'what is normal' and then acheive those and close the case. Turns out Ocasio-Cortez and I agree--we need to stop Global Warming before we have smartmeters installed on cows rectums...and our own!
Reasons to believe Julian Assange is in CIA custody and WikiLeaks under duress.
UPDATE (11/01/2017 - UK Date Format): Julian Assange is alive and still in the Embassy. He confirms WikiLeaks has not been compromised. Julian took questions from the Reddit AmA but answered them via live, current and interactive video. He did this very intentionally, and by so doing, was true to his word. Watch a recording of the live event here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC2EjKYMCeg On the 26th of September 2016 Secretary of State John Kerry (self admitted Skull and Bones member) visited Colombia. WikiLeaks reported that inside sources had confirmed that John Kerry also met with Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa in Ecuador to personally ask Ecuador to stop Assange from publishing documents about Clinton. This was initially fervently denied in the press only later to be confirmed by the Ecuadorian embassy who admitted cutting off Julian’s internet due to pressure from the US. Ecuador wanted to appear impartial. For over four years, the Ecuadorian embassy has been under surveillance and Julian's human rights violated as he has been unlawfully detained termed "illegal arbitrary detention" by a recent UN ruling. During that time, it has been possible for intelligence agencies to gather critical information and build a detailed profile and plan to circumvent Julian's dead man's switch. Both John Kerry and US intelligence agencies know perfectly well that cutting off Julian's internet would have no impact on the release of the leaked emails that are damaging to Hillary's campaign. It has been very clear for a long time that many US officials wanted Julian Assange dead, Hillary Clinton even has remarked, "can't we just drone the guy". The cutting off of Julian's internet access was not for the purpose of preventing the leaks of the Podesta and Hillary emails. Unless intelligence agencies are truly inept, they know that media organisations already have the entire leaked email database and a schedule for release, they also know WikiLeaks staff would continue to leak regardless of Julian's ability to communicate. Removing Assange would not be enough, they would need to circumvent his dead man's switch and then tarnish WikiLeaks reputation. Removing Assange's internet could have the effect of causing Assange to take steps that can be followed to prevent the automatic triggering of his DMS. From the day Julian's internet was cut off, a series of peculiar and uncharacteristic events started to take place. The same day that Julian's internet was cut off, CBS reported that Pamela Anderson visited Assange and had "Tortured" him with a vegan sandwich. A few days before on the 14th, John Podesta tweeted "I bet the lobster risotto is better than the food at the Ecuadorian Embassy". Then on October the 16th the SHA-256 prerelease keys were issued on WikiLeaks twitter feed, although these events are odd and seemingly inconsequential, combined with John Kerry being in the UK from the 16th to the 17th sparked concern among the community for Julian's safety. Assange supporters started to gather at the embassy to keep Assange safe and witness any foul play, some of these witnesses have claimed that a very swift police armed raid took place that lasted only 5 minutes while the crowd was kept under control and prevented from approaching, there have also been reports that they were prevented from taking photographs and that their phones were confiscated. A live periscope feed was also cut off. There have also been some reports of the presence of a mobile jamming van. If Assange has been seized, any recognition by mainstream media would be detrimental to Hillary's campaign. A covert operation with media blackout would be the only effective way of seizing him at this time. On October the 18th Fox News said that Julian Assange would be "arrested soon, maybe in a matter of hours.". The was video was then promptly removed and articles relating to it have disappeared. However, one reddit user was able to find an alternative source and now the video can be found again on YouTube. Although Julian's primary DMS (the release of insurance file encryption keys) did not activate, on October the 18th one of Julian's contingencies did activate, a script was activated that made https://file.wikileaks.org/file publicly visible and set all the file date and time stamps to 01/01/1984 (Orwell reference). This file repository contains many documents that had not been released prior. Staffers Kristinn Hrafnsson and Sarah Harrison, have gone silent while the Ecuadorian embassy is refusing to provide any updates on Assange’s fate. There is a recorded call made to the embassy by a journalist where the receptionist refused to confirm that Julian was at the embassy, she also refused to confirm that Julian was even alive. Julian has not made an appearance at the window of the embassy since being cut off. WikiLeaks suggested in a tweet that its supporters were responsible for the DDOS attacks on the 21st. Neither Assange or WikiLeaks would ever insinuate such a thing. WikiLeaks deceptively tweeted a video of Michael Moore that was actually recorded in June. The video was posted on the 24th of October giving the impression that Michael Moore had been speaking with Assange in the embassy. Why would WikiLeaks do this when they know they are already under suspicion? WikiLeaks have been using their Twitter account to give the appearance of his safety while providing no concrete evidence of his safety. They issued a poll asking what proof would satisfy the public that Julian was safe. WikiLeaks have yet to follow up on the conclusive result of a video or window appearance. Julian Assange is known for his attention to detail and his consistently good spelling and grammar. Currently the twitter feed has very poor spelling, there are numerous uncharacteristic spelling errors, for example, an accomplished cryptographer knows how to correctly spell algorithm and so do WikiLeaks staff. On the 21st of October, there was a massive widespread DDOS attack that disrupted US and EU internet. Also on the 21st of October London City Airport was evacuated. The next day (the 22nd), Gavin MacFayden is reported dead. WikiLeaks made a further blunder by stating his death as the 23rd. There has been a number of high level WikiLeaks deaths recently too. John Jones QC - WikiLeaks U.N. lawyer died on April 16th 2016. Michael Ratner - WikiLeaks chief counsel died on May 11th 2016. Seth Rich - Employee of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) was fatally shot on July 10th 2016 and Gavin MacFadyen - WikiLeaks director died October 22nd 2016. If WikiLeaks has been compromised, it is already preparing the scene for future discrepancy to seriously tarnish WikiLeaks reputation. Nothing WikiLeaks has shared since the 15th of October 2016 should be trusted until Julian has been fully verified as alive. My speculative fears are that Julian has been seized and removed from the Embassy. His internet being cut not being related to the release of the emails, but rather as a component of a plan of 4 years in the making to as secretly as possible remove Assange from the embassy, circumvent his DMS and hijack WikiLeaks with the key team members silenced or under duress. My fears would be confirmed by no future public (mass witnessing and recorded/televised) appearance of Julian Assange discussing recent topics. His death by whatever means after the US presidential election would be extremely suspect. Until proof of life, assume the following compromised: SHA-256 verification Keys posted after the 15th. WikiLeaks submission process and/or platform. WikiLeaks twitter feed. Any WikiLeaks leaks after the 15th October 2016. EDIT: (01/11/2016 - 17:18GMT) URL and spelling corrections. EDIT: Update 16/12/2016 Why demanding proof that WikiLeaks is not compromised is necessary: https://www.facebook.com/events/309760466089922/ (PoL Event @ Ecuadorian Embassy London 17th December 2016) – If you live in the UK please come and let’s get REAL PoL. Please circulate. 1) Still no PGP (GPG) signed short message from WikiLeaks. 2) RiseUp’s warning canary may be dead (RiseUp is believed to host WL Twitter email account) 3) Julian’s internet hasn’t been restored as promised 4) The pre-commitment file hashes released in October do not match the released insurance files 5) Julian’s Swedish defense lawyer Per Samuelson was denied access during case questioning. No one actually saw Julian through the whole process. Additional points: -UK disregard for international law -Capabilities of combined intelligence agencies -WikiLeaks down on October 17th -Mass censorship -WikiLeaks reposting old stuff -See timelines below Various timelines, some with minor errors: https://www.reddit.com/WikileaksTimeline/wiki/indexhttps://www.reddit.com/WhereIsAssange/comments/5dmr57/timeline_of_events_regarding_julian_assange_and/https://regated.com/2016/11/julian-assange-missing/ [Still no PGP (GPG) signed short message from WikiLeaks] Watch this https://youtu.be/GSIDS_lvRv4 video for a simple and good explanation of public/private key cryptography. Here https://riseup.net/en/canary is an example of how a legitimate cryptographically capable organisation uses PGP to sign a message and prove authenticity. WikiLeaks has this setup too. Why do they not use it and prove they are not compromised? WikiLeaks could easily do this. They have their private key. The public has WikiLeaks public key. Even if Julian isn’t in possession of the key, WL most certainly is, no excuse for WL not to prove themselves. This has been heavily requested of WikiLeaks. I’d like to hear from the individuals who claim that their requests were removed (please leave comments). Of all the red flags, not posting a PGP signed message is by far the most damming. If we are to believe that the person in the audio recording at the FCM 2016 is Julian Assange, then what he says about the keys is missing the point. If he himself is not in possession of the key, then WikiLeaks will be. If WikiLeaks use the key to prove themselves, then we know they are not compromised. By extension, we will also be assured that Julian is safe as an uncompromised WikiLeaks would be in a position to confirm his safety and be believed. This audio file includes everything that he says regarding PGP keys: http://picosong.com/UyVw/ (I am not convinced this is Julian). [RiseUp’s warning canary may be dead (RiseUp is believed to host WL Twitter email account)] RiseUp is an activist ISP providing secure services to activists. Its mission is to support liberatory social change via fighting social control and mass surveillance through distribution of secure tools (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riseup). RiseUp use a warrant canary as a means to protect their users in case RiseUp are ever issued with a NSL or gag order etc (https://riseup.net/en/canary). This is renewed quarterly, assuming no warrant has been issued. However, this is now considerably overdue so the assumption is that the canary is dead, and just like the canaries used in coal mines, everyone should get the hell out of there when it dies. https://theintercept.com/2016/11/29/something-happened-to-activist-email-provider-riseup-but-it-hasnt-been-compromised/. I would be grateful if someone could provide a source for the WikiLeaks twitter email account being hosted by RiseUp. [Julian’s internet hasn’t been restored as promised] https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787889195507417088https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788099178832420865 On the 26th of September 2016 Secretary of State John Kerry visited Colombia. WikiLeaks reported that inside sources had confirmed that John Kerry also met with Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa in Ecuador to personally ask Ecuador to stop Assange from publishing documents about Clinton. This was initially fervently denied in the press only later to be confirmed by the Ecuadorian Embassy who admitted cutting off Julian’s internet due to pressure from the US. Ecuador wanted to appear impartial. Both John Kerry and US intelligence agencies knew perfectly well that cutting off Julian's internet would have no impact on the release of the leaked emails that were damaging to Hillary's campaign. The cutting off of Julian's internet access was not for the purpose of preventing the leaks of the Podesta and Hillary emails. Unless intelligence agencies are truly inept, they knew that media organisations already have the entire leaked email database and a schedule for release, they also knew WikiLeaks staff would continue to leak regardless of Julian's ability to communicate. Now it is long after the election and Ecuador have still not restored Julian’s internet. Ecuador have no grounds to continue to restrict Julian’s internet. It does nothing apart from increase tensions and raise suspicion. Ecuador have always been supportive of Julian. However, after John Kerry applied pressure on Ecuador, that whole dynamic changed. Ecuador cut Julian's Internet. He then essentially threatened Ecuador, the UK and John Kerry by submitting those pre-commitment file hashes on Twitter. Since then we have only seen hostility towards Julian from all three parties. Ecuador didn't restore his internet and didn't let his lawyer interview him and no one actually saw him. The U.K. Denied him access to Gavin's funeral and denied him access to medical treatment. The UK also continually disregard the UN. The dynamic now is totally different. He has no political friends. It seems that both the UK and Ecuador are now working against Julian and Wikileaks. An environment where a collaborated siege would be feasible. Finally, many have speculated about mobile signals being blocked at the Embassy. I can confirm that there is 4G signal right outside the Embassy door. I was there, with my phone, and tested it. There is no reason to think Julian cannot use a MiFi device (or similar) connected to a cellular network. [The pre-commitment file hashes released in October do not match the released insurance files] Here are the October tweets with the file hashes: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787777344740163584https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787781046519693316https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787781519951720449 These 3 pre-commitment Twitter posts are SHA-256 file hashes. SHA-256 file hashes are 64 characters long. They are not encryption keys for insurance files. They simply are a mathematical formula for verifying that later released files are genuine and have not been altered. These hashes were released because Julian felt threatened and in increased danger. They specifically targeted the UK FCO, Ecuador and John Kerry. All of whom are key players in his current predicament. On November 7th, WikiLeaks released 3 new insurance files. These files names match the names given in the pre-commitment hash tweets: 2016-11-07_WL-Insurance_EC.aes256 2016-11-07_WL-Insurance_UK.aes256 2016-11-07_WL-Insurance_US.aes256 EC = Ecuador, UK = UK FCO, US = John Kerry. Soon after these files were released, the 3 files hashes were compared to the 3 hashes posted on the 16th of October. They did not match. When this was brought to WikiLeaks attention, WikiLeaks released the following statement in a tweet: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/798997378552299521 “NOTE: When we release pre-commitment hashes they are for decrypted files (obviously). Mr. Assange appreciates the concern.” This firstly proved that the hashes and the insurance files were related (a fact that was already clear). Secondly, it was a lie, as it implied historical use of pre-commitment hashes in this manner. Thirdly, the (obviously) comment was also a deception and an insult to supporters. It was not obvious to anyone, not even to our crypto guys in /cryptography/, on the contrary, they thought it highly suspicious. Additionally, what they suggest would be absolutely pointless. Pointless as a threat, as the UK, Ecuador and John Kerry would have no practical way of identifying the documents to confirm the threat. There's absolutely no scenario where an uncompromised WikiLeaks would either post bad file hashes or altered insurance files. [Julian’s Swedish defense lawyer Per Samuelson was denied access during case questioning] This is highly unusual and very suspicious. Also, Jennifer Robinson was not in the room with Assange. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYR0Pw9LfUQ&feature=youtu.be&t=9m55s and neither was the chief prosecutor http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37972528 “Swedish chief prosecutor Ingrid Isgren will not speak to Mr Assange directly”. [UK disregard for international law] The UK threat is very real. Back in August 2012 the UK was poised to break international law citing the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act of 1987 as a basis for entering the Embassy and arresting Assange (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19259623). It all became very public, very quickly and fortunately never happened (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/ecuado9488996/Ecuadors-president-raiding-embassy-to-snatch-Julian-Assange-suicidal.html). I expressed my concern at the time that the UK shouldn’t have even been contemplating such action, let alone threatening it in writing to Ecuador. More recently, the UK disregarded the UN ruling that Julian Assange was being arbitrarily detained (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/feb/04/julian-assange-wikileaks-arrest-friday-un-investigation). The UK appealed, and then finally lost their appeal in November (https://www.rt.com/news/368746-un-ruling-free-assange/). Julian has also been refused to leave the Embassy with a police escort for medical treatment as well as denied to attend Gavin MacFadyen’s funeral. The UK’s behaviour is appalling and clearly has no respect for international law. The reported raid on the Embassy during the latter part of October seems more plausible when taken in the context of past behavior. This is the Britain I now live in: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/investigatory-powers-bill-act-snoopers-charter-browsing-history-what-does-it-mean-a7436251.html. I never used to be ashamed to be British. [Combined capabilities of intelligence agencies] We know much about the combined powers of the intelligence agencies. We know what they are capable of, thanks to the leaks of Edward Snowden. The combined powers of the NSA, CIA and the UK’s GCHQ are capable of pulling off such a massive takeover of Wikileaks. We know the NSA works with other US intelligence agencies, we know that the NSA works with GCHQ. We know about Tempora, we know about JTRIG, we know about PRISM, we know about HAVOK. We know that websites can be altered on the fly, we know that real-time voice profiling is trivial for these agencies. We know that censorship is happening. https://usnewsghost.wordpress.com/2014/07/15/new-july-14-edward-snowden-nsa-leaks-gchq-attacks-and-censors-internet-nsa-leaks-recent/http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/gchqs-favourite-memes-and-sexual-slang-reveals-a-shared-culture-with-trolls-and-hackers-9608065.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) The NSA has a remit to be 10 years ahead of the curve. We have commercial products that can be purchased off the shelf today that can easily manipulate audio and video. Just imagine what the NSA and the military are capable of. Real time facial manipulation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohmajJTcpNk Signs of editing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O9t_TEE1aw. Both Julian Assange and John Pilger are not filmed together at any time during the interview. There is also no establishing shot. It is also claimed that Assange’s audio is spliced and edited. No recent events mentioned by Assange, only Pilger. Unfortunately, this interview is not sufficient proof of life. What the NSA can’t do, is that they cannot break PGP encryption. This has been expressed by Glenn Greenwald who was one of the journalists that Edward Snowden leaked to. He commented that he knows how secure PGP is because the NSA keep moaning about not being able to crack it in their documents he is reading. This is another reason why a signed PGP message can be the only true proof that WL isn’t compromised. Mathematics cannot lie, people can and do. A compromised WL can’t sign a message without the private key. Edward Snowden revealed that in 2013 the NSA were capable of 3 trillion password attempts per second. As it is now almost 2017, that number will likely be multiple times higher (anywhere between 9 to 15 trillion attempts per second would be my guess based on Moore’s law). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Threat_Research_Intelligence_Grouphttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)https://www.schneier.com/gchq-catalog/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Communications_Headquarters [WikiLeaks down on October 17th] The alleged raid on the Embassy supposedly took place on the 17th just after 1am GMT. On Monday the 17th of October 2016 WikiLeaks website was reported down (http://www.isitdownrightnow.com/wikileaks.org.html expand the comments) https://postimg.org/image/6t68fe4kj/. The internet was alive with reports of mass censorship around this time. This all coincides with when the alleged WikiLeaks takeover occurred. It also coincides with John Kerry being in the UK. [Christine Assange audio only radio interview] Julian's family had their identities changed quite a few years ago after receiving death threats. It is odd that his mother has now revealed herself to a news agency. If you do a YouTube search for Christine Assange (her original name), you'll find all the videos are older than 3 years. She's in hiding, not openly talking on radio shows (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange scroll down to the personal life section). [WikiLeaks bitcoin account was emptied on the 18th of November] Interestingly it was after the bitcoin account was emptied that the encoded message in the blockchain was left. Why would WikiLeaks go to all that trouble when they could just sign a message with their PGP key? Is it because bitcoin accounts can be cracked and the PGP keys can’t? [Mass censorship] Facebook is censoring this event (https://www.facebook.com/events/309760466089922/). It has been advertised for weeks now any only a handful of people are attending. Recently Wikileaks was live on FB. 50% of the viewers (roughly 2.5k) were commenting #PoL, #Whereisassange, RIP etc. The live event was only a prerecorded video being played in loop. Once it concluded, the whole Live event along with all the comments including the comments asking for PoL and PGP signed message were deleted. It was as if it never took place. When Julian’s DMS had supposedly been activated, I saw posts in threads being deleted within minutes. Supposedly with encryption keys, but it all happened too fast for anyone to collate. I took PDF printouts of the pages and then later noticed that posts and entire links were taken down. I have PDF's of pages that now no longer exist. I've been following this since mid-October and seen the censorship first hand. I know many people here on reddit witnessed the same (please comment with your experiences). [WikiLeaks reposting old stuff] There are many examples of this already mentioned in the timelines. One for example is the Palantir Technologies report. Palantir Technologies prepared a report on how to destroy WikiLeaks that was leaked in 2011. The proposal was submitted to Bank of America through its outside law firm, Hunton & Williams. Palantir later apologised for their involvement. But WikiLeaks has recently regurgitated it as if it was new. There are many examples of this. I have watched as WikiLeaks have increasingly destroyed their credibility.
I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the third part of the series introducing Quantum resistant blockchains.
Part 1 and part 2 will give you usefull basic blockchain knowledge that is not explained in this part. Part 1 here Part 2 here Quantum resistant blockchains explained. - How would quantum computers pose a threat to blockchain? - Expectations in the field of quantum computer development. - Quantum resistant blockchains - Why is it easier to change cryptography for centralized systems such as banks and websites than for blockchain? - Conclusion The fact that whatever is registered on a blockchain can’t be tampered with is one of the great reasons for the success of blockchain. Looking ahead, awareness is growing in the blockchain ecosystem that quantum computers might cause the need for some changes in the cryptography that is used by blockchains to prevent hackers from forging transactions. How would quantum computers pose a threat to blockchain? First, let’s get a misconception out of the way. When talking about the risk quantum computers could pose for blockchain, some people think about the risk of quantum computers out-hashing classical computers. This, however, is not expected to pose a real threat when the time comes. This paper explains why: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1710.10377.pdf "In this section, we investigate the advantage a quantum computer would have in performing the hashcash PoW used by Bitcoin. Our findings can be summarized as follows: Using Grover search, a quantum computer can perform the hashcash PoW by performing quadratically fewer hashes than is needed by a classical computer. However, the extreme speed of current specialized ASIC hardware for performing the hashcash PoW, coupled with much slower projected gate speeds for current quantum architectures, essentially negates this quadratic speedup, at the current difficulty level, giving quantum computers no advantage. Future improvements to quantum technology allowing gate speeds up to 100GHz could allow quantum computers to solve the PoW about 100 times faster than current technology. However, such a development is unlikely in the next decade, at which point classical hardware may be much faster, and quantum technology might be so widespread that no single quantum enabled agent could dominate the PoW problem." The real point of vulnerability is this: attacks on signatures wherein the private key is derived from the public key. That means that if someone has your public key, they can also calculate your private key, which is unthinkable using even today’s most powerful classical computers. So in the days of quantum computers, the public-private keypair will be the weak link. Quantum computers have the potential to perform specific kinds of calculations significantly faster than any normal computer. Besides that, quantum computers can run algorithms that take fewer steps to get to an outcome, taking advantage of quantum phenomena like quantum entanglement and quantum superposition. So quantum computers can run these certain algorithms that could be used to make calculations that can crack cryptography used today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliptic-curve_cryptography#Quantum_computing_attacks and https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/598.pdf Most blockchains use Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) cryptography. Using a quantum computer, Shor's algorithm can be used to break ECDSA. (See for reference: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0301141 and pdf: https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0301141.pdf ) Meaning: they can derive the private key from the public key. So if they got your public key (and a quantum computer), then they got your private key and they can create a transaction and empty your wallet. RSA has the same vulnerability while RSA will need a stronger quantum computer to be broken than ECDSA. At this point in time, it is already possible to run Shor’s algorithm on a quantum computer. However, the amount of qubits available right now makes its application limited. But it has been proven to work, we have exited the era of pure theory and entered the era of practical applications:
2001: First execution of Shor's algorithm at IBM's Almaden Research Center and Stanford University. The paper here: (Experimental realization of Shor's quantum factoring algorithm using nuclear magnetic resonance Lieven M. K. Vandersypen, https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0112176 )
So far Shor's algorithm has the most potential, but new algorithms might appear which are more efficient. Algorithms are another area of development that makes progress and pushes quantum computer progress forward. A new algorithm called Variational Quantum Factoring is being developed and it looks quite promising. " The advantage of this new approach is that it is much less sensitive to error, does not require massive error correction, and consumes far fewer resources than would be needed with Shor’s algorithm. As such, it may be more amenable for use with the current NISQ (Noisy Intermediate Scale Quantum) computers that will be available in the near and medium term." https://quantumcomputingreport.com/news/zapata-develops-potential-alternative-to-shors-factoring-algorithm-for-nisq-quantum-computers/ It is however still in development, and only works for 18 binary bits at the time of this writing, but it shows new developments that could mean that, rather than a speedup in quantum computing development posing the most imminent threat to RSA and ECDSA, a speedup in the mathematical developments could be even more consequential. More info on VQF here: https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.08927 It all comes down to this: when your public key is visible, which is always necessary to make transactions, you are at some point in the future vulnerable for quantum attacks. (This also goes for BTC, which uses the hash of the public key as an address, but more on that in the following articles.) If you would have keypairs based on post quantum cryptography, you would not have to worry about that since in that case not even a quantum computer could derive your private key from your public key. The conclusion is that future blockchains should be quantum resistant, using post-quantum cryptography. It’s very important to realize that post quantum cryptography is not just adding some extra characters to standard signature schemes. It’s the mathematical concept that makes it quantum resistant. to become quantm resistant, the algorithm needs to be changed. “The problem with currently popular algorithms is that their security relies on one of three hard mathematical problems: the integer factorization problem, the discrete logarithm problem or the elliptic-curve discrete logarithm problem. All of these problems can be easily solved on a sufficiently powerful quantum computer running Shor's algorithm. Even though current, publicly known, experimental quantum computers lack processing power to break any real cryptographic algorithm, many cryptographers are designing new algorithms to prepare for a time when quantum computing becomes a threat.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography Expectations in the field of quantum computer development. To give you an idea what the expectations of quantum computer development are in the field (Take note of the fact that the type and error rate of the qubits is not specified in the article. It is not said these will be enough to break ECDSA or RSA, neither is it said these will not be enough. What these articles do show, is that a huge speed up in development is expected.):
When will ECDSA be at risk? Estimates are only estimates, there are several to be found so it's hard to really tell. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has made a very thourough report on the development of quantum computing. The report came out in the end of 2018. They brought together a group of scientists of over 70 people from different interconnecting fields in quantum computing who, as a group, have come up with a close to 200 pages report on the development, funding, implications and upcoming challenges for quantum computing development. But, even though this report is one of the most thourough up to date, it doesn't make an estimate on when the risk for ECDSA or RSA would occur. They acknowledge this is quite impossible due to the fact there are a lot of unknowns and due to the fact that they have to base any findings only on publicly available information, obviously excluding any non available advancements from commercial companies and national efforts. So if this group of specialized scientists can’t make an estimate, who can make that assessment? Is there any credible source to make an accurate prediction? The conclusion at this point of time can only be that we do not know the answer to the big question "when". Now if we don't have an answer to the question "when", then why act? The answer is simple. If we’re talking about security, most take certainty over uncertainty. To answer the question when the threat materializes, we need to guess. Whether you guess soon, or you guess not for the next three decades, both are guesses. Going for certain means you'd have to plan for the worst, hope for the best. No matter how sceptical you are, having some sort of a plan ready is a responsible thing to do. Obviously not if you're just running a blog about knitting. But for systems that carry a lot of important, private and valuable information, planning starts today. The NAS describes it quite well. What they lack in guessing, they make up in advice. They have a very clear advice:
"Even if a quantum computer that can decrypt current cryptographic ciphers is more than a decade off, the hazard of such a machine is high enough—and the time frame for transitioning to a new security protocol is sufficiently long and uncertain—that prioritization of the development, standardization, and deployment of post-quantum cryptography is critical for minimizing the chance of a potential security and privacy disaster."
Another organization that looks ahead is the National Security Agency (NSA) They have made a threat assessment in 2015. In August 2015, NSA announced that it is planning to transition "in the not too distant future" (statement of 2015) to a new cipher suite that is resistant to quantum attacks. "Unfortunately, the growth of elliptic curve use has bumped up against the fact of continued progress in the research on quantum computing, necessitating a re-evaluation of our cryptographic strategy." NSA advised: "For those partners and vendors that have not yet made the transition to Suite B algorithms, we recommend not making a significant expenditure to do so at this point but instead to prepare for the upcoming quantum resistant algorithm transition.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_Suite_B_Cryptography#cite_note-nsa-suite-b-1 What these organizations both advice is to start taking action. They don't say "implement this type of quantum resistant cryptography now". They don't say when at all. As said before, the "when" question is one that is a hard one to specify. It depends on the system you have, the value of the data, the consequences of postponing a security upgrade. Like I said before: you just run a blog, or a bank or a cryptocurrency? It's an individual risk assesment that's different for every organization and system. Assesments do need to be made now though. What time frame should organisationds think about when changing cryptography? How long would it take to go from the current level of security to fully quantum resistant security? What changes does it require to handle bigger signatures and is it possible to use certain types of cryptography that require to keep state? Do your users need to act, or can al work be done behind the user interface? These are important questions that one should start asking. I will elaborate on these challenges in the next articles. Besides the unsnswered question on "when", the question on what type of quantum resistant cryptography to use is unanswered too. This also depends on the type of system you use. The NSA and NAS both point to NIST as the authority on developments and standardization of quantum resistant cryptography. NIST is running a competition right now that should end up in one or more standards for quantum resistant cryptography. The NIST competition handles criteria that should filter out a type of quantum resistant cryptography that is feasable for a wide range of systems. This takes time though. There are some new algorithms submitted and assessing the new and the more well known ones must be done thouroughly. They intend to wrap things up around 2022 - 2024. From a blockchain perspective it is important to notice that a specific type of quantum resistant cryptography is excluded from the NIST competition: Stateful Hash-Based Signatures. (LMS and XMSS) This is not because these are no good. In fact they are excelent and XMSS is accepted to be provable quantum resistant. It's due to the fact that implementations will need to be able to securely deal with the requirement to keep state. And this is not a given for most systems. At this moment NIST intends to approve both LMS and XMSS for a specific group of applications that can deal with the statefull properties. The only loose end at this point is an advice for which applications LMS and XMSS will be adviced and for what applications it is discouraged. These questions will be answered in the beginning of april this year: https://csrc.nist.gov/news/2019/stateful-hbs-request-for-public-comments This means that quite likely LMS and XMSS will be the first type of standardized quantum resistant cryptography ever. To give a small hint: keeping state, is pretty much a naturally added property of blockchain. Quantum resistant blockchains “Quantum resistant” is only used to describe networks and cryptography that are secure against any attack by a quantum computer of any size in the sense that there is no algorithm known that makes it possible for a quantum computer to break the applied cryptography and thus that system. Also, to determine if a project is fully quantum resistant, you would need to take in account not only how a separate element that is implemented in that blockchain is quantum resistant, but also the way it is implemented. As with any type of security check, there should be no backdoors, in which case your blockchain would be just a cardboard box with bulletproof glass windows. Sounds obvious, but since this is kind of new territory, there are still some misconceptions. What is considered safe now, might not be safe in the age of quantum computers. I will address some of these in the following chapters, but first I will elaborate a bit about the special vulnerability of blockchain compared to centralized systems. Why is it easier to change cryptography for centralized systems such as banks and websites than for blockchain? Developers of a centralized system can decide from one day to the other that they make changes and update the system without the need for consensus from the nodes. They are in charge, and they can dictate the future of the system. But a decentralized blockchain will need to reach consensus amongst the nodes to update. Meaning that the majority of the nodes will need to upgrade and thus force the blockchain to only have the new signatures to be valid. We can’t have the old signature scheme to be valid besides the new quantum resistant signature scheme. Because that would mean that the blockchain would still allow the use of vulnerable, old public- and private keys and thus the old vulnerable signatures for transactions. So at least the majority of the nodes need to upgrade to make sure that blocks which are constructed using the old rules and thus the old vulnerable signature scheme, are rejected by the network. This will eventually result in a fully upgraded network which only accepts the new post quantum signature scheme in transactions. So, consensus is needed. The most well-known example of how that can be a slow process is Bitcoin’s need to scale. Even though everybody agrees on the need for a certain result, reaching consensus amongst the community on how to get to that result is a slow and political process. Going quantum resistant will be no different, and since it will cause lesser performance due to bigger signatures and it will need hardware upgrades quite likely it will be postponed rather than be done fast and smooth due to lack of consensus. And because there are several quantum resistant signature schemes to choose from, agreement an automatic given. The discussion will be which one to use, and how and when to implement it. The need for consensus is exclusively a problem decentralized systems like blockchain will face. Another issue for decentralized systems that change their signature scheme, is that users of decentralized blockchains will have to manually transfe migrate their coins/ tokens to a quantum safe address and that way decouple their old private key and activate a new quantum resistant private key that is part of an upgraded quantum resistant network. Users of centralized networks, on the other hand, do not need to do much, since it would be taken care of by their centralized managed system. As you know, for example, if you forget your password of your online bank account, or some website, they can always send you a link, or secret question, or in the worst case they can send you mail by post to your house address and you would be back in business. With the decentralized systems, there is no centralized entity who has your data. It is you who has this data, and only you. So in the centralized system there is a central entity who has access to all the data including all the private accessing data, and therefore this entity can pull all the strings. It can all be done behind your user interface, and you probably wouldn’t notice a thing. And a third issue will be the lost addresses. Since no one but you has access to your funds, your funds will become inaccessible once you lose your private key. From that point, an address is lost, and the funds on that address can never be moved. So after an upgrade, those funds will never be moved to a quantum resistant address, and thus will always be vulnerable to a quantum hack. To summarize: banks and websites are centralized systems, they will face challenges, but decentralized systems like blockchain will face some extra challenges that won't apply for centralized systems.
Updating the signature scheme will need consensus in the sense that all nodes need to update after implementation of a quantum resistant signature scheme.
Users of blockchain will personally need to move their funds from old addresses to new quantum resistant addresses. You won't need to move your bank funds.
Lost addresses where people lost access to their funds will never be moved and stay vulnerable to quantum hacks. Blockchain doesn't know their users, can't communicate with them and won't be able to distinguish coins on lost addresses from coins from users who still have access but somehow have not migrated their coins after a quantum resistant update. So burning lost coins will be legally a big issue.
The NSA’s data-guzzling approach here differs significantly from how most blockchain forensics are conducted: By looking at the blockchain, the public ledger that tracks every Bitcoin transaction. On the Bitcoin blockchain, users are represented by strings of numbers and letters called addresses. Anyone can see funds moving between addresses, and even data mine the ledger for connections ... Bitcoin can be considered as the currency of the future. As a result, people are concerned about it reliability. Recently, Andreas Antonopoulos, who is one of the most prominent figures in the Bitcoin community, stated that Bitcoin is not vulnerable to the attacks that are initiated by Quantum Computers. Quantum computers have gone through some major developments throughout the past few years ... Leaked Documents: NSA Developed Tools to Identify Bitcoin Users. A recent report from The Intercept claims that the United States National Security Agency (NSA) has developed a tool that can track and locate Bitcoin users. Regardless of whether you’re the sender or the receiver, the NSA might be able to track down your Bitcoin transactions. The March 15, 2013 NSA report detailed progress on MONKEYROCKET’s bitcoin surveillance and noted that American spies were also working to crack Liberty Reserve, a far seedier predecessor. Unlike ... Bitcoin is not vulnerable to Quantum computer attacks, Andreas Antonopoulos has confirmed. ... Responding to a question regarding whether the US National Security Agency, hereinafter NSA, had the quantum technology to crack Bitcoin, Antonopoulos simply replied, “yes,” but that they wouldn’t use it for that purpose. “It is certain that the NSA has already built quantum computers. Google ...
BREAKING: What You NEED To Know About The NSA Hack And Bitcoin Ransom
i would be explaining how you can hack a bitcoin wallet and get the funds in it Contact: [email protected] Website: WWW.t-echnologie.site 🔴 Bitcoin Live Trading - Crown Crypto *War of the 50MA* Tom Crown 110 watching Live now DEF CON 22 - Michael Ossmann - The NSA Playset: RF Retroreflectors - Duration: 47:22. Details of the alleged hack are unknown, but former NSA analyst Edward Snowden noted in a tweet from his official Twitter account that “the hacking of an NSA malware staging server is not ... Want to see what the SNOWDEN DOCS and WIKI LEAKS really says about the NSA and the NSA HACK of ECC CRYPTO and NSA BITCOIN. The special relationship between primes and numbers on the 8 PRIMES ... 3 MILLION BITCOIN IN 2 SECONDS: GOOGLE QUANTUM COMPUTER $1,000 BTC Price Analysis - Duration: 12 ... Can quantum computers crack bitcoin? - Duration: 39:53. Crypto Finder 3,391 views. 39:53 ...