suqdiqs

a question in line with this one,

do you think there is a solution for the "snitch problem" in anonymous?

since there is no trust and no previous relationship, how can trust emerge from a purely anonymous relationship?

could the possibility of infiltrators (LE or otherwise) be the single most important factor in the on-going "stasis" that "serious-hacktivism-ops-or-groups" have felt?

everyone could be a Sabu, so Anon is dead by mistrust.

yes, it's against our nature and creates a cognitive dissonance that usually only IC field-operatives experience ;)

that is why most ops should be timed and have a specific end date to reduce 'operative' stress.

also why it's never a good idea to make friends in ops or anonymous in general, albeit completely unavoidable since many times "these people" aggregate by (deep personal) affinity.

and so, after trusting, only "hope" can save us.

indeed, key is that activities and operations can be structured in a way that isolates people that don't have "need-to-know".

whatever happens in the mean time, is a risk participants must take. such as having a baby and so on... anyway i get why you underline that this problem is better handled online than AFK.

thank you for your comments on this.

a key factor in suspicion was his complete lack of opsec with tons of his "affiliates". this, right there, is a big no-no. the only people with bad opsec are stupid people, agents or narcs/snitches/CI ;) (aka people that don't have to worry about getting de-anoned)

on page 341 of the Sabutage, you immortalize a group (revolusec) that explicitly asked for it not to be known.

1. how do you feel about that?

2. could you elaborate more on your relationship/research with the revolusec people (if any at all)?

thank you for the great book