Slashdot Mirror
What The CIA WikiLeaks Dump Tells Us: Encryption Works (ap.org)
"If the tech industry is drawing one lesson from the latest WikiLeaks disclosures, it's that data-scrambling encryption works," writes the Associated Press, "and the industry should use more of it." An anonymous reader quotes their report:
Documents purportedly outlining a massive CIA surveillance program suggest that CIA agents must go to great lengths to circumvent encryption they can't break. In many cases, physical presence is required to carry off these targeted attacks. "We are in a world where if the U.S. government wants to get your data, they can't hope to break the encryption," said Nicholas Weaver, who teaches networking and security at the University of California, Berkeley. "They have to resort to targeted attacks, and that is costly, risky and the kind of thing you do only on targets you care about. Seeing the CIA have to do stuff like this should reassure civil libertarians that the situation is better now than it was four years ago"... Cindy Cohn, executive director for Electronic Frontier Foundation, a group focused on online privacy, likened the CIA's approach to "fishing with a line and pole rather than fishing with a driftnet."
The article points out that there are still some exploits that bypass encryption, according to the recently-released CIA documents. "Although Apple, Google and Microsoft say they have fixed many of the vulnerabilities alluded to in the CIA documents, it's not known how many holes remain open."
The article points out that there are still some exploits that bypass encryption, according to the recently-released CIA documents. "Although Apple, Google and Microsoft say they have fixed many of the vulnerabilities alluded to in the CIA documents, it's not known how many holes remain open."
Now the powers to be really have an incentive to outlaw encryption. Great!
This is what really pisses me off: the unstated assertion that *only* the US gubmint has these techniques.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
So is this the real reason why truecrypt was suddenly killed off ?
I know Apple has backdoors and shit because Apple is evil. And I know it because I believe it with all my heart.
Falling right into their line of thinking. This dump is too lacking in content to be real.
I saw some nice C tricks in the wiki pages, not much else that wasn't lightly covered content-lacking confirmations of a bunch of code words that were mostly already leaked when the nsa ant catalog pdf was leaked years ago.
Seems to be a lot of work to make the files all appear to be horridly named junk you'd find a corporate shared drive. Yet other leaks showed a more formal naming structure and folder discipline. This just seems too "uncontrolled" to be real. It's a very chaotic mess that paints a picture of the organization which seems smart in an "Art of War" sense.
Kind of like an army intentionally looking weak so the enemy lowers their OpSec. Be careful what you think you can infer from this dump. Only use it to learn new things that are broken but do not trust any indication of something *not* being broken. That is where the honeypot is so simply use the small bits of real info that were sacrificed in their attempt to make you buy the BS bits about things being secure.
My 2 cents....
Intel CPU Backdoor Report (Updated Mar 12, 2017)
The goal of this report is to make the existence of Intel CPU backdoors a common knowledge.
What we know about Intel CPU backdoors so far:
TL;DR version
Your Intel CPU and Chipset is running a backdoor as we speak.
The backdoor hardware is inside the CPU/Bridge and the backdoor firmware (Intel Management Engine) is in the chipset flash memory.
30C3 Intel ME live hack:
@21m43s, keystrokes leaked from Intel ME above the OS, wireshark failed to detect packets.
[Video Link] 30C3: Persistent, Stealthy, Remote-controlled Dedicated Hardware Malware
[Quotes] Vortrag:
"DAGGER exploits Intel's Manageability Engine (ME), that executes firmware code such as Intel's Active Management Technology (iAMT), as well as its OOB network channel."
"the ME provides a perfect environment for undetectable sensitive data leakage on behalf of the attacker. Our presentation consists of three parts. The first part addresses how to find valuable data in the main memory of the host. The second part exploits the ME's OOB network channel to exfiltrate captured data to an external platform and to inject new attack code to target other interesting data structures available in the host runtime memory. The last part deals with the implementation of a covert network channel based on JitterBug."
"We have recently improved DAGGER's capabilites to include support for 64-bit operating systems and a stealthy update mechanism to download new attack code."
"To be more precise, we show how to conduct a DMA attack using Intel's Manageability Engine (ME)."
"We can permanently monitor the keyboard buffer on both operating system targets."
Backdoor removal:
The backdoor firmware can be removed by following this guide using the me_cleaner script.
Removal requires a Raspberry Pi (with GPIO pins) and a SOIC clip.
Decoding Intel backdoors:
The situation is out of control and the Libreboot/Coreboot community is looking for BIOS/Firmware experts to help with the Intel ME decoding effort.
If you are skilled in these areas, download Intel ME firmwares from this collection and have a go at them, beware Intel is using a lot of counter measures to prevent their backdoors from being decoded (explained below).
Useful links:
The Intel ME subsystem can take over your machine, can't be audited
REcon 2014 - Intel Management Engine Secrets
Untrusting the CPU (33c3)
Towards (reasonably) trustworthy x86 laptops
30C3 To Protect And Infect - The militarization of the Internet
30c3: To Protect And Infect Part 2 - Mass Surveillance Tools & Software
1. Introduction, what is Intel ME
Short version, from Intel staff:
Re: What Intel CPUs lack Intel ME secondary processor?
Amy_Intel Feb 8, 2016 9:27 AM
The Management Engine (ME) is an isolated and protected coprocesso
Once the government figures out that quantum computers can be used to easily crack conventional encryption, you can bet that those new machines will be locked up behind a top secret order that's about 30 pieces of paper thick.
this helps everyone but there are otheruser methods that criminals and people that need more security assurances or just a hobbie.
... is that, with the cat out of the bag, Congress will be working hard to criminalize consumer encryption like it has been done in so many other totalitarian dictatorships.
One thing has been made clear by all of this though: we are not free. We do not live in the land of liberty. And, the government is completely out of our control.
The leaks tell us that encryption only works if the endpoints are secure, which they are not.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Not surprising, really, given that's exactly what encryption was invented for. To military standards. For military purposes. To prevent other militaries doing exactly what you don't want them to do.
All the scaremongering around encryption "being broken" by these "acres of datacentre" junk is just that - scaremongering. Hell, didn't the NSA recently ask for help breaking Skype? I'm sure there's a certain amount of misdirection there (I'm still not convinced on EC cryptography, which was brought along with the help of the NSA choosing certain curves), but nobody has yet shown practical attacks against large enough primes used in PKE.
So far, everything they've done is via side-channel attacks and those are present in every system anyway. And when you have these organisations paying for tools that can open up iPhones, you know that they are struggling to cope.
If you want to secure data, encrypt it and abide by all the necessary precautions for it (i.e. don't enter the passphrase on untrusted computers, etc.).
The whole point of encryption is that you can publish your data on the web and point EVERYONE at it (e.g. Wikileaks insurance file) and nobody can access it without the key. If you don't trust Google or similar to hold your files, only allow them access to the encrypted containers and not the decrypted files.
It's quite clear that encryption is doing its job. And if it wasn't, it would be fixed quite quickly (e.g. we're already preparing against quantum computing attacks).
Just because I choose to go around the mountain does not mean I cannot go over the mountain. Do not assume that encryption cannot be broken. It's just easier/cheaper to avoid having to do it if possible.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
... CIA say it is easier to get control of the input/output devices?
Whatever the quality of your crypto, it is useless on a computer whose peripheral you cannot trust. /me goes back to work on a network based on SD sent by pigeon carriers.
While it may be tempting to think of the recent leaks as evidence of some broader point about cryptography, please realize the CIA is not the NSA. The only thing this proves is there is a huge gap in the capabilities of different agencies.
Amazing all of this 10-20 year old stuff being taunted like it's new by Wikileaks. Type in google search engine "FBI MAFIA CELL PHONE" and notice the date. That's right, the FBI been doing this for about a decade now. As far as the television goes that is old news too but one thing missing, Try video recording as well. Getting away from government spying when the information makes so many people so rich and powerful by knowing how to control millions of people is a very daunting task indeed. Good luck. But I am truly disappointed in wiki leaks for such old and simple stuff when in today spy world they are using nano technology for far more sophisticated ways of doing business. Almost, like they started all this commotion as a simple political favor because there is no real news or at least no new news in all of this. As far as encrytion....pleaseeeee! The big boys stay in business because they cooperate with the Government and who do people think invented it to start with.
They are using git, have troubles with idiots who put binaries in git, know about Git-Flow (my favorite branching technique), are doing retrospectives (so Scrum sprints), are trying to do something that looks like semver.org for release numbering (although most of it is quite wrongly numbered). All in all, quite a typical software development company. Okayish in software development processes and practices. Could be better here and there.
We knew that strong encryption works, because "math and stuff" that lawyers never learned. The point is that the mega companies are WILLINGLY giving your data away to anyone that pays. They provide an unencrypted endpoint to your data, so encryption of data in transit doesn't matter. We are much worse off than we were four years ago, and the cloud is doing to make it worse(er).
Only a fucking shill would calls well researched facts, CCC live hack and RMS conspiracy theorists.
Sysadmins need to know what's going on in their system. A lot of them still have no idea what Intel have been doing on their chips.
Educating the public is more important than your personal feelings, I don't give a fuck what you think, piss off.
What makes anybody think that Microsoft, Google, Facebook, ... are only fixing identified vulnerabilities and not adding new ones while they are at it? It is not like they don't have NSA/CIA moles working for them or history of secretly complying with their demands while denying it in public.
The other thing evident by ommission is that (say) the CIA gets a warrant to hack into your TV. They'll start collecting data, but will they 'unhack' your TV when they're done? Not much to suggest they do, so your TV stays hacked, even though you're not a suspect in some new case they're working on.
Now the powers to be really have an incentive to outlaw encryption. Great!
There used to be a ban on exporting encryption software. It was classified as a munition. Of course this preposterous classification relied on the absurd assumption that nobody outside the US could develop software to do useful encryption or that they would be unwilling to distribute it if they did. Eventually the ban was lifted during the 1990s because it was hurting US companies and because it was basically an unenforceable anachronism once the internet became a thing.
That's not to say that the US (or other countries) couldn't make some idiotic laws along the lines of making use of encryption without permission a crime. Sort of the XKCD wrench approach to the problem.
it may not stop them if they decide you are a high-value target. But it stops mass surveillance dragnets in their tracks.
And that's really what privacy laws are supposed to be about. If the government has a legitimate good faith reason to be investigating someone they have the tools to do this and to a point should have reasonable rights to investigate. Broad sweeping surveillance however should not provide them the same degree of resolution on any given individual. Law enforcement and defense surveillance should have to jump through some hoops and do some actual work to target any individual. That's the entire point of the 4th Amendment we well as several others. An investigation should be harder than looking up a database record because government's have shown they cannot resist abusing such power when made available to them. The notion that encryption will somehow make it impossible for them to do their job just hasn't been shown to be true in reality.
In practical terms however the reason encryption works isn't a moral one. It works because it keeps the economic cost for police to watch a given individual remains non-trivial so that they have to pick and choose who is worth bothering to watch. It used to be that getting the records and communications required a significant expenditure of resources. With email, modern phone systems, and the internet some of that became much easier. So much easier that it causes all sorts of problems with protecting civil liberties. Encryption balances things back out. They can still come after you if they need to but it has to rise to a certain level of suspicion to make it worth their while.
prints out the tcp packets from eth0 in HEX or ASCII format. So, actual encrypted packets would look like garbage. prints an overview of system audit information, including failed login attempts. traces packets sent from start to finish. A LAN scanner would be good to have too just to see who's on the router. I used to use one to see if my RA was in the building or not. Mistake number one, naming your phone with your actual name or a name at all. Entering a " " actually prevents devices from seeing the phone when using it as a hotspot, so it may have other benefits. Or, just name everything the exact same and let the router assign numbers. They change every so often. Lynis (and Rkhunter) is an open source program built for finding Rootkits on Unix-based systems, ie. Linux and Mac. It also prints out suggestions from what it finds to harden your system. ClamAV is an open source virus scanner; unfortunately, it's front ends are deferent for different operating systems and makes it hard to tell if you're getting the real thing. You should also hide your network if you can. In other words, people driving by your house can't pick it up normally when scanning. I think Kali has tools to circumvent this, which brings me to next point. Kali is a Linux based distro that's been around for a really long time and is designed for ethical hacking and could be used to test your stuff out. Oh and, for the love of God, encrypt your Home directory. Linux has LUKS (SHA512), Mac (not sure) has FileVault, and Window$....not going to matter if running 10. You can also learn how to shred your files to prevent recovery. Emptying the trash doesn't do much good anymore. For Mac users, "srm" (secure file removal) command is built in even though they removed secure empty trash option for whatever reason. It wipes 35 times by default. Linux also has srm available, as well as "shred" built in with wipe number options. There are many others for Linux. Bleachbit for open source cleaning of caches is available for both Linux and Window$, and I think they've been working on a Mac version. And, it never hurts to wipe Swap and RAM every once in a while. Cover your webcam if you don't use it. Skype is a convenient trap. If you only need one-on-one calling, use a Tox client. It's encrypted and is available for just about everything, including phones, and supports video, vocal, text, and file sharing. It connects to a server like a switchboard and then it's all p2p from there. Only mentioning this because I read somewhere that Signal and Telegram where compromised. WhatsApp, the Facebook owned version, should of been a given. Duh. As far as web browsing is concerned, NoScript, Privacy Badger, HTTPS Everywhere, and uBlock Origin. Block and uninstall Flash if you can. Most things are HTML5/MP4 these days anyway. DO NOT USE CHROME. Google digitally fingerprints everyone. Chromium with a user agent spoofer addon is a good alternative. Firefox is still the best though. ;P Not everything mentioned is fool proof, but they are tools available to most OS's and people need to start being more proactive in their computing defense. You may not have anything to hide, but "probable cause" is incredibly vague these days, and it'll get worse because of this. https://theouterlinux.com/priv... if anyone is interested. I need to add more stuff.
It's an imperfect world, and the totally rosy picture of encryption you paint there isn't the messy reality.
TLS is a joke at this point, remember Bluecoat? Symantec giving them the ability to forge any certificate. We can't trust TLS because it was systematically undermined.
Also TOR, so much effort has been put into backdooring TOR, some of the decisions done by TOR (e.g. run Javascript! Send obsfuction nodes via PRISM friendly gmail, fail to notice attack nodes attacking when testing TOR server ) suggest it's backdoored at an organizational level rather than from outside. The result is a lack of trust in TOR. I'm sure NSA/CIA/FBI pat themselves on the back at that success, but can you imagine any Russian leaker trusting it? At a time where Russians are getting arrested for treason, they have no trusted connection to leak, and no trusted end target to leak to.
And if you think that's the only two, think again. Updates are often done via TLS so update software is compromised.
It's not a good situation, and Assange has promised more Wikileaks soon (presumably timed to distract from March 20th hearing, so it won't be long to wait).
It's a pity they took the General Alexander route, because they left the US open to attack from outside bad actors while keeping those backdoors open for themselves.
That is why the UK has 'hand-over your password' laws and the US courts are declaring, if the police guess you've got something, you have to hand-over whatever they want. See, it's not costly and risky anymore, so the authorities can fish in your data as they please.
Let me play devil's advocate here. Let's say for a moment that the CIA does indeed have whatever hardware is required to easily brute force modern encryption with the current key lengths we are using. Maybe that's some sort of quantum device or perhaps they have access to standard computing power beyond what anyone imagines. That part doesn't matter for the sake of this argument.
What would you do if you were the CIA? How about release exactly the information we see here - information about some actual tools of some value, in addition to misinformation that makes appear they are stymied by the encryption and must instead go after the endpoints. So we feel all smug and secure, while in reality they can simply access the data in transit. They then use these tools and methods described in the leak as the smokescreen in court (when needed) to show standard methods for acquiring data that is more traditional and highly targeted to a specific device, both to keep their data legal as admissible evidence and to hide their true capabilities.
Or am I giving the CIA way, way too much credit here?
Better known as 318230.
The intelligence community has given all indications, time and again, that breaking cryptography is not the vector the usually resort to in order to obtain information. Other, more traditional, techniques, today euphemistically (and pretentiously) called "social engineering", are much cheaper and effective, under most circumstances.
Cryptographic digital signatures are a way to reliably sign the contents of a message or system update packet (and such) so that any attempt to tamper with the data can be easily detected, while any attempt to forge a valid signature on tampered data is extremely difficult. This way, for example, it becomes extremely difficult to broadcast bogus system updates which actually install malware from a third party, since it is easy to detect if the data is corrupted and/or if the signature was not generated by the purported authority.
Moreover, encryption can be cascaded in various ways so that only the authorized sender could have generated an encrypted message (or signature) and only the authorized recipient can decode it (or them)... as well as only authorized intermediaries being allowed to transmit it from them to you (e.g., passed via Gmail to your specific ISP for delivery). This further stymies any efforts at man-in-the-middle attacks or forged document attacks (such as fake update patches).
This, for example, means that a sender can generate a single encrypted update packet to send to all its customers but use a unique cryptographic digital signature per customer message so that each customer in turn, and only that customer, can validate then install the signed update they receive. By using per-customer unique signatures, broad-based “shotgun” approaches to disseminating malware are no longer tenable.
Note that such use of encryption is not just about data privacy, it is also about verifying data integrity (the data was not corrupted) as well as authority/authenticity/provenance (it came from a specific authorized source who is who they claim to be).
Error: NSE - No Signature Error
Implementation, implementation, implementation..
Can we please get tech-journalists that at least get the very basic vocabulary right?
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
If tech companies continue to make it difficult/impossible for law enforcement to do basic law enforcement-type things merely for the sake of making extreme, unnecessary obfuscation of your pointless texts a marketing slogan, this is where things will wind up.
Perhaps but I doubt it. See companies like Apple and Google have the money to pay for lobbying, bribes, and thanks to a recent decision by our Supreme Court unlimited campaign contributions. Companies can and do buy politicians.
Only a clueless idiot things that encrypting my communications is "unnecessary". I don't actually need to have done something wrong for my communications to be used against me. Innocent remarks can be incredibly easy to misconstrue, intentionally or unintentionally. Just because I have nothing to hide doesn't mean I have nothing to fear.
And with so many idiots out there already shitting themselves over Trump being Super Ultra TurboHitler, there's no incentive to stop the fear mongering any time soon.
Don't have to stop it. Just have to fight fire with fire. There is no way to have a secure internet without encryption where only the "good guys" (ahem...) have access to your dirty little secrets. Just point out all the bad things that will happen without encryption and companies (like Apple) will hire all sorts of flesh eating lobbyists and lawyers effectively on your behalf to keep their cash flow going. The best defense against security theater FUD might turn out to be more FUD pointed in the opposite direction.
There also is that pesky little problems of the 4th and 5th amendments. Not the greatest of comfort in the short run but in the long run they do tend to keep the government stooges at bay over sufficiently long time periods.
Encryption doesn't work, it's just that USAF's 30*50*150 qubit quantum computer is so secret that ordinary CIA/FBI/NSA posse cannot told about it. They sincerely believe 256-bit AES and 2048 bit EC is secure and bearded tenorists or pedo-bears can only be nicked via Stingray and similar worksarounds. Only in the most severe cases (like an impending nuke strike from RUS or an alien spaceship invasion) would the NSA's inner cabal reveal the all-crypto breaking, universal quantum computer capability.
it's all about how much time the end-user puts into encrypting their own data. oh, the things you can do with unhelpfully labeled nested zip-splitting...
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
But I wouldn't put it beyond certain politicians to try.
Table-ized A.I.
All you say is true. However there is a flaw in this whole line of reasoning.
The flaw is, that the citizen must take measures to keep the Three Letter Agencies out of their business. The TLAs actively intrude upon innocent and unsuspecting civilians. It used to be that there was at least some level due process required. Now however, I have no comfort level at all that the TLAs are respecting due process, the constitution, and their (legally!) defined scope and mandate.
Instead the TLAs simply hoover up all they can and complain when a citizen insists upon some privacy rights and due process. The CIA should be relabeled the "Complaining Insistently Agency", the NSA should be relabeled the "Not Secure At-all" Agency, the FBI should be relabeled the "Freely Bullying Innocents" Agency, and GCHQ should be relabeled the "Globally Collecting Here Quietly" Agency.
Very persuasive.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
There is a huge gap between crypto theory (https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~felten/encryption_primer.pdf) and expressed and implemented crypto reality. This gap provides many opportunities for anybody who wishes to favor attack over defense.
Traffic Analysis/meta data collection provides cheap, effective attack against virtually all current communication channels. Once you know who, when, where, how, and approximately what they are saying, you usually don't need to break their crypto.
The easiest way to weaken crypto implementation is to simply withdraw support for updates and improvements. Good crypto is hard. Defense is expensive. Without constant support, defenses fail. If you wish to weaken crypto defenses, it is usually sufficient to withhold support for good standards and good processes, and fail to eliminate mistakes.
The next most cost effective ways to weaken crypto implementation is to focus on degrading or hindering:
Good crypto implementations are almost indistinguishable from bad crypto implementations. The market will cheerfully purchase poor crypto if it is available, cheap, and the consequences are not immediate.
If an attacker ever needs to access info that is protected by a robust crypto implementation, it is usually faster and cheaper to subvert it's surrounding environment, people, hardware or software.
Reform of the Intelligence agencies should begin by greatly reducing their budget. Currently, they are huge, bloated, unmanageable monsters. They twist government to their whim. They distort the civilian economy. They cause massive incidental damage. A slim, tightly focused agency can be more carefully controlled and managed. A small, efficient CIA or NSA would achieve almost all of OUR important goals with a tiny fraction of the collateral damage.
Apple, Google and Microsoft say they have fixed many of the vulnerabilities alluded to in the CIA documents,
Of course they would say that, because it's in their interest to claim that they defend their customers' privacy. That's what the whole San Bernardino iPhone debacle was about: Apple wants to keep being perceived as the Mercedes of computers.
How can I prevent the slashsuckers page from having a pop-over advertisement obscure half my screen space from the content I want to actually view rather than annoying slash-advertising.
"APK doesn't seem to know much about securing systems because if he did he would understand the defense in depth philosophy" - by Bob the WEAK WEASEL ( 1152367 ) on Monday January 30, 2017 @08:44AM (#53765191)
WRONG - I wrote guides on it that even GOT ME PAID https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&btnG=Google+Search&gbv=1/
* How'd EATING YOUR WORDS taste talk behind my back BITCH?
APK
P.S.=> No wonder you use a FAKE NAME for your FAKE LIFE motherfucker - you're a BIG MOUTH nobody do-nothing "ne'er-do-well" & you KNOW it fucker - seeing you stick your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH that way? Priceless & hilarious... lol! Now everyone can see it too, hahahahaha... apk
Are you in need of real hacking service, or did you need to check your spouse sincerity, contact : dynamichack@yandex.com he is also good at bank acct hacking, emails facebook, website database and more. Email him he would help you..
See my subject: Outnumbered ~140++:1 vs. his bullshit directed MY way https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=7804977&cid=50269031/
* Keep on EATING YOUR WORDS you FAKE NAME for FAKE LIVES puppets...
(It's ALL you'll EVER manage vs. me, pure failures on your end)
APK
P.S.=> Just like your lives (huge fails)... apk
Maritz you like to talk behind my back (you're a punk bitch) & yet prove you're a "ne'er-do-well" that doesn't do squat of worth in computing here https://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=9935673&cid=53398581/ like all of the FOOLS here doing what you are - "gossiping" like old ladies as that's all you & "your kind" are capable of vs. myself doing things of value in programs even /.ers LIKE & USE https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10344969&cid=54008683/
* "Your kind" playing "forensic analyst of writing" pseudo detective NEVER will...
APK
P.S.=> By the way, lastly - I'm not the INTEL Management Engine guy posting that (but it IS an interesting read nevertheless - one that's doubtless beyond the comprehension of an unaccomplished undereducated DOLT like yourself & others here gossiping about me behind my back)... apk
I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine. Your software is well written, functional. The Host File Engine performs exactly as promised by mmell
his hosts program is actually pretty good by xenotransplant
I've never tried to belittle (APK's) work, I've flat out said it's good by BronsCon
APK is kinda right. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works by bmo
I like your host file system by Karmashock
I find your hosts file admirable by vel-ex-tech
his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources by alexgieg
* Recommended & hosted by Malwarebytes' hpHosts!
APK
P.S.=> See subject: You (unidentifiable ac) & FAKE NAME online for FAKE LIVES fools along w/ you gossiping behind my back NEVER will... apk
See my subject & "See K.S. Kyosuke run" https://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10024927&cid=53534393/
* I rest MY case (with proof)...
APK
P.S.=> What's it like KNOWING you can't get the better of me & are resorting to acting like a bitch talking BEHIND MY BACK? You're a "ne'er-do-well" is why... apk
See subject (I told other trolls like you the same) & you're WRONG again on Delphi - starter editions ARE free https://slashdot.org/comments....
(You fail).
APK
P.S.=> No small wonder you hide online behind a FAKE NAME for your FAKE LIFE - you ALWAYS fail in everything you do apparently... apk