Here is a proper news article for those who can do without a dozen pages of drivel about the CEO's hairdo, flying lessons, and underwear shopping: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/18/fbi_raids_cybersecu...
The author seems to confuse peer-to-peer file sharing networks and onion routing. The explanations in the article don't make any sense.
What the hell did I just read? Wow.
Ahaha, the fake memoir
Cybersecurity is not security? Like Anonymous cryptocurrencies are pseudo-anonymous? https://inechain.com/blog/what-are-anonymous-cryptocurrencie...
I thought it was going to be Crowdstrike. But I suppose that hasn’t happened yet.
Whatever tech, whatever assets, whatever they have, you can do as you will, I would need to have my head in the sand to be doing business with them. Too much smoke not to be at least a little fire. Just my opinion of course!
Edit: One of those times practicality clashes with politics apparently. Can’t say anything bad about the company that failed to protect high profile clients, then used that failure to help start the Trump/Russia fiasco before quietly walking their statements back - because to be aware of that would mean supporting the bad man.
> “Institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the solution.” — Clay Shirky
https://kk.org/thetechnium/the-shirky-prin/