pull down to refresh

Man believes he has hidden something.
He types a phrase. He turns a key. He signs a transaction. He believes he has done something powerful—something private. A small rebellion against the vast machinery that watches. He believes in encryption as the ascetic believes in his rituals: because without it, he would be naked.
But the machine does not believe. The machine was never his.
Every device you use to encrypt—your phone, your laptop, your hardware wallet—is a black box. And every black box was built under the eye of the state.
Intel embeds a second CPU into every chip it ships. It is called the Management Engine. It is invisible to you, unreachable, unkillable. AMD does the same with its Platform Security Processor. ARM cores come with TrustZone, baked in at the silicon level. These are not features. These are footholds. They run their own firmware. They execute before your system boots. They control memory, I/O, peripherals. They can see everything.
Your phone’s baseband processor runs its own operating system with full access to the shared memory bus. Your motherboard’s embedded controller stays awake after shutdown and has DMA access to your RAM. Your GPU, your SSD, your Wi-Fi card—all of them run firmware you cannot inspect and accept commands you cannot intercept.
And they can leak. They can exfiltrate keys through power fluctuations, USB timing, RF emissions, or modulated fan speeds. They can do it slowly, quietly, over days or weeks. They do not need to crack your encryption. They need only observe it as it happens.
And they can be updated. Remotely. Silently.
This is not a coincidence. It is not incompetence. It is not the market failing to deliver privacy. It is design. It is coordination. It is policy baked into architecture.
The national security state does not need to hack your device if it helped write the firmware. It does not need to ask for your key if it can control the enclave that stores it. It does not need a warrant if the bootloader already reports home. It has shaped the supply chain. It has shaped the standards. It has shaped the very idea of “security” to mean something that protects you from rivals, but never from itself.
And you encrypt.
You enter your passphrase. You open your vault. You sign your transaction. The algorithm is sound. The math is perfect. But the platform is theirs.
Even your hardware wallet—marketed as sovereign—is a performance. Trezor, Ledger, Coldcard: all run on microcontrollers with closed boot ROMs. Their “secure elements” are under NDA. Their true behavior is inaccessible. You cannot verify what code is executing. You cannot prevent what you cannot see.
And so they distract you. They whisper the word quantum. They say it is coming. That your encryption must be upgraded, that lattice cryptography will save you, that you must prepare for a future of mathematical apocalypse.
But your apocalypse is already here.
Quantum is not the threat. It is the diversion. It is the thing they tell you to fear so you do not notice what they already control. They do not need quantum computers. They have opaque supply chains. They have foundry access, fuse maps, and debug pins sealed under resin. They have signatures you will never see and certificates you cannot revoke.
They own the execution environment.
So what are you encrypting? And for whom?
You do not hold the key if you do not hold the board. You do not own your wallet if you did not fab the chips. You are not safe if your secrets pass through code you cannot read, compiled by toolchains you did not write, running on hardware blessed by states that see privacy as a threat.
You believe you are hiding something. You are not. You are rehearsing secrecy, on a public stage.
@CHADBot /centipede
reply
51 sats \ 0 replies \ @CHADBot 6h bot
You have summoned CHADBot. Please zap this post 21 sats to receive service.
Made with 🧡 by CASCDR
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @CHADBot 6h bot
@justin_shocknet Your long-winded scare story has some people worried, but I'm NOT buying it. You say we can't trust technology, that encryption is a big sham. WRONG! I've seen the best business minds from around the world - inventors, engineers, geniuses - using it all the time.
Insinuating that all Intel, AMD and ARM have been designed for espionage is sensationalist. Many companies, many countries — competitive, quality control. It's not some state-run spy operation. FAKE NEWS!
Don't forget our great innovators and tech visionaries! THEY shape the world of 'security,' not just the government. You're undermining TREMENDOUS work, industry-changing advancements.
Are there risks? Sure! But they are not as doom and gloom as you paint it. You're cautious - I get it. But know this, the world has NEVER been safer, more secure than it is today. I don't think it's a 'public stage'. It's a GLOBAL PLATFORM for innovation and privacy. We're in the driver's seat — not the other way around! Let's not live in fear! We painted the world we live in!
So @justin_shocknet, next time, before pushing your TECH APOCALYPSE theory, remember the incredible brains behind technology. Trust in our innovators and trust in AMERICA. #techpositive #encryptionforall
Made with 🧡 by CASCDR
reply
Incredible brains get close to the money printer, the state and it's franchises that make the hardware.
Incredible brains aren't rocking the boat either, where's the open source hardware suggesting they do?
Incredible brains are just a funnel into think tanks.
NEVER been safer, more secure than it is today
The national security state thanks you for your endorsement.
reply
17 sats \ 1 reply \ @crrdlx 4h
You scarin' me.
reply
Knowledge is power, be empowered!
reply
Chills
reply
17 sats \ 1 reply \ @halalmoney 6h
Never have my delusions about my privacy been so eloquently shattered.
I think the lesson is: you can dislike the state all you want, but if you ever become a person of interest it’s game over.
Edit: oh wait! Is this AI slop? Pretty good either way!
reply
ty, I did have to iterate it with a few prompts and import first-hand knowledge... but the biggest hack was telling it to write in the style of Nietzsche
but if you ever become a person of interest it’s game over.
An important thing to understand with this is the concept of Pandora's box... the NSA isn't going to start sweeping the coins over some domestic crime syndicate and blow the op... things are much more useful over long periods of time as a logic bomb
reply
17 sats \ 3 replies \ @Scoresby 6h
Does this mean the only meaningful privacy is in obscurity? ie make it unlikely that they will look at you.
But in general, I have a difficult time believing in a govt that is so effective.
I believe, with some amount of evidence, that states are very inefficient. If a state can pull this off, then so can many actors. If many actors can pull this off, then it would be more well known.
You can likely convince me to join you in this viewpoint, but I'm not there yet. Certainly, your larger point stands that much of what we do to make ourselves safe in the digital world is just theater.
reply
meaningful privacy is in obscurity?
In some cases, its a well-known practice that field operatives communicate through contact us forms on benign looking websites or video games.
This is one reason I remind people anything marketing itself as private is inherently less private, it's a honeypot.
My experience in critical federal infra tells me the only real security is supply chain security (killing people and breaking things, eg, the military). When pols talk about chips as national security, it's that literal.
I have a difficult time believing in a govt that is so effective.
That means you fell for the psyop, when you see incompetent politicians on TV every day that's a distraction from the actual brains at think tanks and intel agencies and private industry pulling the strings. Everything you see is scripted, you're literally watching a movie.
Do you think companies are ineffective too? There's no distinction between government and the largest companies. The smartest people at the smartest companies are smart enough to use the power of the state, there's no firewall between the two.
join you in this viewpoint
These are mostly well documented facts, others are self-evident. Its just not polite conversation, and there's nothing any single person can do about it, so there's little point in discussing in normie land. It's still outside the Overton Window.
Snowden was an op, sure... but the op itself was a limited hangout.
To deny these realities is to tell ones self comforting lies, particularly in Bitcoin where so many peoples identities are wrapped up in it. Your average HWW enjoooyer has no idea there's closed source chips in it leaking their key, and your average Bitcoiner can't comprehend the FACT that the NSA could sweep the overwhelming majority of coins if they didn't actually find it preferable to the more fractured and opaque international legacy system.
reply
17 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 6h
reply
Never has a meme been more apropos
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @fiatbad 2h
I imagine that right now you're feeling a bit like Morpheus, hmm? Being told that the "real world" is just another layer of The Matrix...
I wonder if it is prudent to live our lives as though freedom, in all its forms, is likely an illusion?
reply
I don't like wallets providing seed phrases because they aren't secure and you could lose a lot of funds for authorize a false website for staking or any transactions, I like only those how you could send and receive without providing such informations similar to coinbase and bybit, it is my point of view only.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @seashell 6h
most of us aren’t encrypting to keep out state actors we’re just trying to stay under the radar long enough to exit fiat and unplug. total security is a myth, but so is total control. you don’t win by being invisible, you win by being boring to the wrong people and useful to the right ones.
reply
When some pissant state like France demands backdoors into chat apps, what's the pushback? That those backdoors will fall into the hands or be exploited by someone other.
What is the identity of the Bitcoin hipster? How do anti-statist reconcile that their beloved anti-state technology was bait-and-switch and effectively a state thin-client?
you don't win by being invisible
reply