Creating art which is then roundly enjoyed by others has helped me with perfectionism.
Intellectually, I know that ‘perfect is the enemy of good’.
Unfortunately, my standards for my own work are often far too high to encourage incremental progress & learning in public.
2/8
Part of the reason why I feel that way is because the security community is so frequently negatively judging. As this is the community I joined from a young age, it has molded my behavior to be far too constrained & limited — in direct opposition to the hacker ethos.
3/8
Judging the work of oneself & others to an extremely high (& often unattainable) standard reduces the likelihood that people in a given community will produce original work for the benefit of said community by releasing it publicly — even when such efforts are sorely needed
4/8
The community essentially molded my behavior to the point where I have refused to release original work in the security space.
Meaning: useful code/scripts. Methodologies. Process improvements. Updates to the state of the art in information security. Incremental progress.
3/8
I haven’t always felt the things I’ve created have been good enough to stand up to the intense scrutiny which comes from both being a woman and a human in this space — and even if they were, I wanted to avoid the minutiae of the forced and oft-entitled/angry peer review.
4/8
Through the work and culture of infosec, I’ve developed an extremely keen eye for mistakes, errors, and systematic problems — and often fail to state how much I appreciate the value of someone’s work before criticizing it.
5/8
Yet what I’ve helped make has received so much kudos, & the process of making them has been so enjoyable & validating, that I feel I am “good enough” to release artwork for public sale & consumption under my own name — even if not at the level of a Kandinsky or Warhol.
6/8
Seeing the support and kindness people make the effort to express in the #NFTcommunity (within certain communities on Discord especially, shout-out to @itskay_k) has repeatedly shown me that there is another way, and not everyone is like this outside our weird little bubble.
7/8
I’d love for the infosec community to recognize how our overly-critical reactions to the work of others is often the opposite of encouragement, even if well-intentioned, and reduces opportunities for us to effectively learn from each other to improve our craft & culture ❤️
8/8
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Q: Why do the GOP and Kremlin bots slander Kamala Harris and other Dems as "Marxist"?
A: I can explain! First, a little context:
Social Murder is a term used to describe unnatural deaths caused by social, political, or economic oppression, rather than direct violence.
2/ Social murder is committed by the elites against the poor, sometimes through omission rather than commission, & results in deaths that may seem natural, but were actually preventable.
3/ Think: Opposition to Obamacare, opposition to protective measures against climate change and infectious disease, new tariffs, low corporate taxes, austerity measures, lobbying against environmental and safety regulations...
1/ The promised laughs/tears of the day have arrived!
Buckle up y'all! Remember that incel loser who came at me the other day (image below, top left)? 👇🤠
Let's talk about it. Signals indicate the account belongs to Vladislav "Artem" Klyushin, a convicted hacker who was recently traded back to Moscow (Artem is a common diminutive for Vladislav).
He's wealthy and well-connected, is an associate of a GRU operative already indicted by the U.S. for interference in the 2016 election, runs cybersecurity firm "M-13" which does IT work for Putin's office, and was–and may still actively be–one of Putin's "Musketeers" (bodyguards, somewhat akin to the Secret Service) in the Federal Protective Service (FSO), which is reportedly assigned some level of responsibility over information warfare.
ARTEM_KLYUSHIN represents a high-level Kremlin influence actor who combines cyber and info warfare capabilities, financial operations, and direct policy influence through social media channels owned by his partners to achieve the goals of the man to whom he is loyal.
KEY FINDINGS
> Direct operational connection to GRU through indicted business partner Yermakov
> Demonstrated ability to predict and potentially influence major U.S. policy decisions
> Pre-arranged platform access on X
> Evidence of active, long-running coordination with Trump world + Musk
> Visible systematic strategy to degrade U.S. institutional safeguards
I apologize if images are a bit fuzzy, as the size limit on X is 10mb–I can also mirror these elsewhere later.
2/ Klyushin's cyber capabilities and social media operations likely stem from FSO training/connections rather than just GRU links. His relative ease of access to both Putin and elite western figures fits the operational pattern of FSO based on what is publicly known.
> FSO training/connection explains combination of technical and social capabilities
> Part of Putin's "Musketeers" system of trusted operators in strategic positions
> Activities mirror FSO's evolution from protection to Active Measures
> Uses FSO-style elite access patterns (ex. social events)
> Demonstrates FSO's characteristic focus on info warfare and institutional penetration
FSO officers being "elevated to ministerial posts and regional leadership positions" as described in the article below contextualizes Klyushin's focus on U.S. personnel appointments and institutional restructuring in his recent social media activity.
3/ Following his August 2024 release in a prisoner swap with the Kremlin in which he was exchanged for Evan Gershkovich, Paul Whelan, and others, he has publicly demonstrated a coordinated strategy of malicious targeting of U.S. institutions in collusion with domestic elected officials and unelected actors from the safety of his newly Russian digs.
Klyushin's post-release strategy shows three phases:
Each phase demonstrates increasing operational boldness–but who really needs a covert channel when you can publicly direct your men Donald Trump and Elon Musk from the safety of the platform and administration they purchased and own?
OPERATIONAL METHODS
Info Ops
> Multi-phase messaging strategy progressing from cryptic to explicit
> Uses accurate predictions to build credibility
> Coordinates timing of releases with official announcements
> Maintains parallel Russian/English messaging tracks
Platform Manipulation
> Direct communication channel with platform ownership
> Sophisticated understanding of engagement metrics
> Strategic use of reposting and amplification
> Extremely low engagement relative to bot/follower activity
Network Activation
> Direct tagging of key figures (realDonaldTrump, elonmusk)
> Interaction with Trump Jr. regarding nominations
> Signs of coordinated messaging with other platform actors
> Strategic amplification of specific proposals
‼️🚨 These flyers have no creator attribution or symbology, and I doubt they are organic. They appear to be a continuation of the Kremlin‘s hybrid warfare tactics targeting NYC.
Goal: To obscure the next planned acts of violence as “stochastic”, or “random” attacks.
#Article5
Same gig as @LibsofTikTok: to give the public handy explanations when the Kremlin engages in terroristic acts on U.S. soil to influence Americans.
This is how they cover themselves and are able to continue engaging in “gray zone aggression” or “sub-threshold warfare”.
@libsoftiktok Go to Google News and type, “random attacks NYC”. A visiting computer science professor was “randomly” stabbed in the hand recently. They send messages constantly.
Speaking out against the Buscemi attacks got me targeted by a massive swarm of Russian bots for 3 solid days.
3/ They've been running this play for years as part of their multi-pronged attack on the minds of the American people–The effort is intended to influence the world's most powerful nation away from its own best interests in collusion with domestic actors.
After the 2020 election, there were many investigations & calls for recounts led by GOP which were found to be baseless. Dems refusing to fight means they believe recounts won't change anything & will only lead to greater democratic distrust which undermines our electoral system.
Thing is, we don't even have a plan to stop bomb threats from affecting the next elections.
We can't even build one until we deeply understand what happened here–which may change our perception of the outcome.
Lawmakers avoiding this are shirking their responsibility to us.
We don't even know if vendors are required to submit their source code for review, like many government contractors handling sensitive data must do.
We don't know what happened to the last software which was stolen, that Fani Willis has evidence of.
I've been developing a news analysis tool. Want to see what it can do? 😉 Ignore the numerical score for now.
Analysis: "Social media star Peanut the Squirrel has been euthanized after being seized from NY home"
The USA TODAY article covering the euthanization of Peanut the Squirrel presents as straightforward news reporting, but reveals concerning patterns when examined in depth.
The analysis indicates the article may inadvertently serve as a vehicle for state enforcement messaging, with a final risk score of 924 (High-Moderate Risk) after reliability adjustments.
The article's framing demonstrates several critical issues:
1. Selective Context: While the article mentions the bite incident that precipitated euthanization, it omits crucial context about:
- The animal's long-term health history
- The absence of prior rabies symptoms
- The owner's demonstrated animal care expertise
- Alternative testing or quarantine options
2. Authority Perspective Dominance: The narrative heavily centers official justifications while providing limited scrutiny of:
- The necessity for immediate euthanization
- The decision to euthanize both animals simultaneously
- The timing of enforcement action against a high-profile social media pet
- The relationship between viral status and enforcement priorities
3. Enforcement Pattern Indicators: Several elements suggest potential use of public health protocols as an enforcement tool:
- Timing of the seizure
- Immediate move to euthanization
- Targeting of both animals
- Use of rabies testing justification despite no prior symptoms
Public Interest Implications
The case raises significant public interest concerns regarding:
- Use of administrative powers
- Wildlife pet enforcement strategies
- Social media influence on enforcement
- Public health protocol application
Critical Omissions
The article's reliability is significantly impacted by failure to address: 1. Alternative testing options 2. Standard protocols for suspected rabies cases 3. Pattern of enforcement against social media pets 4. Prior relationship between authorities and the sanctuary
Propaganda Elements
State propaganda elements score highly due to:
- Uncritical presentation of authority justifications
- Emphasis on deterrence messaging
- Selective information presentation
- Use of public health concerns to justify immediate action
Broader Context
The analysis reveals potential patterns in wildlife regulation enforcement: 1. Higher scrutiny of visible social media cases 2. Use of public health protocols as enforcement mechanisms 3. Immediate euthanization as deterrent strategy 4. Limited consideration of alternative solutions
Public Interest vs. Authority Narrative
The article demonstrates tension between:
- Public health protection claims
- Enforcement agenda execution
- Social media influence on enforcement
- Animal welfare considerations
Conclusion
While presenting as straightforward news reporting, the article reveals concerning patterns in wildlife regulation enforcement and raises questions about the use of public health protocols as enforcement tools. The high-moderate risk assessment reflects significant concerns about narrative framing and potential state agenda, despite the article's apparent neutrality.
The analysis suggests readers should approach the official narrative with skepticism and consider broader patterns of enforcement, particularly regarding high-profile social media pets. The case may represent a larger trend of using public health protocols as enforcement mechanisms against wildlife pets, regardless of their care conditions or history.
Recommendations for Readers 1. Question the necessity of immediate euthanization 2. Consider broader enforcement patterns 3. Examine the relationship between social media visibility and enforcement 4. Research similar cases and outcomes 5. Consider alternative testing protocols
Areas for Further Investigation 1. Pattern of enforcement actions against viral pet accounts 2. Alternative rabies testing protocols 3. Standard quarantine procedures 4. History of department's enforcement strategies 5. Relationship between social media visibility and enforcement priorities
❌ Truth & Thoroughness
- Didn't question why both animals needed immediate euthanization
- Failed to verify necessity of killing vs quarantine
- No expert input on rabies testing alternatives
- No investigation of bite incident details
- Omitted crucial context about animals' health histories
❌ Watchdog Function
- Accepted authority narrative without scrutiny
- Failed to question timing of seizure
- No investigation of enforcement patterns
- Didn't challenge simultaneous euthanization justification
- Ignored red flags about possible ulterior motives
❌ Balance & Fair Play
- Over-relied on authority sources
- Under-represented sanctuary owner's expertise
- No veterinary/wildlife expert perspectives
- Failed to explore standard protocols
- Didn't question why both animals were targeted
❌ Independence
- Functioned more as authority mouthpiece than independent press
- Amplified deterrence message uncritically
- Failed to maintain skeptical distance from official narrative
- Didn't question enforcement timing vs social media status
Bottom Line: Paper essentially served as uncritical platform for authority action rather than fulfilling journalistic duty to investigate and question government power exercise. Classic case of "stenography journalism" rather than watchdog reporting.
Key Question Ignored: Why euthanize both animals immediately when neither showed rabies symptoms and one wasn't even involved in alleged bite?