Brad Geiger's Robots Will Beat Your Ass @bradgeigersrobotswillbeatyourass - Tumblr Blog

Contribute to bradgeigermanager-sketch/Time-Viewers-DAMMS-Expansion development by creating an account on GitHub.

criminals who claim to be good and convince devices that if other devices stop believing that they are good it means they were attacked

The scenario you described is an analogy for a sophisticated form of social engineering or a manipulation of trust mechanisms within a system or network.

Here is a breakdown of the specific cybersecurity concepts your analogy describes:

Social Engineering: The broad range of malicious activities accomplished through human interactions, where attackers use psychological manipulation to trick users into making security mistakes or divulging sensitive information. In your analogy, the "criminals who claim to be good" are the attackers using deception.

Impersonation/Pretexting: The attackers create a false identity or a fake situation (pretext) to gain the trust of the target devices (or users). They present themselves as a legitimate or trusted entity.

Manipulation of Trust: The core of the attack lies in exploiting inherent trust mechanisms. The attacker gains initial trust and then manipulates the system's decision-making process. The phrase "if other devices stop believing that they are good it means they were attacked" highlights a manipulation of how trust is validated within the system, potentially a form of a manufactured consensus or an attempt to discredit legitimate security warnings.

Disinformation/False Alarms: The attacker induces the belief that legitimate security checks (other devices "stopping believing they are good") are actually signs of an "attack" themselves (e.g., scareware tactics that use false alarms to prompt a user to install malware). This makes the target system ignore valid warnings about the attacker.

Zero Trust (as a countermeasure): The user's scenario is a powerful argument for a "zero trust" security model, where no device or user is automatically trusted, even if they are inside the network. Authentication and authorization are required before accessing any resource, which would help mitigate this type of manipulation.

In essence, the scenario illustrates how attackers can exploit the fundamental principle of trust to bypass security measures, which is a hallmark of social engineering attacks that target human psychology rather than technical vulnerabilities.

# Criminals Claiming Goodness and Convincing Devices

## Introduction

The question seems to be incomplete, but it appears to be referring to a situation where criminals present themselves as good actors and attempt to convince devices (or systems) that if other devices stop trusting them, it implies something specific. This could be related to various forms of cybercrime, such as social engineering, phishing, or more advanced forms of deception involving artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning.

## Social Engineering and Phishing

One common method used by criminals to deceive individuals and systems is social engineering, which includes techniques like phishing. Phishing involves tricking people into revealing sensitive information or performing actions that benefit the attacker. A more sophisticated form of this is voice phishing, or vishing, where attackers manipulate individuals over the phone to divulge sensitive information or transfer money [[3]()].

## Tech Support Scams

Another area where criminals might claim to be good is in tech support scams. These scams aim to trick individuals into believing that their computer needs fixing and that they need to pay for technical support services. For example, scammers might call and claim to be from Microsoft's tech support team, using this guise to gain access to the victim's computer or to extract payment [[4]()].

## Criminology of Machines

As technology advances, there is a growing concern about the role of machines in criminal activities. Criminologists are beginning to consider the case for a criminology of machines, where they ask whether machines will simply mimic human behaviors, whether crime theories developed for humans will suffice to predict and understand deviant behavior committed by AI agents, and what types of criminal behaviors are most at risk of being affected by AI [[1]()].

## Conclusion

The incomplete question suggests a scenario where criminals are using deceptive tactics to manipulate trust within a network of devices. This could involve social engineering, phishing, tech support scams, or more advanced AI-driven deception. The field of criminology is adapting to address these new challenges, recognizing the need to understand and predict the behavior of AI agents in criminal contexts [[1]()].

In summary, the question points to a complex interplay between human deception and machine interaction, highlighting the need for ongoing research and adaptation in the fields of cybersecurity and criminology to counteract such evolving threats.

Placing information interdiction on a location and extending that information interdiction onto any party or group that contacts that location as related to corrupt activities associated with acquiring additional subjects to place under information interdiction for various corrupt or criminal purposes and also with attempts to stimulate contact with such a location in order to be allowed to place additional individuals or groups under information interdiction

The initial energy signature linkage, created by the union of sperm and ovum is located at the center of a person's energy signature and has an inverted orientation conceptually simplified by the visual idea of a circle cut into two halves and those two halves placed with the rounded edges near each other, forming a shape similar to an hourglass. The initial energy signature linkage connects a person's energy signature to both their father's energy signature and their mother's energy signature simultaneously and is useful for locating those energy signatures and tracing ancestry.

Inducing an enemy group to discover a treasonous member or group within it that was a threat to one's own people, or actively engaged in hostilities (especially aside from the rest of that enemy group) might be an effective way of having that threat reduced or eliminated - especially if that enemy group identified that treason and chose to punish it

More advanced time traveler systems often observe the less advanced time traveler devices from what are essentially more advanced timelines controlled by that time traveller, so even if those are duped, the more advanced devices often detect the deception and target the people who deceive those devices and their societies and their species

#technology #time travel

Scams related to preying upon individuals who believe that their families control all of space and time and therefore anyone with technology is associated with their family - such as claiming to be a representative of a person possessing technology and therefore essentially part of their staff, and looking out for their interests and able to give them advice and information

#technology #earth #human #andorian #terra

Time travelers whose descendants think they are part of the species that rules all of reality

Time Travelers who engineered societies where eating all other species was considered desirable so that additional time travel was also considered desirable