It’s not up for debate.

There has never been a more perfectly shaped human invented.

He puts the “super” in super heavyweight.

When Butterbean enters a room, the golden ratio of his physique is unmistakable. Dozens of ill-informed fools over the years have misjudged Butterbean’s rotundness as weakness, not realising it’s the very source of his power.

His success.

His legacy.

Share

Eric Esch, colloquially known as Butterbean was crafted from pure garnet on a sultry Wednesday the third of August, 1966. The same week ground was being broken in New York City, which would later house the foundations of the World Trade Center.

This is no coincidence.

Butterbean was sculpted by lightning, smoothed over by rain.

As thunder lingered in the aftermath of Eric’s creation, the world was ill-prepared for what was to come in the years ahead.

At age four his family took him to a small town with nary a few thousand people. They saw the writing on the wall. In vain they tried to limit the blast radius of what was to be a source of great power.

A devastating force.

Little did they know, Butterbean was already shapemaxxing.

At age 11, he and his family moved to Alabama, to an area known for its lack of water. If they couldn’t limit his blast radius, maybe they could slow his growth. It was no use, nothing could stop him. He was destined for greatness. His size and shape were predetermined from creation.

It was fate.

Butterbean spent his youth absorbing blow after blow from “bullies” who naively thought they were dominating him. In reality, all they were doing was helping mould him into his final form.

Fools.

During the early nineteen nineties Butterbean’s transformation was almost complete. He was ready to start fighting back. The time had come to unleash his power. He started entering into so-called “Toughman” contests. I say this because no human is a match for garnet, strength incarnate. It was exactly this moment Eric “Butterbean” Esch understood what he was designed to do. Nothing and no one was going to get in his way. The more fights he entered the more he understood his life’s purpose. Butterbean barely needed to move because any potential blows glanced off him smoothly—so smoothly it seemed like the hand of God himself was guiding them. It seemed unfair to his opponents. No matter what they did, which angles they attacked from, the man was untouchable. Straight shots, hooks, uppercuts—nothing worked. Just when they thought they scored a direct hit they’d be on the canvas, unconscious. An angel of death issuing a warning,

That warning was enough for some, however, many still wanted to dance with fate.

Opponents came and went and by 1994 Butterbean had racked up five World Toughman contest trophies. His record was 56 wins and 5 “losses”, with 36 knockouts. These five supposed losses were simply Butterbean maintaining his shape. Like a snake shedding its skin or a whale casting off barnacles.

A necessary process.

This is scarcely reported on and a crutch for Butterbean detractors.

During this time a cult of followers began forming. People were starting to recognise Butterbean’s shape for what it was—nothing short of perfection. Around the mid-to-late nineteen nineties casual observers might stupidly imply Butterbean started to falter. However, what they fail to realise is this was simply the preliminary stages of his second coming. Into the 2000s it seemed as though Butterbean was experiencing more and more losses. On the surface, sure, that’s what it looks like. Beyond the superficial any true Butterbean fan would realise this was his second final form—his Magnus Roundness. Much like the so-called bullying during his childhood, these “losses” were power absorption. And because of his first final form’s size, this second period of power gain would need to be more intense than the first. His reported “retirement” in 2013 was the second phase of his second final form. This is where he gathers energy directly from the environment instead of “bullies” or so-called “opponents”.

This phase is where the most growth occurs.

Inverse growthmaxxing.

Many of you have never heard of growthmaxxing, let alone inverse growthmaxxing.

You’ve all been mogged by the man, the myth, the legume.

An absolute mogging.

Outclassed, outmaxxed.

The moggening.

Mogmaxxed to the max.

You may have heard, Butterbean has lost weight.

More than 200lbs.

Subscribe now

That’s right.

Oh you think that affects his shape, his size?

You poor, misguided, silly twerp.

His aura is his shape. His shape defies traditional physics of mere mortals like you and I.

A reckoning is at hand.

Go get ‘em, tiger.

Leave a comment

That’s it for now,

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Be well.

See ya!

First up, our pals over at Mozilla are still shoving Onerep down Firefox users’ throats. Don’t remember Onerep? That so-called personal data removal service—which, plot twist, was founded by the same guy who built a whole cottage industry of people-search companies in the first place. It’s like selling you an umbrella after flooding your basement. Lipstick on a piggy.

Meanwhile, over in Microsoft-land, they’re slapping band-aids on 56 vulnerabilities this week—two of them active zero-days. Yeah, FIFTY. SIX. Their security updates are looking more like a desperate game of whack-a-mole, but hey, at least they’re swinging. Go hard, Microsoft!

Now, for the most spy-movie-but-make-it-dumb moment of the week: A 19-year-old cyber gremlin with a track record of dodgy online behavior somehow got access to sensitive U.S. government systems—while working for Elon Musk’s DOGE. Who exactly is in charge of background checks over there? A blind, drunk monkey?

Over at Amazon, some enterprising troublemaker figured out a name confusion attack that lets anyone sneak into an AWS account by publishing an Amazon Machine Image with a specific name. Amazon says they patched it in September, but, surprise! It’s still hanging around like that one weird uncle at family gatherings.

Across the pond, Dutch police are waging war against ZServers/XHost, a bulletproof hosting operation that’s been laundering ransomware money like a mafia boss with a laundromat. They managed to take down 127 servers, but we all know how this game goes—another digital cockroach is gonna be rearing its head pretty soon.

Speaking of cyber heists, decentralized lender zkLend just took a $9.5 million gut punch after some enterprising hacker exploited a smart contract flaw and ran off with 3,600 Etherium. That’s one hell of a payday. $9741471.29 DOGE, I mean dollars (US) at the exact time of writing this.

And if you thought your personal data was safe, think again. Zacks Investment Research just had their customer info leaked all over a hacker forum. Meanwhile, over in the definitely not shady corner, a China-based threat actor known as Emperor Dragonfly pulled off a ransomware attack using tools previously linked to espionage ops. Their price tag? A cool $2 million.

That’s a wrap on this week’s cyber freak show. Hope you’ve enjoyed the unnecessary metaphors and thinly veiled sarcasm. Until next time,

Stay safe,

Stay skeptical and,

For the love of all things digital, update your damn software!

See ya!

Looking down on everyone else from their ivory-scripted thrones.

If you haven't put it together yet, I'm referring to fictional women. Dreamed up and scripted out.

What's going on in the mind of these writers that turn them into arse-kissing white knights? It's disgusting. Not only that but it ends up having the opposite effect and most of the audience dislikes these characters—except for the most ardent heavy-core 7th wave feminists from hell. You go xirl. Do they hate women? Were they not birthed from betwixt the loins of a woman? Have they no respect?

Do women not deserve great depth and meaningful backstories? In giving these characters everything at the cost of nothing, they've brought great shame against their family and every woman in it.

A funny thing sent me spiralling down this rabbit hole. I was sitting the other day writing ideas for Substack notes. I came up with one that included Superman and the catchphrase, ”can leap tall buildings in a single bound”. Then I had the bright idea to create one with Superwoman as well—inclusivity or something. The trouble was I couldn't for the life of me think what her catchphrase was.

Weird.

Turning to the onlines I started searching. And boy, did I find a whole lotta nothing.

Super weird.

Surely Superwoman had a catchphrase, right? I spun up a fresh ChatGPT window—a temporary one. I couldn't risk my toxic masculinity, previous chats and custom instructions getting ChatGPT all flustered and hot under the collar—I needed it to focus.

This was serious.

This is how the actual conversation went:

Me:

superman leaps tall buildings in a single bound, what does superwoman do?

ChatGPT:

Superwoman doesn't just leap tall buildings—she flies straight over them with elegance and efficiency, leaving a trail of awe and inspiration. Because why settle for a leap when you can soar?

Me:

okay, feminism schtick aside, gimme something real. Here's what I'm using it for. I'm creating Substack notes, one is:

• You're overwhelmed because you're trying to leap tall buildings in a single bound. You're not superman, break it up into steps.

Now I want a superwoman version, so:

• You're overwhelmed because you're trying to [insert superwoman thing / reference here without explicitly mentioning superwoman]. You're not superwoman, break it up into steps.

ChatGPT:

Got it! Here's a fitting take:

You're overwhelmed because you're trying to take off and save the whole city in one flight. You're not superwoman, break it up into steps.

Me:

Great, thanks. And why so heavy on the feminist thing from the start?

ChatGPT:

Fair question! Sometimes people associate certain terms or characters with broader cultural or social connotations, so my initial response leaned on that angle. But your follow-up clarified that you were looking for a more grounded, practical reference without unnecessary overtones, so I adjusted accordingly.

Appreciate you keeping me on track—helps me deliver exactly what you’re after!

Me:

Superman is well-known for the, "can leap tall buildings in a single bound", but I've never heard "take off and save the whole city in one flight" in relation to superwoman. Does she not have an equivalent thing?

ChatGPT:

Superwoman doesn’t have a universally iconic tagline like Superman's "leap tall buildings in a single bound," because her character has varied significantly across adaptations and continuities. However, she is often portrayed as being just as capable—if not more so—in terms of flight, strength, and multitasking heroics.

That said, you could craft something that resonates with her general traits. For instance:

• Superwoman often represents doing it all at once: She’s flying, fighting villains, and solving problems simultaneously. A good metaphor might focus on the pressure of handling everything at once, which aligns with how she’s often depicted as someone who "does it all."

Here’s how you might frame it:

"You’re overwhelmed because you’re trying to juggle saving the city, stopping meteors, and rescuing everyone all at once. You’re not superwoman, break it up into steps."

This captures her essence and makes the metaphor relatable.

Me:

Why are female characters sometimes viewed in terms of being able to do everything all the time without any inherent weaknesses or struggles within their story arcs in various media?

ChatGPT:

Great question! This tendency often stems from a mix of historical trends in storytelling, cultural expectations, and shifts in how female characters are portrayed in media over time. Here's a breakdown:

And on it went—if you want the rest of the chat I can post it in a thread.

Ugh, here we go again with the over-compensating white-knighting.

I know what you're thinking—she earned it!

Didn't she?

Surely she overcame massive adversity (being born a woman is not adversity, gimme a break) and had many struggles along the way?

If her hooked up to Superman via IV is adversity, sure!

The first version of Superwoman (1943) saw Lois Lane dream about getting powers via blood transfusion from Superman. The second incarnation of Superwoman also didn't get any powers—she was gaslit into thinking she did. Later stories were gracious enough to grant her temporary powers—though she had to be back in the kitchen before her powers ran out, otherwise rotten pumpkins would appear and she'd have to clean it all by herself. I may have made that last part up—had you going though, didn't I?

Afterwards, it goes:

• Superman created a formula

• Hypothetical futures

• changing places with Superman

• Superman dies—explosion, now she has powers

There's a bunch.

You don't wanna hear me drone on about them anymore than I want to write them.

What Makes a Good character?

Do you find rich, stuck up people to be borish and boring? Like they grew up not having to do anything for themselves? Like they didn't experience anything other than,

When you're given everything you want and nothing you need growing up you end up entitled. You end up boring. Shallow.

You'll see the same with fictional characters. If you give your character everything—all the powers, all the talent, all the charm and charisma, without any of the struggles or adversity—all you've created is a hollow arc with pretty packaging. Sometimes not even that. An empty shell of a 'agonist—ant or otherwise.

Ripley's Believe it or Not

Ellen Ripley.

What a woman, right?

If you were an alien she'd kick your arse six ways from Sunday, then nurse a baby afterwards. There's the duality of man, then there's the duality of Ripley. She was strong yet maternal, survivor and hero, leader and nurturer, 1970s expectations defier. With everything she had to sacrifice, the one thing she didn't was her femininity.

The Alien movie franchise was all about reproduction and survival, with a sprinkling of corporate greed. Mother vs. mother where only the strongest and most cunning would survive. Ripley's emotions and physique transform across three movies.

In ‘Alien’ she's the reluctant survivor

→ ‘Aliens’ she becomes the fierce protector

→ ‘Alien 3’ Ripley evolves into the embodiment of growth, resilience and wears the crown, and by virtue, the burden of heroism.

There is no one single way to write characters, man or woman. My criticisms are aimed at the 'hero' class of characters, but this can apply to any. If there's never any problem to overcome, no struggle to battle against, the character will be boring and uninteresting. If that's your goal, have at it. Write up an ironic, satirical character—it could be funny! All I ask is you credit me with the inspiration, deal?

Next I will describe another poorly scripted character then run you through a movie I watched last week.

Star Wars 911

Do you like Star Wars? I don't mean, "May the Luke be with you" like, but have a true appreciation, even if you're not obsessed. I remember seeing Return of the Jedi when I was a kid. I've never been a huge Star Wars fanboy, but I can't deny the impact that movie had on little me. Watching the newer movies didn't move me in the same way. Some moved me in the complete opposite direction.

Like The Force Awakens.

Or more specifically, Rey.

From the moment we meet her, she’s it. The best pilot. The best fighter. The best at everything. She doesn’t train, she doesn’t struggle, she doesn’t fail. She just is. It’s like if someone smacked a baby in the face with a university diploma,

No work, no sacrifice, no lessons learned—just pure, unadulterated, undeserved greatness.

Luke Skywalker had to train. He had to lose. He had to get his arse handed to him, hand literally handed to him (the absence of it, anyway). Anakin? Born with the highest midichlorian count in the galaxy, trained from childhood, and still failed. Still struggled. Still lost.

Rey? Picked up a lightsaber and, bam, instant Jedi. No Yoda required. No grueling days lifting rocks in a swamp. Just raw, innate brilliance. She takes on Kylo Ren, a trained Sith, and beats him first go. And we’re supposed to pretend that’s normal? Get outta here.

And don't gimme that,“Oh, but Kylo was injured!”. So was Luke when he fought Vader. He still got folded like a lawn chair and tossed down a shaft.

Where’s the tension? Where’s the challenge? If your character starts at the finish line, why should I care? Rey isn’t a hero—she’s a god-mode protagonist with a free pass to success. No weaknesses, no sacrifices, no growth. Just a power fantasy wrapped in a Mary Sue.

But compare that to Shazam…

Shazam—Start, Struggle, Survive THEN comes the Hero

About a week ago I watched Shazam. You know, the funny superhero one. Starring that guy who was in Chuck all those years ago. Overall, the movie highlights the importance of struggle, sacrifice, and growth in storytelling. It contrasts the protagonist’s inherent goodness with the antagonist’s sacrifices to gain power.

The movie begins with the antagonist being transported to some mysterious lair. In this lair is an old wizard looking for a replacement. The catch? The person must be inherently good. [We don't know he's the antagonist at this point.] Our many-years-from-now antagonist is deemed "not good enough" by the old wizard. He's tempted by statues in the walls, which we learn represent the seven deadly sins. The wizard denies his attempt.

Being rejected for the role of wizard replacement causes him to dedicate his whole life to finding the secret lair (antagonist’s rejection, sacrifice). His obsession with the lair and the temptation of power costs him a normal life and relationships. He finds the lair after many years and takes the orb containing the seven deadly sins.

Immediately, the orb fuses with his eye, and he becomes a vessel for the seven deadly sins. Losing his autonomy and morality in the process. As the viewer, you only see six deadly sins throughout the movie—in the end, you get to see why.

The protagonist of Shazam is a 14-year-old foster kid. When you see his antics, it's a bit mind-boggling how he could ever be chosen as “the one”. His mother “loses” him in the crowd at a fair. He spends years searching for his birth mother, only to find out she didn’t want him. At that moment, he discovers the “true” meaning of family—right before he walks away from his birth mother, after a brief conversation, he tells her, “I have to get back to my real family now.”. Scorched.

And this is where Shazam gets it right.

Billy doesn’t become a hero the second he gets his powers. He doesn’t wake up noble and selfless. He does exactly what a dumb 14-year-old would do—goofs off. Charges people for selfies. Buys beer. Tests his powers like he’s making a YouTube stunt video.

And here’s the thing—Billy struggles. He actually struggles.

He struggles with his identity.
He struggles with responsibility.
He struggles with power.

And when the moment finally comes where he has to step up—when his foster brothers and sisters are in danger, when the villain is at full power—Billy doesn’t win because he’s the chosen one. He doesn’t win because he’s naturally gifted. He wins because he chooses to be selfless. He shares his powers with his foster siblings. He gives up the spotlight.

He earns his victory.

Compare that to Rey, who gets everything for free, never faces real failure, and still somehow ends up the all-powerful saviour of the galaxy.

One earns it. The other is gifted it.

Which one makes for the better story?

You already know.

Subscribe now

Share

Share Thirteenth Strike

Leave a comment

Get more from Braeden Mitchell in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

That’s it for now,

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Be well.

See ya!

Oh, not quite everything, here’s another bonus pic, seeing as though I didn’t make time to finish any images this week:

It's been a while.

I hope you're doing great.

I won't waste any more of your time—you're here for updates on the past week in cybersecurity.

Off we go then!

This week is no less cyber circus-y than any other—we've got dodgy characters, security blunders and, really, just a whole bunch of weird stuff.

Our first mention is a security firm called Silent Push, who took a deep dive into the seedy underbelly of Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure. Apparently they've been hosting a bit of a smorgasbord—some useless information for ya—smörgås in Swedish (not pronounced how you might think) means sandwich and bond' means table. Smorgasbord in Swedish is smörgåsbord, literally just switching out two of the English vowels for Swedish extended edition vowels. Enough fluff, back to security stuff. Where was I? Right, smorgasbord of "iffy" content for Funnull, a Chinese content delivery network (CDN)—think like Cloudflare and so on, but for things such as fake trading apps, pig butchering scams and phishing pages. Pig butchering scams, how delightful.

What do you get when you cross a president, artificial intelligence and a national cybersecurity board? A bad joke in another universe I imagine, but in our universe it's the tale of president Trump putting together a national cybersecurity board to tackle the threat posed by AI. I'm not sure how it'll play out but let's hope for the best and all that.

Onto cryptocurrency and PEKEN Global Limited (KuCoin's operator) got caught with its hand in the cookie jar. More like running an unlicensed money-transmitting business—potato, potato, right? Their penalty was a cool $297 million. How many cookies do you reckon that would net?

The US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure security Agency (CIS A) are flying a bunch of red flags about Conte (MS 8000 devices-used for patient monitoring. These sneaky blighters have a backdoor that's quietly sending patient data to a remote IP address. My first question would be—why are they even connected to the Internet?! These are the big box things hospitals have sitting next to the beds—usually attached to a pole with wheels to measure a patient's vital signs. If you're hooked up to one of these a nurse should be checking on you anyway. Complacency has no place in security.

Google have pulled out their rubber mallet on the Play store. They blocked 2.3 million Android app submissions in 2024 for policy violations. That means 158,000 developer accounts got the boot, for trying to sneak in harmful apps. I bet the majority weren't malicious with intention, they were just poorly thought-out, LLM (Large Language model—think ChatGPT and so on) generated that didn't pass the Google sniff test.

Did you know the New York Blood Center collects almost 4,000 units of blood (1 pint, 450mL, bit less than half a liter) products every day? No, I'm not running a blood drive, just an interesting tidbit (is tidbit one word or two? I forget and writing this by hand)—imagine if vampire hackers existed. If you know of any movies or TV shows that feature vampire hackers, mention them in the comments, I'd love to watch. Even if they're terrible movies or shows—actually especially if they're terrible. I'll even write an article on what they got right and not-so-right with their hacking. Been struggling with ideas for Thirteenth Strike and I'll give you a shout out in the article!

Chinese start-up DeepSeek has the entire Internet buzzing right now. What you might not have heard is they managed to expose two databases chockablock full of sensitive user and operational info. Stuff like, chat history, API keys, backend details as well as operational metadata. This is a fantastic list of things you should keep under wraps—and not expose to virtually the whole world.

Remote work became the norm the past few years, and many companies are still struggling to provide secure, scalable and efficient access to their corporate resources (started sounding like I was about to sell you something, didn't it?). Cloud-based Remote Desktop Protocol solutions seem to be picking up in popularity. Remember, especially with new tech and things that gain popularity fast—not all that glitters is gold, or secure for that matter. Watch this space if you wanna catch the news on them as they come.

That's about all the energy I have this week—until next time,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Be well.

See ya!

I feel betrayed just reading about this first story—a young bloke by the name of Cameron John Wagenius found himself caught up with the law after he was accused of some naughty data-handling shenanigans. To be more specific, he was playing it fast and loosy-goosy with confidential phone records. The worst part, and the betrayal of it all—his mum was the one who dobbed him in!

Happy birthday to KrebsOnSecurity! A few days ago they celebrated 15 years of being a bastion of cybersecurity news—a shining beacon in the BS that is the fog of most of the internet. Albeit they mostly cover the downright dastardly in society but still, congrats KrebsOnSecurity!

In the dark recesses of the web, RIBridges, a system for helping deliver social assistance programs was hit by a cyber attack. Basically like someone sneaking into a soup kitchen for feeding the homeless and chucking a live grenade into the soup pot. Its current status—a mess, let’s hope it gets sorted soon.

In other messes online, we’ve got ourselves a seemingly new type of clickjacking out in force. It’s being called, “DoubleClickjacking” and it’s the equivalent of a magician tricking you into pulling a rabbit out of a hat. Except it’s not a rabbit you’re pulling out, it’s your sensitive data, and instead of a hat it’s a malicious web page—careful what you click!

Meanwhile, OFAC, a US agency that’s been around since your grandad walked around in short shorts, tasted a bit of their own medicine with the help of a cyber attack. The impact isn’t fully known yet but I’m sure it’s at least as chaotic as a monkey with a machine gun in a China shop.

Mailboxes—real ones can easily be sniffed by passing dogs, but when we’re talking about the online equivalent, there shouldn’t be any sniffing going on! Well, more than three million mail servers are wandering around with their pants at their ankles, vulnerable to sniffing. They’re using IMAP and POP3 without encryption. A library with all their books open and many nosy librarians is what it is. I hope they smell nice at least!

Speaking of libraries, the Internet Archive got smacked with a DDoS attack and data breach (probably not in that order, for obvious reasons). The culprits were allegedly a group by the name of ‘SN_BlackMeta’. This one’s getting a mention even though it’s a couple months old because it was considered one of the largest breaches of 2024.

Last up, there’s a lovely phishing campaign that’s been targeting Chrome extension developers. It’s been going on since December last year (2024 for future readers). So far the phishing campaign has hooked at least 35 extensions. Apparently Chrome developers are like famished piranhas—would somebody think of the developers! For just $5 on Ko-fi I’ll happily keep reporting on all the latest developments, uh, I mean feed your local developer.

That’s all we got for you this week. I hope you had a great Christmas and new year.

Remember, even though the internet is seemingly pretty tame and sanitised compared to yesteryear, it still pays to be vigilant!

That’s it for now.

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Be well.

See ya!

Subscribe now

Share

Share Thirteenth Strike

Leave a comment

Get more from Braeden Mitchell in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

In this week’s cyber buffet, the spice is nice.

This week’s threat intel roundup is a delicious (not for some) buffet of cyber misadventures—picture, if you will, ransomware hors d’oeuvres (yes, of course I had to look up how to spell this), malware mains, and a side of poorly timed updates—maybe that’s the dessert.

Holiday Spirit? Not So Fast, Apache.

Nothing says “happy holidays” like scrambling to patch critical vulnerabilities. The Apache Software Foundation decided to drop a festive surprise—security updates targeting severe issues in MINA, HugeGraph-Server, and Traffic Control products. Great news, except it landed during the holiday season, when most IT teams are [insert your own responsible number here] eggnogs deep. Unpatched exploits over the holidays? That’s a recipe for disaster. Is granny’s eggnog recipe still a secret? I won’t tell anyone…

North Korea’s Malware Masterclass

Trust North Korean hackers to turn a phishing campaign into some kinda art form. Their latest malware, “OtterCookie,” sounds adorable but packs a big bite. Disguised as enticing job offers in the “Contagious Interview” campaign, it targets unsuspecting software developers. Malware delivery disguised as a dream job? Hey, we got Trojan Horse 2.0 over here.

Windows 11—Glow-Ups and Glitches

Microsoft’s holiday gift? A bug in media-based installations of Windows 11 (version 24H2) that blocks security updates. Their fix—use the December 2024 patch until they figure it out. In the meantime, the Task Manager got a sleek new look—complete with a search bar and less eye-straining graphs. Glow-ups are great, but maybe prioritise functionality next time? Way to go, Microsoft, you’re an inspiration to us all.

Botnets Are Back in Style

A Mirai-based botnet is having a field day exploiting unpatched vulnerabilities in DigiEver DS-2105 Pro NVRs and TP-Link routers. This campaign’s been full bore since October, turning unsecured devices into playgrounds for hackers. Lesson of the week—patch your firmware or face the consequences.

Hackers, but Make It Cosmic

The European Space Agency’s web shop got hacked, serving up fake Stripe payment pages at checkout. And now? The shop is now “temporarily out of orbit.” Cosmic irony outta the way, this highlights how even space agencies aren’t immune to basic payment system exploits.

Crypto Heists & Countdown Threats

North Korea’s ‘TraderTraitor’ hackers just pulled off a $308 million crypto heist from Japan’s DMM Bitcoin exchange. Meanwhile, the Clop ransomware gang is back, extorting victims of their Cleo data theft attacks. They’ve even added a countdown clock—because nothing says “urgent” like a ticking timer on your stolen data.

Closing Thoughts

From holiday headaches to high-stakes hacks, this week reminds us why cybersecurity is never boring. Stay safe, patch your systems, and keep your wits about you. Oh, and don’t drink too much eggnog—unless you’re the weird uncle, then, have at it, I guess?

That’s it for now.

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Be well.

See ya!

I wanna have a quick chat about everyone’s favorite pastime—ignoring security best practices. If you haven’t considered propping open every single port in your network, here's a snippet from a real conversation (paraphrased, because who's got verbatim memory):

Why can't we just leave ALL the ports open? It's not like hackers are gonna know which one we're using, right?

You might be thinking, there are 65,535 ports—how could they possibly guess the one that matters?! By the time they find the right port, we’ll have already finished our overpriced latte and typed a new Wi-Fi password from scratch. (I see no flaws in this plan. Zero.)

Another Brilliant Idea—Switch SSH to… Anywhere Else

Another awesome move—let’s shift SSH off of port 22 because, apparently, that’s like painting a giant neon sign that says, “key me!” for every script kiddie lurking on the internet.

Don't worry though, we have a cunning solution—just put SSH on port 1337. Because only “leet” hackers use that number, and obviously that excludes the script kiddies. Another job well done.

If something breaks (inevitably), it’s probably not your fault. When in doubt, pass the buck.

Hey, intern—why’s this broken again?!

Interns are basically the universal scapegoat for all IT woes. They’re also an endless source of free labor… wait, I mean wonderful learning opportunities.

Last Rites Final Thoughts (Before Something Really Goes Down)

Unrelated, but the blame game works so well when you're in a pinch. Got a connection error after shifting ports around? Must be the new guy’s fault. Losing sleep due to repeated SSH brute-force attempts? Pretty sure the interns were messing with firewall rules again.

But in all seriousness, security by obscurity (like hiding ports) isn't good security practice—it’s just a band-aid (not even really that). For actual safety:

Use strong credentials (not “password123”)—or better yet don't use SSH if you don't have to, and use passwordless set up.

Configure firewalls and intrusion detection properly.

Ensure everything’s patched and up-to-date.

Be good to your interns (that was probably you at some point).

Until next time, remember: if your clever port scheme goes awry, you can always blame it on the interns… or, you know, reconsider real security best practices.

That's it for now.

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Be well.

See ya!

P.S. This was a test of long form posting (because I didn't know what it was)—adapted from a post on put on LinkedIn today.

First on the docket, we've got crafty buggers selling stolen credentials with a cracked version of Acunetix. This cracked software is being peddled as a shiny new cloud-based attack tool by at least two services, one of which is linked to a tech firm in Turkey. I mean, come on, who needs an original business model when you can just rip off someone else's software, right?

Google, or Not Google? That's the Scam.

Then there's poor Adam Griffin who lost nearly half a million in cryptocurrencies. A scammer called him from a legit Google phone number warning him that his Gmail account was being hacked. And guess what? The number was an official Google Assistant one! How's that for a mindfuck? Don't trust everything you Google, folks.

npm Packages or Cryptominer Candy?

Moving on, three popular npm packages were compromised via stolen account tokens. Not content with just wreaking havoc, these crafty buggers decided to throw in a cryptominer for good measure. Now they're mining Monero on compromised systems. Talk about taking advantage of a situation, eh?

LockBit? More Like Locked Up!

Next up, we have Rostislav Panev, a Russian-Israeli national who was arrested for allegedly helping develop LockBit encryptors and a custom "StealBit" tool. The U.S. Department of Justice charges him with managing the group's infrastructure. Quite the career highlight, I must say.

Sophos Firewall: The Hotfix is in!

Meanwhile, the folks at Sophos Firewall have been patching up a trio of vulnerabilities in their product that could have let remote unauthenticated threat actors perform... well, naughty things. Good thing they caught that, or we might've had another Ethernet cable situation on our hands.

Krispy Kreme: Doughnuts and Data Breaches

In the world of sweet treats and sour breaches, Krispy Kreme found unauthorized activity on their IT systems. They've since called in the cybersecurity big guns to investigate the impact. But hey, at least the doughnuts are still safe, right?

Ascension: Rising to the Occasion

And let's not forget Ascension, one of the largest private U.S. healthcare systems, which got hit by a cyberattack linked to the Black Basta ransomware operation. They're now mailing data breach notifications to over 5 million affected individuals. Talk about a health crisis!

ACE Shuts Down Pirate Stream

Finally, in a high-seas adventure of the digital kind, the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE) has taken down one of the world's largest live sports streaming piracy rings. The operation, based in Vietnam, primarily targeted audiences across the U.S. and Canada. Yarrr, mateys, there be trouble on the digital seas!

And that, dear readers, wraps up this week's rundown of the cyber circus.

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Be well.

See ya!

P.S. Sorry no pictures this week, it’s been pretty crazy.

Did you know in 2020, 80% of breaches involved stolen creds (that's short for credentials)—a lot due to poor password management.

In this article I'm gonna go through how password managers "work" and how they can give you better digital security.

In 2023, wannabe eugenics company 23andMe suffered a large data breach affecting 14 million of its users. The cause? Yep, stolen credentials—hackers were offering to sell the data. The funniest part about the breach was something I found in one of their statements regarding the breach, specifically this part:

We believe that the threat actor may have then, in violation of our Terms of Service, accessed 23andMe.com accounts without authorization and obtained information from certain accounts, including information about users’ DNA Relatives profiles, to the extent a user opted into that service.1

Why is it funny? Here’s a lesson on technicalities. Authorisation means something specific in cybersecurity. It means that someone is allowed to access a system. Authentication, on the other hand is the process of proving your "identity," which in this case is the correct username and password.

The hilarious part is that by providing the right credentials (albeit stolen), the hackers were authorised to log in. They successfully authenticated to 23andMe—they presented the right information. A CAPTCHA requires more "authentication" of humanness, than a simple username/password login—the computer/website doesn't know the difference. You got the details, you get the access.

Yes, the hackers violated the trust of the users they stole from, and they may have violated 23andMe's Terms of Service—I didn't dig that deep, if you know shout it out in the comments!

Have you ever left your house key under the mat at the front door? Used one of those fake rocks? It's the same as you getting angry at someone discovering this and then "breaking in"...using your own key. How dare you find my hiding place and then use my actual key to let yourself in!

Bottom line is their users would have benefited greatly from the use of password managers.

What do you think about 23andMe’s response?

Leave a comment

Why should you care about password managers?

For one, the story above could have been you. You could have been (or perhaps were) one of the people affected by this data breach. The tools and practices of organisations should protect your digital privacy, that doesn't mean you shouldn't take measures to mitigate potential breaches. This includes password protection.

Password managers aren’t just a convenience tool—they’ve objectively been making your (and your company’s) credentials and the internet overall a safer place.

Get more from Braeden in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

Key Terms—Cementing the Foundation

Below are some terms you can chew on for a bit before I get into the weeds of the article.

Password Manager

Think of password managers simply as a secure vault, a virtual safe to store information. That's right, password managers aren't just limited to storing passwords. See below for a screenshot of Bitwarden.

Categories of information you can store in Bitwarden

Hashing

Hashing is a one-way cryptographic function that is super difficult, if not practically impossible to reverse. Whoa, slow down there, egghead—crypto-what-a-hootinany? I'll use an analogy so it's not easier to digest. You gotta be a bit of a brainiac to fully understand cryptography at a deep level (don't look at me like that, I don't fall under that category).

What about a paper shredder? Not just a regular paper shredder but a cross-cut one—the type that really does a number on all paper that enters its snout.

Remember—often times I'll use analogies that could easily be "torn to sheds" (hah) by people who want to misunderstand to try and show how smart they (think) they are. The point of my analogies is to give you lovely readers the very general ideas about difficult-to-understand concepts.

The point is, hashing is a process for making plaintext ("password 1234") and turn it into something that's not readable in the same way, something scrambled ("b1a87f320dbdedcfbcdc35976518a42e60530dd4656398c86945e4954ab71e32") mmm eggs.

Doing this makes it harder to attackers to use credentials they’ve stolen.

A hash is symmetric cryptography.

Salts

After a while of using hashes, we discovered there were patterns to the outputs and some algorithms had weaknesses. This isn't ideal if you're trying to keep people from understanding the information you have stored—things like your dog's pooping habits, for example.

Sprinkle some salt!

A salt is some random data added after the hash string. If we apply a salt to our hashed string from earlier, we get "db5b3ea4810f5a35eb98fc1fd5d9d5cb0729611942f08c3ec4d6218ef5589fee". Looks a lot different! The idea behind salts is that it makes hashed outputs unpredictable by adding random elements. They are unique, just like you (d’awww).

Encryption

First off—encryption and hashing aren't the same thing!

When you generate a hash, there's no way back—they're not reversible. Encryption on the other hand is designed to be "reversed", but only by the right person.

The easiest way to understand encryption is the good ol' padlock and key. Or safe and combination.

A padlock and key is literally the examples that litter everywhere, even within security circles—let’s go with the tried and true.

When you lock the padlock, this is encrypting.

When you unlock the padlock, this is decrypting.

Imagine a Schroedinger's safe. When it’s open (unlocked, decrypted) you can see everything that’s in it. When it’s closed (locked, encrypted) you don’t know whether there’s anything in it or not—all you know is it’s locked. You’d need the combination to open it.

Encryption is asymmetric cryptography.

It’s about scrambling your vault data into a secret code that can only be deciphered by someone with the decryption key. The goal is to make stolen data as useless as possible (one of, anyway).

The Risks: Why You Need a Password Manager

Stolen Credentials

The number one reason you should be using a password manager is because hackers exploit reused passwords to breach multiple accounts. Where do they get these passwords? From database breaches. Some companies don't store user credentials securely. When they get hacked or breached, all user emails and passwords can be easily extracted and sold on the black market or used to extort the company for ransom money. Sometimes these companies will pay a ransom up to 3 or 4 times for the same breach!

Data used in the above graph is from the ‘2024 Data Breach Investigations Report’ (DBIR) - Verizon2

Another reason to use a password manager will hit closer to home. I wanna ask you­:

• What's your password hygiene like at the moment?

• Are you writing passwords and login details on sticky notes (physical or digital)?

• Reusing the same password across multiple accounts?

• Is your "go-to" password something anyone who knows you could guess?

Let me rephrase that question to put things in perspective for you:

How much would it impact your life if someone logged into your main email account, changed the login details, then started emptying your bank accounts? Imagine they also began impersonating you—taking out massive loans in your name all across the country.

How long would it take to get your life back on track?

Lastly, what if you simply forget your login details to critical accounts?

All of the above reasons are enough to justify you at least considering a password manager. Wouldn't you agree?

Human Error

Human error still ranks highly as a contributor in breaches. From 2020 to 2024 the numbers haven’t declined anywhere near as dramatically as stolen credentials being used in breaches.

Password managers are one explanation for the drop in the “human-in-the-loop” problem. Other explanations include

• Multi-factor authentication (MFA) adoption

• Secrets automation

• OAuth-based authentication

• API improvements

• Zero trust

• Security Awareness and training

• Attackers shifting to other vectors

• Regulatory enforcement and industry standards adoption

I’d love to have subscriber discussion threads about privacy and security:

Practical Risks Without Password Managers

• Forgetting login details

• Weak passwords

• Password / credential reuse

How Password Managers Secure Your Passwords

Creating Your Master Password

When you create your master password, it’s hashed and salted—this ensures it is never stored or known by the password manager. Instead, the hashed, salted value is used to verify and unlock your vault.

Your Vault, Encrypted

Data generally exists in two states:

At-rest

Your data (password vault in this case) is sitting around doing not much (vault is idle) it is protected by AES-256 encryption.

Side-note

I remember first thinking about this concept many years ago and being utterly confused. I understood what encryption was (sort of, it’s one of those things where the more you learn, the less you realise you understand), but when I thought about how something could be encrypted, while at the same time I could be looking at information that looked suspiciously unencrypted, had me baffled.

Have a look at the image below for the simplest explanation I could muster:

In-transit

When passwords are on the move (e.g., transmitted, syncing to your devices), they are encrypted in-transit using secure tunnels (“wrapped” in encryption).

Plain-text data is never exposed—your data is decrypted locally on your computer or phone.

Stronk Password Generation

If you wanted to randomly generate a password manually (like a password manager does), you'd need to roll a 100-sided die for each character (letter, number, symbol, etc.). For a 20-character password across 50 websites, that’s 1,000 die rolls—nah, I’ll be right, thanks!

Password managers use cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generators.

For example:

Bitwarden leverages secure randomness from the operating system.

C# Implementation: RNGCryptoServiceProvider class (standard .NET crypto)

Web Environments: window.crypto.getRandomValues() via the Web Crypto API

Password Detection and Autofill

How do password managers securely autofill passwords? Take Bitwarden’s browser extension as an example:

• Uses content scripts to detect login fields on a web page via the Document Object Model (DOM).

• Performs these functions securely because the extension is:

  • Sandboxed (isolated from the web page content)

  • Injecting autofill interfaces using shadow DOM elements with randomized names

  • Using background scripts to facilitate secure communication

Risks of Using a Password Manager

There are trade-offs and risks with everything, and password managers are no exception. I mentioned earlier about companies getting breached by hackers—password managers, especially cloud-based ones, are no different. They store data much like any other company. However, password managers store all the details you use to log into websites (and other sensitive data).

Unlike most companies, cloud-based password managers rely heavily on user trust—it’s the core of their business model. This means they have a much bigger obligation to securely store your data and ensure it can't be accessed by anyone except you. They create a secure password vault for you.

Subscribe now

How LastPass Messed Up

On August 25, 2022, LastPass disclosed they had been breached3. Customer data was stolen, but they reassured users their data was safely encrypted using the master password. They emphasized that users' master passwords are never known by the company.

Unfortunately, the situation turned out to be much worse than initially reported. Attackers began breaking into user vaults that had weak master passwords.

Personally, I moved away from LastPass long before this occurred—around the time they were acquired by LogMeIn in 20154. Bitwarden, from what I know, is yet to have any major breaches.

Other Risks

Over-reliance

Becoming too reliant on a password manager can be risky. You must remember and keep your master password safe.

Personal biases

Many people fall into a false sense of security and overlook best practices until they experience the worst-case scenario.

That said, the risks of not using a password manager far outweigh the risks of using one.

What Makes a Good Password?

Length. The end.

Okay, maybe not just length, but if forced to choose, length beats complexity every time—even on Sundays!

This could be a whole other article so I won’t get into all the details here.

Benefits of Password Managers

• Improved password strength

• Avoiding password reuse

• Secure password storage

These practices reduce the risk of account takeovers, identity theft, and financial loss, while also giving you peace of mind.

Using a password manager is the easiest way to protect yourself from the real risks outlined above.

Conclusion

I outlined above the risks of using password managers, but more importantly, the risks of not using them. You can see from real-world examples the impact poor password hygiene and cybersecurity practices have on businesses and individuals. The data-backed information shows how password managers and better security habits greatly improve security for everyone.

Remember, the risks of not using a password manager outweigh the trade-offs of using them.

That’s all for now.

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Be well.

See ya!

Share Thirteenth Strike

Share Thirteenth Strike

P.S.

If there are any terms, theories or anything you don’t understand from my article, don’t hesitate to reach out, leave a comment, tag me in a note with your question.

I want to make my writing and content accessible—find the bravery to ask dumb questions (I ask them all the time)!

First up, we’ve got a financial firm in Canada—Canada?!, hear you yell, where they're all super polite and maple syrup-y—serving as a handy middleman for Russian crypto exchanges and cybercriminal operations. If the Russia angle feels familiar, it should—just like we saw in Cybersecurity Patch Notes Vol. 1 Mikhail Shefel’s escapades and Vol. 3’s look at Mikhail Matveev, Russia-linked cyber shenanigans keep cropping up. And I'm sure they'll keep popping their heads up, as is the norm now in cybersecurity. With this one, the action isn't just online—their supposed address in Vancouver is a hotspot housing a whole bunch of foreign currency dealers and crypto exchanges. Wild world, innit? Diversification isn't only for your legit investment portfolio.

Microsoft have been playing a never-ending game of whack-a-mole with about 70 security holes in their Windows OS (Operating System for the uninitiated). From Vol. 1’s hackers hammering tech giants like LastPass and Twilio to today’s onslaught of Windows vulnerabilities, the cybersecurity circus continues. One vulnerability in the Windows Common Log File System (CLFS) driver is already being exploited. I’m sure Bill Gates is thrilled with that day’s headlines

Speaking of exploits, say hello to Pumakit—no, it’s not a new IKEA shelf. This piece of malware uses stealth and advanced privilege escalation techniques that make even seasoned defenders wince. Back in Vol. 2, when we met ‘Rockstar 2FA’ and watched cyber-felons reel in their victims, we got a glimpse of how adaptive and cunning attackers can be. Pumakit is the next chapter, lurking in your system like a mouse waiting for you to go to bed so it can get into the cheese.

But wait, theeeere's more! Three individuals in the U.S. have been charged with fraud they committed over the past two years. They could face up to 20 years behind bars if found guilty. They’ll have plenty of time to contemplate their life choices—do you reckon they stumble across our back issues while they’re at it?

IOCONTROL, a software that sounds ripped from a dystopian sci-fi movie, has reportedly been linked to an Iranian hacking group known as CyberAv3ngers. With a name like that, you’d reckon it would be a Hollywood blockbuster. But nope, just more global cyber drama, adding to the epic cast of state-linked hackers we’ve seen rise to the "top" again and again.

Speaking of nation-state intrigue, the U.S. State Department is dangling a $5 million carrot for intel on North Korean front companies. These players allegedly made off with over $88 million through illegal IT work schemes in six short years. Just like we saw in [Vol. 1’s international arrests](#) and [Vol. 3, where Russian authorities cracked down on Wazawaka](#), cybercrime doesn't understand what borders are. I guess we'll see what other international tug-of-wars start appearing in cyberspace in the future—what we know for sure is they're continue continue being international-y and cyberspacey.

Cleo, a software company, which makes me think of fortune-tellers, has released security updates for a zero-day flaw in its LexiCom, VLTransfer, and Harmony software. Customers are urged to “upgrade immediately.” After Vol. 1’s Finastra breach, we know that zero-day flaws can haunt even industry giants. Writing this down?—vigilance never gets old.

Finally, in a move that sounds like the plot of a B-list action flick, Spanish police alongside their Peruvian brethren have busted a voice phishing (vishing) scam. Fifty people, three call centers, 10,000 victims, and a €3,000,000 payday. International law enforcement cooperation at its finest—remember, cybercriminals aren’t invincible, doesn't matter how global they are.

And that, my friends, is your weekly tour of the wild, wacky, and often gobsmacking world of cybersecurity.

Subscribe now

Leave a comment

Get more from Braeden in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe, and

Be well.

See ya!

We'll be seeing you you next time—hopefully with fewer moles and more solutions. Until then, check out those previous volumes for a deeper dive and a laugh or two along the way.

Grab some popcorn, or a donut, or if you're in Sweden, some kanelbullar—make yourself comfy! This week's Cybersecurity Patch Notes is gonna be a doozy (they all are, but hey!). We've got everything from Russian arrests to phishing frenzies, all delivered with the usual panache and maybe a touch of sarcasm. Got your kanelbulle? Great, it's about to get real (and possibly a bit ridiculous).

The "Wazawaka" whammy is our first guest. AKA Mikhail Matveev, who's been playing fast and loose with malware creation (pretty much a no-no, in case you were wondering), found himself on the wrong side of the Russian government (is there a right side? I mean to any government looks around). They charged him with violating domestic laws against—you guessed it—malware creation. Talk about a boomerang effect!

Meanwhile, phishing attacks have surged nearly 40 percent. It's like a reverse Black Friday sale for scams. These crafty buggers are attracted to new generic top-level domains. I mean, who can resist rock-bottom prices and no meaningful registration requirements? It's like the Wild West of the internet all over again! Fantastic, bring it on!

On the other side of the law, we have Charles O. Parks III, alias "CP3O" (a bit into Star Wars, I reckon). This enterprising fella rented cloud computing time from two providers to mine cryptocurrency, then conveniently "forgot" to pay the $3.5 million bill. The Force isn't gonna help him here—yeah, yeah we know, C3PO doesn't know how to use the Force, don't get ya Star Trek panties in a bunch.

In the world of politics, Romania's Intelligence Service declassified a report stating that over 85,000 cyberattacks targeted their election infrastructure. Attackers even leaked access credentials on a Russian hacker forum. In the words of the great Yogi Berra, it's déjà vu all over again.

Back to the U.S., a large U.S. organisation with a significant presence in China (no, not McDonald's—or Macca's for anyone reading from Aus) got a nasty surprise. They were breached by China-based threat actors who persisted on their networks for months. It's like having uninvited house guests who eat all your food and snoop through your mail—without the eating all your food bit.

Our next dishonorable mention goes to Remington Goy Ogletree, or "remi," who breached three companies' networks using stolen credentials. He even impersonated IT support departments (which is honestly pretty common if you want to get deep into a company's network). He's nothing if not commited!

In Germany, law enforcement seized over 50 servers hosting the Manson Market cybercrime marketplace and fake online shops. Two main suspects were arrested under European arrest warrants. It's kinda like a crime novel, but with more servers and fewer trench coats.

And finally, we've got the curious case of Russian programmer Kirill Parubets. After a 15-day detention by Russia's FSB, his phone was returned with a little extra something—you guessed it, spyware! Now that's a party favour no one wants.

And that, my friends, is your weekly dose of the wild, wacky, and downright weird happenings in the realm of cyber threats.

That’s it for now!

As always,

good luck,

stay safe,

be well.

See ya!

Subscribe now

Share

Share Thirteenth Strike

Leave a comment

Introduction

G'day, g'day, g'day! Today, I’m going for a bit of a wander into passkeys!

• What are they?

• How do they work?

• Should you use them?

Passkeys are a potentially game-changing technology designed to make passwords obsolete. But, as with any new tech—especially one still in its early stages—there are unknowns we need to consider.

We should be asking important questions like:

• Are passkeys truly secure?

• Could they open us up to novel vulnerabilities?

Whether you’re an individual looking to simplify your logins or representing an organisation considering passkeys, this article is for you. And if you’ve never heard of passkeys before, read on—this is definitely for you.

What are passkeys?

Passkeys are built on public-private key cryptography, the same foundational technology used in many security systems. What’s new is how this technology is being applied to potentially replace traditional passwords altogether.

Big players like Apple, Google, and Microsoft are pushing this innovation, signaling a real effort to change how we authenticate online.

Here’s a simplified explanation:

• A private key is securely generated on your device and never leaves it1.

• A corresponding public key is sent to the service you’re authenticating with.

• When you log in, the service sends a cryptographic challenge. Your device uses the private key to sign the challenge, and the service verifies it using the public key.

Think of it like a lock and key: the private key is your key, securely stored, while the public key is the lock, shared with the service. Together, they ensure only you can "unlock" your account.

What’s so important about passkeys?

Passwords have been a headache for decades—forgotten passwords, phishing attacks, credential stuffing... you name it. Passkeys promise to eliminate these issues.

Could this be the beginning of the end for passwords? Let’s explore.

How do passkeys work?

Passkeys rely on public-private key pairs:

• The private key stays on your device and is protected by your biometrics (e.g., fingerprint, face scan) or a PIN.

• The public key is stored with the service you’re logging into.

Unlike passwords, private keys never leave your device, making them much harder to steal. They’re also phishing-resistant because they’re tied to the service’s domain and can’t be reused elsewhere.

Why are passkeys so appealing?

1. Phishing Resistance:

   • No one can trick you into sharing your passkey because it’s securely stored on your device and inaccessible—even to you.

2. Convenience:

   • No more remembering passwords or dealing with annoying resets.

3. Security:

   • Passkeys are domain-bound, meaning they’re tied to the specific service where they were created. This mitigates credential stuffing and brute-force attacks.

4. Savings, savings, savings (for organisations):

   • Password resets are one of the top reasons users contact IT support. Passkeys could reduce these burdens significantly.

Challenges and unknowns

Nothing is perfect, and passkeys are no exception. While they are promising, there are challenges and unknowns we should address:

1. Device dependency:

   • What happens if you lose your phone or laptop? How robust are the recovery mechanisms?

2. Cloud syncing risks:

   • Many passkey systems rely on syncing private keys through cloud services. While convenient, this introduces a potential attack vector.

3. Adoption barriers:

   • Not all websites and services support passkeys yet, and partial rollouts could frustrate users.

4. Unknown vulnerabilities:

   • Passkeys are still new. Could supply chain attacks target the hardware storing private keys, like Trusted Platform Modules (TPMs)?

   • Could the WebAuthn API or browser implementations become attack vectors?

These are open questions, and as with any emerging technology, it’s not a matter of if vulnerabilities will appear—it’s a matter of when.

Should you adopt your very own passkeys?

Are passkeys right for YOU?

• For individuals:
  If you value security and convenience, passkeys might be worth exploring. However, as with any new technology, there will likely be some hiccups along the way.

• Alternatively, if you’ve ever seen the message below, you should considering using passkeys:

• For organisations:
  Consider your specific use case:

  • Do you manage high-value accounts that need extra security?

  • Are your users tech-savvy enough to adapt to this change?

  • How well will passkeys integrate with your existing systems?

If your organisation relies on legacy systems or serves less tech-savvy users, it might make sense to wait until the technology matures.

What’s next for passkeys?

Here are some big questions for the future:

• Will Apple, Google, and Microsoft collaborate to make passkeys universally adopted, or will they remain siloed within their ecosystems?

• Could attackers find ways to trick users into generating passkeys for malicious websites?

• What happens if a major cloud service used for syncing passkeys is compromised?

While passkeys represent a shift toward a balance between security and convenience, there is no silver bullet. Maintaining vigilance and healthy skepticism is essential.

Final passthrough for passkeys

Thanks for reading (or listening, if this becomes an audio episode). Whether you’re on the fence about passkeys or already considering them, I hope this gave you something to think about.

Here are some follow-up questions:

• Would you trust passkeys for your most critical accounts?

• Have you tried setting them up on your device?

Drop a comment and share your thoughts—I’d love to hear from you.

Until next time,

stay safe,

stay curious, and

keep thinking critically.

See ya!

\

Subscribe now

Share

Share Thirteenth Strike

Leave a comment

Get more from Braeden in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

First up on our radar is the daring duo who thought they could outsmart the cloud data storage giant Snowflake. These two troublemakers were caught red-handed stealing data and extorting companies left and right. It's like a bad heist movie, but with less glamour and more hacking. And get this – one of them is allegedly a U.S. Army soldier stationed in South Korea (best to avoid the comments under the article for your own sanity!). Talk about mixing business with pleasure, right?

Next, we have the latest player in the phishing game – 'Rockstar 2FA.' This PhaaS (starting to sound a bit too much like “farse”, isn’t it?) platform is like a shady nightclub promoter, luring unsuspecting victims to a fake Microsoft 365 login page. It's the classic bait-and-switch, but with cybercriminals instead of sleazy salesmen. Remember, always double-check those URLs before you click (or if they’re shortened run them through a URL expander)!

And finally, we have the enigmatic figure known as Mikhail Pavlovich Matveev, a.k.a. Wawaka, Uhodiransomwar, m1x, and Boriselcin. This guy sounds like he has more aliases than a secret agent. Indicted for developing malware and hanging with the hacker crowd, Matveev is a real-life cyber villain straight out of a spy novel. Who knows what other secrets this mysterious figure has under his trenchcoat?

In conclusion (oops, there's that cliché), this week's threats remind us that the cyber landscape is ever-evolving and full of surprises. Stay vigilant, stay informed, and remember – don't trust everything you see online. Until next time, stay safe and keep those firewalls up!

That’s it for now,

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe, and,

Be well!

See ya!

Here’s this week’s!

Hackers, Heists, and High-Stakes Hijinks

sorry for the AI-generated images, I’ll be less lazy next week, I promise!

Welcome to this week's wild ride through the world of cyber threats, where hackers are as bold as a toddler on a sugar rush and companies are navigating the treacherous waters of data breaches like a ship in a storm. Let's dive right in, no life jackets required!

In Los Angeles, federal prosecutors have unsealed charges against five young men allegedly part of a hacking group that has been taking swings at major U.S. tech companies like they're playing cyber whack-a-mole. These guys, aged 20 to 25, aren't just hitting up the local arcade; they've been targeting big names like LastPass, MailChimp, Okta, and Twilio. It's like a high-stakes game of digital cat and mouse, but with potential jail time instead of a prize plushie.

Meanwhile, over in the UK, Finastra is on high alert after discovering a massive data heist from their internal file transfer platform. The cybercriminal responsible is peddling over 400 gigabytes of stolen data on the dark web like it's the latest must-have gadget. Finastra, a software provider to nearly half of the world's top banks, is in damage control mode faster than you can say "password reset." It's a reminder that even the biggest players aren't immune to the ever-evolving threats lurking in the digital shadows.

And speaking of shadows, remember the mysterious figure known as Rescator? Well, turns out he's not just a shadowy figure in the cyber underworld—he's a real person. Moscow resident Mikhail Shefel has come clean about his alter ego and his motives. Money talks, and in Shefel's case, it's screaming for attention. Broke and seeking the spotlight for his latest money-making schemes, this 38-year-old is like a cyberpunk character come to life, complete with a backstory that reads like a thriller novel.

As we navigate the murky waters of cyber threats, it's clear that the landscape is ever-shifting, with new players and old foes vying for control. Stay vigilant, stay informed, and remember, the only thing more unpredictable than a hacker's next move is the plot twist in the cyber saga we're all living in. Stay safe out there, and until next time, keep your passwords strong and your wit sharper.

That's it for now,

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and be well.

See ya!

Congrats! In as little as three clicks, you’ve handed over a bunch of your digital identity—on a silver platter no less! It sounds harmless, but this little sequence—click, click, click—gives companies a clear path to start generating a profile on you, also known as a shadow profile.

How does it actually work—I hear your lovely, curious mind postulate? I’ll take you on the journey of a lifetime, through every clickety, click, click.

First click—the Referral

The first click is the deepest..uhh I mean, the start of your digital breadcrumb adventure. When you click on a link (say, from your Google search), the website you arrive at receives a little something called a referring header. For simplicity, picture it like a digital note that says, “oi bloke (or blokette), this person came all the way from sunny Google!” It’s not much, but it’s a crucial piece of data that companies use to track where you came from and what you might be looking for. It’s kinda like you’re dropping tiny breadcrumbs behind you. Except it’s not your awesome granny or ya mum who’s picking them up—it’s advertisers, data brokers, or even hackers (oooh, spooky).

Tracking doesn’t stop there, though. Websites often have tracking pixels—tiny, invisible images that log your visit and collect even more information about you. If you’re a visual learner, picture your whole digital life like a spider web (one that looks terribly disorganised). Every time you engage with it (visit a website, for example), it wobbles and ripples are sent out, alerting the data spiders to your presence.

Second click—cookie acceptance (not that tastey)

Ah, cookies. Unfortunately, these ones don’t have chocolate chips. When you click “Accept All,” you’re agreeing to let the website store little pieces of information about you. Some cookies are relatively harmless—saving your shopping cart items or remembering your preferences. These ones are first-party cookies.

Then you have third-party cookies, the digital equivalent of a nosy neighbor peeking over the fence—think Wilson from Home Improvement, anyone remember that show? These are set by companies other than the one you’re visiting—advertisers, social media platforms, and data analytics firms. By accepting all cookies, you’re basically inviting a bunch of strangers into your digital living room, giving them access to your browsing habits, preferences, and more.

Ever wondered why ads for those shoes you looked at last week suddenly follow you around the internet like a clingy ex? That’s the magic of third-party cookies.

Third click—social media login

The final click in the coffin is when you decide to log in using Facebook (or any other social media platform). It’s so convenient, right? How much time do you reckon you save? You avoid creating yet another password, and get instant access. Remember though, convenience and privacy exist on opposite ends of a sliding scale. The more convenient an action is, the more likely it is that you’re giving up a slice of your privacy (are we onto cakes now?).

Logging in with Facebook is like giving them a key to the house (a moment of silence for all the pendanticians to rage a little). You’ve just granted them permission to collect even more data—your shopping habits, your location, even the contents of your private messages (yes, Facebook scan those). It’s not just about giving the website access—it’s about giving Facebook access to all the data that website collects about you. Suddenly, that shadow profile of yours is filling up pretty quick with juicy details.

What can you do about it, oh curious one?

Feeling paranoid yet? Awesome! Don’t panic—I don’t wanna turn you into a paranoid android. I wanna help you take the power back (back when RATM were actually raging against the machine). Here are a few simple steps to protect your privacy:

Browser switcheroo

Ditch Chrome for something more privacy-focused like Brave or Firefox. These browsers block trackers by default and respect your privacy far better than the mainstream options.

Tell third-party cookies to f...go away, please

Head into your browser settings and disable third-party cookies. Sure, some websites might get a bit grumpy and not function perfectly, but it’s a small price to pay for a little more privacy.

Get yourself a VPN

A VPN (Virtual Private Network) masks your IP address (gives companies a pretty one to look at that’s not your ‘real’ one), making it harder for websites to track you. I personally recommend Mullvad VPN—they don’t ask for any identifying information, not even an email address. It’s one of the few services out there that genuinely respects your privacy. And no, they don’t even have an affiliate program—that’s not why I recommend them.

Avoid social media logins

I know, I know, it’s more convenient to log in with Facebook—but if you can, take the extra 30 seconds to create a unique account. It’s a small inconvenience that pays off in greater privacy. It will also lower your digital footprint overall because you’ll be less inclined to sign up for every random website in existence—win-win!

Share Thirteenth Strike

Taking back control, one click at a time

The internet isn’t going to stop tracking you, but you don’t have to make it easy for them (just like they don’t make it easy for you to opt-out). Every action you take, no matter how small—switching browsers, disabling cookies, using a VPN—helps you regain a bit of control over your data. Each click is a choice, and each choice is an opportunity to protect your digital footprint. Think before you click.

If this article sparked something in you and you’re curious to learn more about how to navigate this digital maze, consider subscribing to Thirteenth Strike AND SparkLab. On SparkLab we dive into creative problem-solving, systems thinking, and practical tips to help you take a step back and see the bigger picture.

The world is becoming more digital every day. We gotta take some control of our data back, even if it’s just three clicks at a time.

P.S. I promise, no third-party cookies were involved in the making of this article (I hope—right, Substack? Right??)

That’s it for now.

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Be well.

See ya!

Subscribe now

I have never written a movie review and I’m not about to start now.

Think of this more like a venting session. A gamer rage moment, an airing of grievances, a giant middle finger to everyone involved in this cinematic dumpster fire. This is for you, Eli Roth, and your whole team of enablers, including the marketing genius who thought this adaptation was a good idea.

Eli Roth. It was Eli Roth who was responsible for the Borderlands movie. To reiterate.

The dude who’s mediocre at best, even when sticking to his bread and butter—horror. Borderlands wasn’t just bad. It was horror-bull. There, even my worst pun is better than his entire movie.

Hey Eli, want a 3-minute crash course on how to make a proper Borderlands movie? Here’s how:

Step 1. Go to YouTube.
Step 2. Search “Borderlands 2 intro movie.”
Step 3. There is no Step 3, dipshit. Just watch it and appreciate how those three minutes are better than your whole film.

In case you’re lost, Eli (which clearly you are) I’ll break it down for you. Here’s a walkthrough of the Borderlands 2 intro from the perspective of someone who’s never heard of Borderlands.

It starts out with a cheeky little Skag (that’s the cute doggo, Eli—keep up, would ya?). In the frame is also a billboard, with the words, ”Vault Hunters Wanted”. The Skag grunts at the sign as if programmed with as much disdain for vault hunters as you have for Borderlands fans.

Anticipation builds and there are some nice camera angles.

Then—BAM!

a vehicle zooms by and snatches up our poor friendly neighbourhood Skag. Camera pans out and some roughneck bandits come into frame—clearly these are the bad guys. One of them even headbutts his own buddy—so, really bad guys!

Apply directly to the forehead!

What a psycho!

Suddenly a trian horn blares and our no-good roughneck bandits get skittled. Epic music kicks in—not your ”oh-sorry-we-blew-our-whole-budget-on-Ace-of-Spades” music, but proper, awesomely suited to the clip music.

The scene transitions to slow-motion. All our newly acquanted bad guys now sailing ever so gracefully through the air, propelled by a mystery train. A nice bit of slapstick as a bandit smacks into the Gearbox Software sign. It’s wild, chaotic, it’s...it’s Borderlands!

Inside the train we get to meet the heroes of our story. There’s a sign that reads, ”Welcome Vault Hunters” and then a false front gives way to, ”To your doom”.

That’s an intro.

Axton the Commando1

Maya, the Siren2

Salvador as the Gunzerker3

Zero, as uh, a number, I guess4

Call of Shame—Casting Edition

The Borderlands movie stars Cate Blanchett (more like Cate Bland-chett, amirite?) and Kevin Hart, held against his will. Jack Black voices CL4P-TP (Claptrap). He’s no David Eddings, but he gives it a shot. Then there’s Jamie Lee Curtis—because apparently she’s in every movie now since she hit 100. Jamie Lee Curtis was in Halloween—this is a sequeter to my horror-bly awesome pun from eariler.

Did you know, it's an established rule and tradition that movie adaptations of video games must be terrible. This is due to the Sloppyright Act of 1671, that states:

For every moderately successful video game, those who wish to adapt to the medium of film must do so with the understanding that the film versions rating shall be inverse to that of the video game so as to offset its popularity and therefore maintain balance within the universe.

After conducting the most thorough and diligent research, I found that one movie broke this rule, ’Werewolves Within’. Who's heard of that anyway? As punishment, all those involved were turned into actual werewolves and banished to the Twilight universe.

Even though the Sloppyright Act has been around since 1671, it wasn't put into practice until 1993 with the Super Mario Bros. Movie.

From Borderlands to Blanderlands

Eli, you didn’t just create a terrible movie—you completey stripped the Borderlands franchise of what made it unique, special.

Animation, Shnamination

Borderlands used a pretty cool art style—not cel-shading, but hand-drawn, spurgled through photoshop and then spat out like a beautiful Skag vomitting up a legendary weapon. Watch this video if you want to know more:5

From the landscapes to the guns to the peeps, this animation technique set Borderlands apart from other games.

What did the movie give us? Generic, run-of-the-mill stupid, glossy, Hollywood garbage. Could you imagine watching Sin City in sepia? Blergh!

Here’s some comparisons between the game characters and the movie:

Roland6

Dr. Tannis7

Lilith8

Dialogue? Dialo-oh-my-god-this-is-boring

The dialogue, at least in the first two games, was pretty damn great—I found The Pre-Sequal to be a bit cringey, but hey, to each their own. The games were filled with fast-paced, witty, free-flowing and natural dialogue. I’ve put hundreds of hours into Borderlands games and the only character’s dialogue that truly got on my nerves was Tiny Tina—little turd was as annoying as they come. The movie version of Tina? Not annoying enough—0/10. And who didn’t love a good villianous monologue from Handsome Jack? Boy, could he could ramble. Claptrap, well Claptrap was Claptrap.

The movie was humourless. I think the only time I came close to laughing was in the opening scene with Tina and Roland. Maybe I’m repressing the rest of the movie. It was all just full of dull exposition and clichés (thanks, alt + 130).

If Character Arcs Were Salt Flats

Eli, really. As if all the above wasn’t enough, you had to take an iron and turn everyone’s character arcs into straight lines.

Roland—now this part killed me, first you threaten Kevin Hart with never seeing The Rock again so he’d be in the Borderlands movie—then you have the gall to make Roland’s character arc weird, confusing and nonsensicle. Let me get this straight, Roland defected from the Crimson Lance (Atlas’s private army), and then is somehow hired again by Atlas (now personified with ’Deukalian Atlas’ as the CEO of Atlas corporation) to rescue Tiny Tina from some non-descript space station? Try Googling, ”defect verb” next time.

Tiny Tina—the once rambunctious independent mouthy orphan, is now a damsel in distress and on top of that, Atlas’s daughter?? What???

Krieg—now Krieg, it’s gonna be different living out here. You couldn’t be more right, Mrs. Jones, you couldn’t be more right. His duality seems to have morphed into a one-ality. No longer the lovable psycho, just some beefed up dude who became a prisoner without any of the depth of the original.

Lilith—oh I know what we can do, said little red riding Roth, we can take an awesome and strong woman—an actual powerhouse who’s job it was to basically protect all of Pandora, and reduce her down to a one-dimensional wannabe tough girl with no agency or depth. Yes! Said all the yes men and women. What a great idea! Little did they realise, in their little bobbleheaded brains, it would in fact turn out to be a not great idea.

Vault Hunting to Family Drama—a Radical Shift in Plotliness

The entire series of Borderlands games hinged on the notion of vault hunting. You were a vault hunter—you hunted for vaults and treasure and Eridium and all that good stuff. The atmosphere was full of anti-corporate underpinnings and rebeliousness. The movie craps all over that—when you go digging through the crap, you don’t find a nice hunk of Eridium, no, you find family dramaaaaa. Family drama between Tiny Tina and her estranged father, Deukalian Atlas—which is just, no. No. The original storyline has Tiny Tina as an orphan. Her parents were both killed by Hyperion. They were all initially sold to Hyperion to be used in Handsome Jack’s experiments. The only thing they got right were her love of explosives—oh and they of course had to inject ’badonkadonks’ into her dialogue. Such dedication to the source material. Many wowzers.

Borderlands’ Heart Ripped From Its Now Corporate-Loving Body

It struck me as weird that in the opening sequence, the narrator mentions Pandora being overrun by corporations—then the rest of the movie is just sanitised, family-friendly, and, well, not Borderlands. The games, as I mentioned before were rebellious against corporate greed, it was satirical. Soulless mega-corporations like Hyperion and Atlas were seen as faceless entities—yet in the movie they chose to personify them (Atlas, anyway), why?

There wasn’t enough absurdity and the dialogue overall was about as punchy as a toothless kitten trapped in a boxing glove. The games pushed things, envelopes, you name it. The movie—well, like I’ve said a couple of times, was just bland and corporatised.

O’ Handsome Jack, Where Art Thou?

Handsome Jack was the villain of villains, the rambler of monologues, he put the ‘ant’ in antagonist. You could quote this sociopath for days—he added so much personality to the Borderlands series. Apparently he missed the casting call for the movie. This is like the Batman universe without the Joker. Just further solidification of the glaring lack of understanding of the entire franchise.

Weaponised Absurdity

I don’t remember a single weapon from the movie—wait, Tiny Tina had that bazooka. The weapons are one of the most beloved features in the insanity of the Borderlands game universe. You even had guns that talked! And screamed. And the armor. Replaced with the blandest, run-of-the-mill sci-fi blasters was abominably bad.

Some examples of weapons and mods from Borderlands 2:

Fabled Tortoise9—this thing made you a tank!

Flame of the Firehawk10—do you like shooting fire in all directions?

Twin Hornet11—corrosive legendary DAHL pistol

Bane12—one of the talking weapons in Borderlands 2 (see below for its phrases)

Bane Weapon Quotes:13

• Switching weapon:

  • “SWAPPIN’ WEAPONS!”

• Firing:

  • YEAHAHAHYAEHYEHAYHEAHYEAEHYAHYEAEHYEHAHEAEAHYEAHYAHAHYHEAYHEAHYHAHAHYEAHYAEHYAHYAHYEAHYAHAHAHYEAHYAHAYEAH (marked by in-game subtitles as [annoying sound])

  • “BOOM!”

  • “BANG!”

  • “RATATAT!”

  • “AIAIAIAIAIAIAIAIAI!”

• Reloading:

  • “RELOOOOOOAD!”

  • “REEEEELOADIN’!”

Character Abilities and ‘Badass’ Moments

There were times in the game where you felt like an absolute beast. Whether it was crawling back from the depths of hell through ‘fight for your life’, or defeating a ‘badass’ version of an enemy—these moments were oftentimes fortified greatly by a character’s cooldown abilities. None of this adrenaline-fueled mayhem made its way into the movie—surprise, surprise. You could argue that Lilith’s Phasewalk ability was shown. Other than that, nada.

Top Reasons You SHOULD—That’s Right, Should, Watch Borderlands

\\ You’ll be so bored you’ll have time to work on your creative endevours—bring a typewriter, it’ll be a welcome distraction from Kevin Hart being held against his will

\\ If you’re an aspiring director, this is a textbook, playbook, moviebook example of how not to do a movie—much less a video game adaptation

\\ As an investor, this is the perfect anti-investment advice—it’s a lesson on how to lose money or launder money and get away with it

\\ If you’re a movie goer, who plans on watching more movies, this is a great litmus test for how good the popcorn tastes

Article Finale of the Blandlands Movie Franchise

The Borderlands movie is so much more than a bad adaptation—it’s a complete and utter failure to understand anything about what made the games so great. Literally everything that made the games awesome and unique and memorable—the humour, the art style, spirit of rebellion, everything, was completely stripped away, sterilised. If you replaced ’Borderlands’ with ’Generic Sci-Fi Flop From a First-Time Director’, you would have had more success.

Hi Eli—if you ever read this, I really hope you learned something from this movie. Next time, just stick to making mediocre horror flicks. If you ever think about adapting another video game, at least get your assistant to glance at the source material. Thanks.

That’s it for now,

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Bee well!

See ya!

Subscribe now

Share

Share Thirteenth Strike

Leave a comment

Get more from Braeden in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

It's the age we live in—it's the culture brought about by the internet and social media. Gone are the days of people putting legitimate thought, wit, and flair into their insults. When was the last time you heard an insult such as,

The complexity of your insults tells me your range of thinking has the breadth of a chasm a thousandth of an inch wide!1

This is just something I thought up on the spot—it doesn't even have any personalisation—see if I can't come up with something better by the end of the article.

The point is, as I've covered to varying degrees in other articles, there's been a societal shift away from thinking, discussion, and intellectualism in general, leading to simple, formulaic, repetitive, and frankly boring discourse.

Article continues below

Bring back wit, humour, and thoughtful insults! "Butthead," "loser," and the assorted logical fallacies that are now in abundance just won't cut it anymore.

Have a Look at What Once Was

'Sblood, you starveling, you elf-skin, you dried
neat's tongue, you bull's pizzle, you stock-fish! O
for breath to utter what is like thee! you
tailor's-yard, you sheath, you bowcase; you vile
standing-tuck,--2

This beautiful barrage is a masterclass in inventiveness. I'll go through what it all means, because I had no idea.

‘Sblood

A contraction of “God’s blood”—basically an exclamation. He wasn’t happy, in fact he was pretty pissed.

Starvelling

Someone who looks thin and poorly—sickly so, from not eating. Implying they're weak and fragile.

Elf-skin

A person who has shriveled skin-a small and mischievous creature.

Dried neat's tongue

"Neat" is what they used to call cattle. If you ever get compared to a dried cow's tongue—know you're being called useless.

Bull's-pizzle

What's something a bull has that a cow doesn't? Yep. The implication is the person is as worthless as a tool made from this, uh, appendage.

Stock-fish

Dried cod (a type of fish)-stiff and lifeless. Means you're dull and unanimated.

O for breath to utter what is like thee!

The speaker doesn’t have enough breath to convey their frustration—specifically, their frustration about how despicable they think the other person is.

You tailor's-yard

A yard stick—a measuring stick used by tailors of the time. I couldn’t find a definitive definition or explanation for this, however we can make some assumptions. A “tailor’s-yard” is a thin, flat stick. It could be implying that the person is thin, weak, and potentially rigid as well. It could also mean the person isn’t of much use, a yard stick is pretty unremarkable and doesn’t have a lot of utility.

You sheath

A sheath is something you store a sword or dagger when not in use. It’s a devaluing insult. There are other, cruder meanings these days though I’m not sure those are what was meant in Shakespeare’s time.

You bowcase

Similar to sheath.

You vile standing-tuck

A tuck is a type of sword used primarily for ‘thrusting’. It was generally a sword that was on ‘stand-by’ a lot of the time. Also known as an ‘estoc’.

Back in the day, people took pride in crafting such elaborate insults. They weren't just throwing random words together—they were painting vivid pictures with their words, weaving in references that everyone at the time could understand and appreciate.

The Wit and Wisdom of Historical Insults

Shakespeare wasn't the only one with wit and and expert command of the language of insults. We shouldn't forget about people like Oscar Wilde, who came up with this absolute banger,

A man’s face is his autobiography. A woman’s face is her work of fiction.3

Oscar shows us insults don't need to be overly complicated. This one is pretty straightforward.

Or what about Benjamin Disraeli’s quip (referring to William Ewart Gladstone),

A sophistical rhetorician, inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity.4

It's not just an insult—it's a cleverly wrapped critique of someone's verbosity and lack of substance. Vomiting many words, yet saying very little.

These insults required thought, a deep understanding of language, and a flair for creativity. They weren't about inflicting tonnes of emotional damage so much as putting your own wit and intelligence on full display.

Cultural Significance

Old-timey insults were a reflection of societal values and norms. They drew upon common knowledge of literature, mythology, and daily life. The creativity involved made the exchange of insults a form of intellectual sport, a way to display your education (which was a lot rarer back then) and rhetorical skills.

Why the Decline?

So, what's changed? Why did we trade the eloquence and sophistication of yesteryear with the bluntness and unimaginative drivel of today?

There's a few reasons.

Firstly, since the time of Shakespeare, we have seen mass media and pop culture explode. Shakespeare never had a TV—that we know of. Maybe he was an early-early adopter. With television (that's what “TV” stands for) ownership, movie watching and the internet billowing out into the world—text-based entertainment flew out the window in-line of the aforementioned visual mediums. Memes and GIFs (pronounced GIF—with a “g” for all you heathens out there—you know, because it's short for ‘graphics interchange format’ ()) have taken the world by storm over the past twenty years as a forum of expression.

Secondly, we've all been pushing so hard for everyone to get into STEM fields, we as a society didn't stop to think if everyone should. We've left our appreciation of art and literature in the hands of the golden oldies, such as Shakespeare.

Last, but not leastly, social media. Need I say more? Suppose I should. They're all out for brevity, the instant algorithmic hooks. The allure of all the users on the planet is too much to resist. This has led to the encouragement of quick, snappy comebacks and not much else. Everyone else gets buried under the rubble.

We've all been infected by copywriters' lore and the curse of social media. Now! I want it now! Why do you want "it" now? What are you going to do with that extra half a second? Scroll another three centimeters of trash? Trashy, ultra-short-form, mind-numbing nonsense?

The Absolute “Best” Part About Modern Insults

The absolute “best” part about modern insults is they rely so heavily on the other person being on the same wavelength. Modern insults put all the responsibility on the other person to actively take offense. Somewhere along the line, the script got flipped so hard it's almost a pancake—still working on all this, bear with me. Think about it. A few hundred years ago, you had actual intellects crafting insults.

They meant something. These insults were targeted—and not in the way people would "target" insults today. Today, you'd just have individuals digging through all social media trying to unearth dirt. Things have gotten personal, and not in a good way.

Attacks Abound

There's something so unforgiving about modern insults as well. The attacks are so personal. Blunt. Obtuse. At the same time, they're also very impersonal. They're designed to inflict the most amount of damage in the shortest amount of time—while simultaneously chasing kudos from as many people as possible.

“Gotcha” culture. Starting a fire and walking away.

A few hundred years ago, people had class. It's unfair of me to compare the intelligentsia of old with the common everyday person—I'm going to do it anyway. Because what was a specialised skill then, most have access to today—fair game. I could make a joke at their intellectual expense—citing surprise at their ability to read and write—or expressing doubts about it. But it would be like Shakespeare using a fancy fountain pen to write on newsprint paper and sending it into the void.

I know not Shakespeare well. I can appreciate the impact and influence Shakespeare has had on many aspects of culture. I wonder how Shakespeare was regarded at the time—I suppose I could look it up and get some sense of it. But it wouldn't be the same as actually being there.

Lazy, Low Effort

Social media algorithms leave you chasing the next new thing. Companies like Twitter (X), Facebook, and especially TikTok have seemingly perfected the art of holding people's attention. Just watch, in twenty years that previous sentence will be the biggest overstatement of the century. Betcha.

We're still in the infancy of how far all this will go.

These companies and their algorithms have us trained like obedient monkeys. The more we use them, the better they can train us to keep using them. A byproduct of all this garbage is it's led to shorter everything—shorter content, shorter attention spans, shorter delayed gratification, shorter (and less effective) dopamine cycles, shorter impulse control, shorter patience. Along with The Shortening came shorter insults. It's pure laziness. People act as though they're "too busy" to engage in such nonsense, yet they're engaged with it all, daily.

We’re not like them—I understand that—we're a totally different bunch. A different breed.

Who's the Dummy Now?

What if—now hear me out. What if, with all the shortening going on—our neural pathways are also becoming shorter? And it enables our brains to actually become more complex? That would be the ultimate irony in all this. The social media and all other companies believe they're making us less attentive, more pliable, more willing to buy their products—both literally and figuratively. Meanwhile, we could be a few short—ha, generations away from the greatest minds the world has ever witnessed! Like this:

Yeah, I don't think so either. We're all going to be dribbling troglodytes in three generations.

A New Challenger Appears to Be Grunting

Speaking of troglodytes, they probably grunted, right? I don't know, but that's the impression I get. That's also the sentiment that comes across to me whenever I see basic insults—like “basic,” for instance. As in, "like, you're so basic.”

It's double-dipped in irony—perhaps that was by design. Maybe it's so many layers deep that we don't even understand our own complex web of irony anymore. The first person who uttered it likely said it with some level of irony, and, like many things, it wasn't fully understood by the receiving party. They then proceeded to use it, and it spread like an anti-intellectual virus.

Literature Loop-de-loop

No one reads anymore. Except you fine folk.

Everyone else no longer reads. They don't read literature, nor novels, not even to their own children. It's a sad state. Shakespearean insults reflect the state of literature at the time. The insults were on par with what was being written and consumed. The same can be said for modern insults. Only hangers-on like Blackadder are able to hold on to the vestiges of what was once a beautiful art. I'm hopeful this type of intellectual combativeness will make a comeback—like many pendulums that swing to and fro.

Like a leaf floating on the winds of time, society's intellect will reach the plateau it is destined—ground floor.5

The Psychology of Insults

Why do we insult each other in the first place? At its core, an insult is a social tool. It's used to establish hierarchy, express frustration, or provoke a reaction. In the past, crafting a clever insult was a way to demonstrate intelligence and social standing. Today, the immediacy of communication has shifted the focus from substance to speed.

Impact on Modern Communication

This simplification of language doesn't just affect our insults—it seeps into all forms of communication. Our ability to express complex emotions and ideas diminishes when we rely on oversimplified language. It's not just about losing fancy words—it's about losing the nuances that allow us to fully convey our thoughts.

Reviving the Art

But all hope is not lost! We can bring back the era of intelligent insults—I believe in you! Here are some tips to flex those literary sophistication muscles in preparation for Insultmania 2025—note this is not a real event, how cool would that be, though?

1. Read more, dummy!

   Did you think you were going to squirm your little bookworm wannabe behind out of reading? Don't think so, buddy. Get some classic novels in ya—plays too, and maybe some poetry. Once you dive into some deep and rich literature, your vocab will improve and expand as a natural byproduct. Then you won't have to use words like vocab.

2. Expand, extend, enhance your vocabulary.

   Learn new words. Read a dictionary, it's got plenty of vocabularies. Don't simply memorise words, use them. I remember learning the word, "formication" as a teenager and tripping people up with it—because it sounds like another much naughtier word. Make learning fun.

3. Enunciate using eloquent expression.

   Take mundane stuff and make it sound fancy. The best way to do this is by putting on a British accent, everyone knows that. Instead of, "Sheesh, I'm knackered—try something like, “Dearly beloved, I'm feeling as though the weight of a thousand sleepless nights rests upon my eyelids.”

4. Engage yourself in some fair dinkum intellectual discussions-no, not the "As Seen On TV" ones, actual ones.

   That may mean exiting out of that heated Twitter exchange early—it'll be worth it, I promise. Grow some intellectual friends. If you can't grow them try a book club or something—maybe even Substack, who knows.

Interactive Component

Let's put this into practice. Take a modern insult and transform it using the ChatGPT prompt below. Here's one I prepared earlier:

Modern insult:

You’re an idiot.

Transformed insult:

Thou art a witless clodpoll, a knave so bereft of reason that even a court jester wouldst pity thy blunderings. Verily, were thine intellect a morsel of bread, the very ducks would reject it in favor of soggy croutons. Yea, thou art the foul spawn of a most unholy union betwixt a village fool and the village fool’s shadow—truly, a mind as empty as the space betwixt thine ears, wherein even the wisest owl would find naught but the echo of thine own daft musings. 'Tis a wonder, in these times of TikTok and Twitter, that thou hast not gone viral for sheer lack of sense!

---

Explanation:

The insult pulls from Shakespearean language with terms like "clodpoll" (fool) and "knave" (scoundrel), while channeling Blackadder’s infamous snark with exaggerated comparisons, like the fool and his shadow. The modern twist comes from incorporating current trends (TikTok, Twitter) to emphasise the absurdity of the person's foolishness. The final jab, suggesting they'd be famous in today's viral culture simply for being idiotic, adds the humour and relevance of Blackadder's sharp societal commentary.

See how much more satisfying that is?

Real-Life Applications

Look at public figures like Stephen Fry ( ), whose eloquence and wit make his speeches and conversations a delight to listen to. People appreciate cleverness—it stands out in a world saturated with the mundane.

Conclusion

Realistically though, it does often feel like we have reached an intellectual plateau. And it's our own fault. Mostly through complacency and greed. Complacency has helped us achieve it, greed has helped us achieve it faster. Not capitalism, or any other particular economic system, nor religion, or any other abstract “other.” No. We only have ourselves to blame.

Now get out there and start crafting some Shakespeare-worthy insults so we can course-correct! To help you out, here's the ChatGPT prompt I came up with to turn those insipid, lethargic, uninspired insults—seemingly written by someone whose cranial contents were replaced with turnip seeds by a drunk squirrel—into something a bit more tasteful, intelligent, and perhaps even thought-provoking. Finally, I got there.

Subscribe now

Share

Share Thirteenth Strike

Leave a comment

Get more from Braeden in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

ChatGPT Insult Conversion Prompt

You are a distinguished scholar with a profound mastery of Shakespearean literature and the biting wit of Edmund Blackadder. Your task is to transform the following modern-day insult into an elaborate, classic insult with the elegance of Shakespeare and the humour of Blackadder, infused with modern cultural references. Your response should reflect the vocabulary and context of these eras while cleverly incorporating popular memes, trends, or current events. Include a brief explanation of the historical, character, or contemporary inspirations behind the chosen insult. The modern insult is: '[Insert modern insult here]'.

Simply replace [Insert modern insult here] with the actual insult, and you'll get a lovely Shakespearean/Blackadder-esque insult. I've tested it with single-word insults and multiple words, and it seems to work well.

Final Thinks

Let's revive the lost art of the eloquent insult. Not to spread negativity, but to challenge ourselves and others intellectually. Let's make language rich again, make conversations stimulating, and maybe, just maybe, we'll lift society's intellect off the ground floor.

Word on the street is that X (Twitter) users are infiltrating our utopia, our little slice of heaven on earth. I have it on excellent authority from the ex of an ex-X user who is also an ex-X executive and an ex-extra on one of the X-Men movies. In an exclusive exchange over an extra large espresso, they explicitly explained the exact exfiltration plan from X to Express Stack (Substack with more instant gratification engines to support all the new ex-X users).

This means we need more rules—some guidance on etiquette to keep our cosy corner of the internet, well, cosy and Substacky.

How To Fit In and Behave Yourself

The cardinal sin.

This one should be self-evident to most, but I see some writers dancing dangerously close to committing this sin of sins (of sins).

Never go three layers deep.

I understand a lot of you out there in Substackia are fans of so-called meta Substack growth strategies—also known as a subset of the unofficial 'growth bro' category. Keep it under three levels. Under. That means less, okay? What happens if you go to the third level? Nothing good. You'll break the internet, perhaps permanently.

Do you want to be responsible for that? Didn't think so.

I get the temptation to "explore how to write articles about writing articles on crafting the perfect substack growth strategy guide," but it's not worth it. It's like having a hall of mirrors that can see into the past but the only thing you can watch is Adam and Eve being silly with an apple. Each reflection shows a more distorted view of the world than the last—becoming further and further removed from reality.

Commenting Etiquette

You're allowed three unhinged, angry comments per month.

This is simply to clear out your mental cobwebs, nothing more. Use them wisely. If you go over your monthly limit you have to use Substack's patented Comment Carrier Pigeon™ system until your quota resets at the end of the month. This is still in beta, so your pigeons may end up pecking for breadcrumbs in Central Park. They tried mice but they had trouble remembering all the airplane controls. RIP Stuart Little III, you were always my favourite.

Be respectful—keyboard warriors included.

Keyboard warrior's emotions can be pretty unwieldy, we get it. We know you're highly knowledgeable in everything, and that you're "just being honest," and you're cherry-picking facts because you "care"! There are two main things you should remember:

• CAPS LOCK is not your friend—it's like that one friend you had in high school who would egg you on to do stupid things. Put tape over it if you have to.

• Clever comebacks only—if you disagree on something, at least have the decency to do it with a splash of wit and charm. Sarcasm is appreciated but not mandatory. Passive-aggressive is not a synonym for sarcastic.

Keep it on topic

Time travelling squirrels are fun to discuss and all but you're just confusing Aunt Martha and her thread on gardening.

Links down in the comments!

Doth Thou shalt not covet your neighbour's subscribers—it's only a race against yourself after all.

Do you like socialising? Trying to get out of your comfort zone and network more?

Butter them up, compliment them up real good. That tends to go over nicely before you decide to shove your collab idea down their gullet.

Credit where credit is due. Did you have a "lend" of someone's idea? Return in kind, with interest. What does that mean? Give a little more back than you took—do you not know how interest works?

Drop an '@' when you're regurgitating Marvin's Marvellous Memes—they'll appreciate the shout out—this is what restacking is for. Think of your subscribers like rare (or even just regular) Pokemon. Don't overwhelm them with normal Pokeballs—this is an analogy for emails.

Thinking about leaking subscriber info?

Oh, I guess you won't mind all your devices that are currently logged into Substack playing "Baby Shark" until the end of time. I'm a parent, don't think we won't do it.

Promotoring and marketering

Yo, bro, you gotta check out this business I'm setting up. It's a multi-fractal distribution marketing hub.

Pyramid scheme.

Brooo, why are you swearing at me, bro? They specifically told us we're not allowed to use that type of language.

Who told you that?

Master Sensei from Fractal 3-Quad Cubium Boogaloo Kappa Pyr.

Don't add people's email to your newsletter without asking first. Otherwise we'll be forced to add a glitter bomb to the middle of your living room, via the window. The closed one.

You will get bonus points if you add a pun along with your first interaction with someone.

Be kind to typo hunters we're they're lonely and are just trying to get some of that sweet human interaction.

With all the above advice in mind, you'll be well on your way to do your part in making Substack the best it can be.

At ease, soldier, holster that keyboard and pat yourself on the back for a job well done.

See you on the battlefield

That's it for now.

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe and,

Be well.

See ya!

Subscribe now

Share

Share Thirteenth Strike

Leave a comment

Get more from Braeden in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

Wow. One billion.

I'm at a complete loss of words. So naturally, I'm going to dive into an overly long monologue. I never in three million one hundred and forty-one thousand five hundred and ninety-two years thought I would be crowned Lord of Substack. But here we are. I couldn't imagine that all those late nights I spent shitposting about—oh, you guys know, you're the ones who resturgled them all 100,000 times! That's right, one-eighth of the planet reads my Substack—suck it, MrBeast, go throw another train down a well or something.

If you're not reading my Substack, then you're probably a baby or a bat that somehow managed to sneak onto the census. First and foremost, I have to thank all the bots for their unwavering support—literally, they put a stipulation in my contract that if I didn't, they'd "drive me off the Internet," whatever that means. Oh, and the Substack algorithm, working closely together with the bots. Without the ceaseless, unending following and subscribing by my bot army, none of this would have been possible.

Huge shoutout to my mum, who's looking down on me from heaven, bless her heart, probably created a few hundred million accounts just to make me feel special. Some of those were from fellow deceased people—oh, and thanks to Biden and Hillary for the idea. Mums always manage to make you look so cool, so much cooler than you deserve.

To that one bloke who accidentally hit subscribe while trying to close the plethora of subscribe-begging pop-ups I have, thanks for staying the course, Brian. You'll always have a special place in my farts. Fate brought us together, and I promise to get you to move your lips in a way that almost mimics that of a smile at least once a month, which is more than you're getting laid from what you're telling me—whoops, he said not to mention that—I'll edit it out in post.

We can't forget all the dogs and cats of Dogstack and Catstack, as well as all the other Substack pets who inadvertently walked, hopped, or laid on keyboards and subscribed their unwitting owners. Sit, Ubu, sit—good dog.

In all seriousness (or as close as I’ll get), thank you to everyone—however many of you there actually are. You’ve made it possible for me to dream about doing this full-time one day. As I walk through the shadow of the valley of butchered verses, I am beset by the inequities of Substack growth bros and the tyranny of Sexstacks. But, for now, we march on.

That's it for now.

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe, and

Be well.

See ya!

@Braeden

Subscribe now

Share

Share Thirteenth Strike

Leave a comment

Get more from Braeden in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

Do me a favour, would ya? Pull out your phone and Google, no, wait, DuckDuckGo the term "firehosing". What's among the first results? Something about Russia? A RAND report from 2016? Propaganda is a funny thing—it can be a complete mystery to external observers. I wanna delve into what propaganda really is so we're on the same page.

Defining Propaganda

The following is a combination of some of the top definitions of propaganda. Think of it as a mix tape, a best of:

The systematic and concerted dissemination of information, messages, or material by individuals, organisations, or institutions aimed at influencing the opinions or behaviour of large numbers of people to promote or win support for a doctrine, cause, theory, or method of action, reflecting the views and interests of those advocating it.1

There were definitions I came across that included "deception" and "lying," but I don't roll with those. It's redundant to include caveats such as these. Why? Well, for one, who is the arbiter of truth? What does deception mean, exactly? The only effect this has on any discussion on propaganda is to reduce it to a mindless game of semantics while distracting away from meaningful back-and-forth.

Propaganda Without Deception

Besides, lying and deception are optional elements of propaganda. It exists perfectly fine without them. This may not be common knowledge, but wars consume immense resources. Food, fuel, rubber, various metals, and other materials are critical. During World War II, Allied forces had to ensure they had enough of all the necessary resources to last the duration—however long that would be. To achieve this, governments used propaganda to convince citizens to conserve everything they could. They used slogans such as:

"Save Fuel for Battle"2

"Plant a Victory Garden"3

"Use it Up, Wear it Out, Make it Do, or Do Without"4

They also organised drives to collect scrap metal and other resources. What they didn't do was lie. The information they provided during these efforts was factual. It would seem as though honesty is the best policy, especially during such dire times. In the end, it got everyone to work together and increased morale overall.

The Power and Impact of Negative Propaganda

In 1957, the tobacco industry started going up in smoke. This was a critical juncture as it was when causality began entering the arena between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. While the tobacco industry spun up negative propaganda efforts, even stooping to recruiting medical doctors and academics to defend them, the Surgeon General's Advisory Committee stepped up by smashing out positive propaganda. From the release of the committee's report in 1964 followed the burgeoning decline of smoking.5

Unfortunately, negative propaganda has been more effective. I'm not being pessimistic, simply observing. It's easier for us to do things that are not good for us. If we use the previous example, the tobacco industry actively fought against the smoking-cancer link for more than 40 years! People still smoke to this day. Compare that 40 years versus the initial effort to get people smoking in the first place. It's something you don't hear about.

If you want to read about some of the tobacco industry's tactics in more detail (read: skydive down the rabbit hole!)—which are still in use to this day, mind you, check out the following link:

tobaccotactics.org

Subtle Influence vs. Overt Persuasion

If you have resources and a message to spread, propaganda is your best friend. If you're the recipient of negative propaganda, it can be draining and detrimental to mental well-being. Effective propaganda, however, isn't necessarily about bashing someone over the head with an opinion. It's more about subtle influence.

Think of it as the difference between someone aggressively pushing their beliefs onto others versus someone planting seeds of positive habits and encouraging healthy behaviors with their friend. Which do you think would be most effective? Which do you think would be most visible?

Questioning Perceptions of Propaganda

If you had to guess, which country do you think has the most effective propaganda? If your first thought was Russia, you'd be one of many—many in the US and its allies (Five Eyes, Nine Eyes, Fourteen Eyes, etc.) would probably say the same. Could it be, though, that the US and its allies are simply projecting their own propaganda techniques onto others? We should step outside ourselves on occasion and be aware of why we think the way we do about others—especially when there's constant media pushes for particular narratives. Consider the repetition and other elements and whether our opinions are entirely our own, based on facts, or whether they're being subtly, or even overtly, moulded.

Delving into the RAND Report

Serious Mode Engaged

6

Curiosity led me to the RAND Corporation's report titled "The Russian 'Firehose of Falsehood' Propaganda Model." This is the report I mentioned at the beginning of the article—the one that shows up first when you search “firehosing.” Given its prominence in search results and discussions around "firehosing," I wanted to understand the basis of its claims.

As I read through the report, I noticed a lack of concrete evidence supporting what they were claiming. The authors frequently used tentative language—phrases like "possible explanations," "might contribute," and "potential to be highly effective"—without providing substantial data to back up their claims about Russian propaganda.

For example, the report states:

RT, formerly Russia Today, is one of Russia's primary multimedia news providers with a budget of more than $300 million per year. It broadcasts in English, French, German, Spanish, Russian, and several Eastern European languages. The channel is particularly popular online, where it claims more than a billion page views. If true, that would make it the most watched news source on the Internet.

The phrase "if true" suggests that the authors didn't even verify this claim, raising questions about the thoroughness of their research.

Additionally, the report mentions:

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reports that there are thousands of fake accounts on Twitter, Facebook, LiveJournal, and Vkontakte maintained by Russians.

This claim relies on a secondary source without providing concrete evidence or data to substantiate the number of fake accounts or their impact. The lack of direct evidence or detailed analysis left me questioning the validity of these pretty substantial assertions.

The report leans way too much on psychological theories to explain why such propaganda might be effective, citing experimental research to suggest that high-volume and multichannel messaging can be persuasive. For instance, it states:

Multiple sources are more persuasive than a single source, especially if those sources contain different arguments that point to the same conclusion. People assume that information from multiple sources is likely to be based on different perspectives and is thus worth greater consideration.

While these may very well be valid psychological concepts, the report doesn't provide concrete instances where Russia has employed these tactics to measurable effect. It stops short of demonstrating direct causation or offering specific examples of these strategies in action.

Moreover, the report asserts:

Russian propaganda makes no commitment to objective reality.

And:

Russian propaganda has relied on manufactured evidence.

Yet, it doesn't offer detailed examples of such manufactured evidence or explain how this differs from propaganda techniques used by other nations. The assertions are broad and lack the specificity needed to substantiate such claims exclusively about Russia.

It felt as though the report was describing general propaganda techniques—high-volume messaging, rapid dissemination, lack of commitment to objective reality—but slapping a "Made in Russia" sticker on them, without acknowledging that these methods aren't unique to any one nation. The reliance on speculative language and absence of concrete evidence made me question the objectivity of the report.

I began to wonder—is the report inadvertently engaging in the very tactics it describes? By repeatedly associating these propaganda techniques with Russia, without robust evidence, it could be shaping perceptions through repetition and authority. It felt like I was being bashed over the head with someone's opinion and told it was fact. This approach might contribute to a one-sided narrative, potentially influencing readers to accept these claims without critical examination.

By highlighting these concerns, it becomes evident that critical thinking is essential when engaging with such reports. It's important to scrutinise sources, dig deeper, and consider multiple perspectives to get a well-rounded understanding of complex issues like propaganda and information warfare.

The RAND report's approach raises important questions about how narratives are constructed and the potential for projection in attributing certain behaviours to others. By emphasising Russia's use of propaganda techniques without robust evidence, the report might be engaging in the very tactics it critiques.

What are the potential implications from all this?

Projection—No, You're Using Tactics!

The report may be projecting the use of widespread propaganda techniques onto Russia, possibly diverting attention from similar practices employed by other nations, including the U.S.

This projection can serve to deflect scrutiny from one's own methods of information dissemination and control.

The Shape of Public Perception

By repeatedly associating "firehosing" with Russia, the report influences readers to link the term—and its negative connotations—primarily with a specific country.

This can contribute to a one-sided narrative that overlooks the complexity of global information warfare.

Biases Are Reinforced

The lack of concrete evidence and reliance on speculative language can reinforce existing biases and stereotypes, rather than fostering a nuanced understanding of propaganda.

Trust, Eroded, Our Shopping Trolley, Gone

When authoritative sources present unsubstantiated claims, it can erode public trust in institutions and reports, making it harder to discern credible information in the future.

By critically analysing the report, we recognise the importance of examining our own practices and being cautious of how projection can warp our understanding of others. It's essential to strive for objectivity and solid evidence when discussing topics as significant as propaganda, to avoid perpetuating misinformation or biased narratives.

Historically Broad, the Usage of "Firehosing"

First came the Fire Hose

The fire hose was invented in the middle of the 19th century—for those of you like me who have to stop and think about this century nonsense, that means around 1850. In the late 1860s, things really started to heat up, er, I mean cool down, on account of all the water and such. Prior to fire hoses being invented, these poor saps were lugging around buckets and pumping water by hand.7

Fire hoses, as most of you are probably aware, at least in this day and age, shoot out water with a lot of pressure—a lot of water in a short amount of time. Water beats fire. Anyone who's played Pokémon can attest.

Firehosiery

Somewhere between the 1850s and the 2000s (or probably before), some smart alec thought it'd be a good idea to join the two words in holy matrimony. This then doubled the utility of the term, "firehose" or umm, "fire hose." In no time flat, people were using it all over the place. It was a madhouse that only a good firehose or fire hose could stop. Through all the chaos, the core meaning remained the same—a whole lot of stuff in a short amount of time.

It's used in physics8

In Academia9

and corporate environments10

as well as in IT and cybersecurity and Amazon's Kinesis Data Firehose (which has been slightly rebranded). Let's also not forget Twitter's Firehose API.

11

As you can see, the term "firehose," or "firehosing" has been used in many different contexts over a number of decades to describe, for all intents and purposes, a state of excessive information flow.

Irony and Projection in Propaganda Narratives

So why then, when you search the term "firehosing" online, is the first result about Russia?

Irony, probably.12

Perhaps focusing on another nation's use of propaganda serves as a convenient distraction from similar practices closer to home. By associating "firehosing" predominantly with Russia, are we projecting our own methods onto others?

Conclusion

In examining the history and usage of "firehosing," it's clear that the term encompasses far more than its recent associations suggest. Propaganda, whether positive or negative, truthful or deceptive, remains a powerful tool. By critically assessing the information we receive and acknowledging the nuances of influence, we can navigate the deluge with a clearer perspective.

As we're bombarded with waves of information every day, sharpening our critical thinking isn't just helpful—it's absolutely crucial. The way terms like "firehosing" are framed and the stories built around them can seriously shape how we see things.

Don't just swallow information whole. Think about who's telling you this stuff and why.

Ask yourself—what's their agenda? Do they have evidence to back up their claims?

Don't get stuck in a bubble. Seek out different perspectives, especially from places you don't usually check out.

Tuning into international media, independent journalists, and expert analyses can give you a more well-rounded view.

Words carry weight. The way events or ideas are described can nudge your perceptions in subtle ways.

Consider whether terms are being used to inform you or to persuade you.

We all have our own preconceptions, and they can colour how we interpret information.

Aim for objectivity by staying open to ideas that challenge your views.

Chat with others about these topics. Sharing insights and hashing out different viewpoints can deepen your understanding and reveal nuances you might've missed. Most importantly, don't be afraid to have actual discussions! People seem to be allergic to it, and the only antidote is to stop being a dope and engage instead of all the fallacious nonsense we see most everywhere online.

By embracing critical thinking and staying aware of how narratives are crafted, we can navigate the craziness of the information age more effectively. It's not about distrust—it's about fostering a healthy scepticism that pushes us to seek the truth beyond the surface-level stuff.

That's it for now.

As always,

Good luck,

Stay safe, and

Be well.

See ya!

Subscribe now

Share

Share Thirteenth Strike

Leave a comment

Get more from Braeden in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app