Intercontinental Brigading - Part XIII - Censorship by All Means Available in a Continent So Far Away, as 'Secure' (Restricted, Restriction by Microsoft) Boot Has a Crisis of Legitimacy
Yesterday morning at 07:41 (AM) the High Court received - via Special Delivery (Royal Mail Special Delivery Guaranteed 1pm™) - input it had asked for from my wife and I (related to this series, Part II will follow much later); it is about the scope and reach of the censorship Garrett is pursuing at a time when "Certificates" and "Authorities" are shown to be mostly overhyped hooey rather than a serious pursuit of real security; it's about America controlling sites and computers everywhere. Today we discuss what else is at stake. There may be an impending escalation to the Court of Appeal for technical reasons.
Previous Parts:
In some ways, we are glad about the recent CA blunder. We are not relieved, however, to see people of unsavoury interest groups using it to scapegoat Indian IT.
For those who did not pay attention, a lot of the assumptions (or foolish premises) of the CA pushers got shredded to pieces. Lots of software, e.g. Tor Browser, Istio and tons more, needed to issue emergency "fixes" (without tackling the underlying, core issue; centralised CAs are designed to give control over users, not to actually secure users from actual threats). We'll spare discussions about PHP as that's inherently different from so-called 'Secure' (Restricted) Boot.
The Microsoft employees who are pushing this into Linux right now have just had their blogs cracked (hello, PHP) because they don't understand security. When it started they began preaching about 'security' and other times - or over time - it became about rootkits, DRM, "attestation", and killswitches. James Bottomley (Microsoft) openly boasts about TPMs while shoehorning 'Secure' (Restricted) Boot - controlled by his employer - into Linux. Then we have Garrett and his collaborators (from Microsoft) on lawfare. Yes, also from Microsoft.
Earlier this year Garrett openly confessed that while working on 'Secure' (Restricted) Boot he was getting drunk with Microsoft employees. Good times, eh?
Earlier this month, in another site, I explained that these Americans who take on debt already use up resources in the UK's High Court (at least 9 judges so far, including two chief judges and two Masters) at the expense of a European couple, the British taxpayers, and the Court (also local taxpayers, not Americans). This lawfare is subsidised by third parties which are hostile to the interests of our country.
Garrett did not work alone. It is abundantly clear, based on public disclosures by his friends and himself (he's like a "front" to them). He and his hired guns repeatedly lied to several High Court judges (that's perjury as far as I'm aware) about his connections to Graveley from Microsoft (also the funding) and less than a month ago he sent me a threatening letter to my doorstep. It was about Lozza, who tried to take down 'Garrett articles' only days after we had sued him in September 2024 [1, 2] (Lozza and Garrett still talk to each other in public about ways to achieve this). It's the collective that we call the GGG brigade ("Restricted Boot" Garrett, "Microsoft Plagiarism" Graveley & "Gas The Jews" Lozza). They work together and they try their best to take down the site, remove articles, even put my wife in prison (they target her more than they target me because they know I am thick-skinned). I get sent illegal communications from burner accounts.
Why did all this start? Because in 2012 I began talking against Microsoft-controlled Restricted Boot. I did not name anybody. Garrett came to Techrights to heckle the messenger, so I reacted (in my own platform, where he had left the negative feedback).
Now we see much of the same in Web and Net CAs. A lot of people who were heckled for pointing out inherent, not-at-all-unavoidable trouble are vindicated and fake 'security' non-professionals eat crow. Their faked credentials show they were more like GAFAM 'cultists', not Computer Scientists. They memorised acronyms and buzzwords of NSA-connected vendors in order to sound witty. Like many people rebranded as "data scientist" and then "AI expert" we have geneticists who magically became "security experts". What an incredible career shift, right? Maybe tomorrow I can pretend to be a heart surgeon (I had a friend at the gym who actually lied to people about that) because I'm a "doctor".
Anyway, Garrett is not successful or reputable (ask his spouse if you don't believe me), he's an insistent faker who intimidates critics or people who question his credentials, motivations, and so on. He would definitely be evicted if not for third parties (there may also be a CFA). More than 2 years later he continues to rely on his Microsoft litigation buddy (double-dipping the Court's docket), who has no income sources. I should mention that his Microsoft ally, "The Serial Strangler", is nowadays (this month) attempting "trial by phone calls" (behind the back of the other side). When you strangle women and tell them to kill themselves you'd not obey laws anywhere, would you? It is truly grotesque. They also lie about my parcels, they try to mislead the Court, but the clerks should be smart enough to spot that.
This is what one gets for opposing plagiarism by Microsoft, back doors of Microsoft, and so on.
They lie to the High Court (in another continent), they breach Civil Procedure Rules every single year, and somehow the problem is the person who is interested in computer sciences/disciplines, computer security included, and who protects his wife and other women who suffered violence.
That they even go after my relatives is extra ugly. That really says a lot about this company (Microsoft) and solicitors eating from its palm. █