Barrett Brown - Hacktivist, Narcissist, Anonymous

From Anarchy Tube

How does someone introduce Barrett Brown? That's a really tough one because the personal, professional, and political stories play off each other in numerous ways. I would have to say that first of all, Barrett Brown is one of too few to survive a very intense era of anti-authoritarian activism and state repression. In addition, Brown is a survivor of the innumerable disappointments that I feel have had a big impact on the way things are now. He is someone who has comprehended the contemporary moment and has participated in its unfolding with the skills at his disposal and he is someone who has paid a big price for taking those risks. Naturally, his recently released book, "My Glorious Defeats: Hacktivist, Narcissist, Anonymous: A Memoir of Barrett Brown" is an excellent insight into what I just said and though I'm only on Chapter 5, it has been an enjoyable read.

One of the things that Barrett is well-know for is his relationship with Anonymous at the peak of their Hacktivist period. That's what we're going to be focusing on, along with where Anonymous has gone from there.

READ (or LISTEN) to Barrett's new book, "My Glorious Defests: Hacktivist, Narcissist, Anonymous: A Memoir":
https://a.co/d/4tIPo6l

Wikipedia Page for Barrett Brown:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_Brown

The New York Time "This Hacker’s Story Is Deranged, Hyperbolic and True":
https://archive.ph/h6zfO

New York Mag "The Ballad of Barrett Brown":
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/the-ballad-of-barrett-brown.html

DON'T FORGET TO LIKE, SUBSCRIBE, AND SHARE!

Become a Patreon Patron:
https://www.patreon.com/cyberdandy

Comments

EmmaAintDead Tue, 07/16/2024 - 17:34

One of the biggest idiots I've ever had the displeasure of being associated with. I'm genuinely shocked Barrett could step away from fedjacketing everyone he encounters on Twitter via hour long rambling front-camera videos for long enough to cobble a book together. Not for nothing, but the accolades showered on Barrett here also perfectly describe Weev, the full fledged actual fascist, with the added bonus that weev actually did half the shit barrett claims credit for.

At the end of the day, he's a grifter none different than CommanderX or Gregg. He's just jelly he's not getting that Netflix money like good ol marblecake housh.

Anyway, best of luck with projpm, barrett. It'll gain traction any. day. now.

If you'd like someone who was there for all the Cool Anon Times and is actually down with circle-A shit, give props to Fuxnet and Jeremy Hammond. This one ain't it.

lumpy (not verified) Tue, 07/16/2024 - 18:55

In reply to by EmmaAintDead

damn! emma's got dirt, i have so many questions but this guy definitely talks like a textbook narcissist. all they do is crank out compulsive self aggrandizement so it makes writing easier, fills a book in no time

EmmaAintDead Tue, 07/16/2024 - 19:37

In reply to by lumpy (not verified)

Honestly I do, but just given this interview I don't think I need any to prove my point. I'm not sure if cyberdandy was just excited to get a big name in anonymous on for an interview but I'm honestly a bit disappointed that claims like "the fbi and weev run DDoSecrets with Neil rahauser" didn't get any push back let alone a hearty laugh and the Skype call ended around effect.

cyberdandy Tue, 07/16/2024 - 21:18

In reply to by EmmaAintDead

I was very excited to have Barrett Brown on the show because I’ve enjoyed what I’ve seen of him over the past several years and his book has been good so far. I don’t know the subject matter all too well. I barely know what DDoSecrets is and it’s because I have been reading this book (that I’m about a chapter into): https://hacksandleaks.com/

Generally, I don’t have people come on my show that I’ll have much pushback for anyway. I try to be a promoter more than a critic. Something I think should be more common.

Anyway, whatever the issue is with Barrett Brown, it doesn’t seem like I know enough to understand it. I’d happily interview others who are focused on the security, transparency, cypherpunk, whatever stuff.

EmmaAintDead Tue, 07/16/2024 - 23:19

In reply to by cyberdandy

"Generally, I don’t have people come on my show that I’ll have much pushback for anyway. I try to be a promoter more than a critic. Something I think should be more common."

I think that's an admirable quality and tends to make for entertaining and informative conversations, I've enjoyed a number that you've put out and intend to continue doing so. You're genuinely a treat to listen to and I'm a little bummed with myself that my first interaction with you (to my knowledge) is this, I apologize for that.

That said, Barrett took advantage of that social grace in this interview and fedjacketed about a half a dozen people directly by name and quite a few more by insinuation/association, regurgitated one of his tired lines that Emma Best (of DDoSecrets) is faking being trans in order to take advantage of a name change to hide their nonexistent past as a federal intelligence operative, repeatedly tried to draw direct ties between net privacy and open source freedoms activists who have publicly disagreed with him to full blown nazis, and suggested creating a registry of FBI assets according to his definition of the term which is so broad that it would likely include you if you were to have offered any push back on any of that. A number of the journalists he was referring to as FBI assets regarding their relationship to the "modern anonymous" (a ridiculous concept, anonymous is deader than a doornail and has been for the better part of a decade) are tech beat journalists he has publicly "given notice" to because they gave interviews to Kirtaner after the Freedom Convoy and Truth Social breaches or contributing researchers for the Netflix documentary on anonymous recently released which also featured Kirtaner. Kirtaner isn't exactly a sympathetic character or in line with anarchists as such, but he is currently absolutely getting fucked by the very same agency that Barrett is publicly accusing him and his cohort of being on the payroll. It doesn't sit right with me to let it go unchallenged and I'm not trying to put the onus of challenging it on you, I'm just making sure there's some kind of documented refuting of the baseless namedragging he's been doing. He's lost credibility with the overwhelming - and I mean OVERWHELMING - majority of the netsec and tech scene for his years-long targeted slander campaigns against individuals he has personal beef with that never EVER yield any actual documentation of the accusation.

That all said, I got a bit of a chuckle when he was insistent that anyone who dismisses his accusations as "drama" is doing the Fed's work for them. Awfully convenient position for him specifically to hold.

cyberdandy Wed, 07/17/2024 - 12:31

In reply to by EmmaAintDead

These seem like fair points. I read the other comment too. I don’t have much else to respond with at the moment but didn’t want you to think I ignored this.

anon (not verified) Wed, 07/17/2024 - 09:07

In reply to by EmmaAintDead

Barrett is fucking awesome. You're probably either someone who didn't like when Barrett pointed out Julian's Trump connection or you're a scumbag like Andy Ngo still trying to go after Barrett because he walks the walk of an anti-cop, anti-authoritarian, anti-fascist.

There's a reason peeps like Jeremy are still cool with Barrett. You should back up your assertions but you're full of shit so you won't.

The moderators should really stop one-siding gossip and deleting comments that oppose the bullshit.

Fuck off EmmaAintDead.

anon (not verified) Wed, 07/17/2024 - 09:23

In reply to by anon (not verified)

I'm getting that establishment types get ridiculously irate like hypermoralist bishops of the old days in regards to whistleblowers when they're targeting their own collective capitalist ass-sets, instead of comparable Russian capitalist assets. Wonder whyyyy???

lumpy (not verified) Wed, 07/17/2024 - 09:23

In reply to by anon (not verified)

you didn't address the fedjacketing? those would be easily verifiable assertions...

i don't really have a position but to me, it looks like you ignored the main point emma made? and you're trying to redirect to ad hominem? does this guy Brown, throw out tons of accusations publicly?

anon (not verified) Wed, 07/17/2024 - 09:39

In reply to by lumpy (not verified)

"you didn't address the fedjacketing? "

Neither did EmmaAintDead. There was no substance to the assertion. Barrett called out some people who were feds and fed assets. Some of them happened to be beloved in certain communities that EmmaAintDead apparently holds dear so of course that must mean Barrett is lying (he's not).

You should really read more slowly, lumpy. He even has a Wikipedia page if you have a short attention span.

EmmaAintDead Wed, 07/17/2024 - 11:01

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Proving a negative, etc. Barrett called out precisely one person who has demonstrably worked with the feds (Neil R) and labeled completely unrelated people fbi assets based on that. Dozens of people have been labeled feds simply for asking for evidence of his accusations, and he's never once actually provided it. His projpm initiative was largely a wiki catalog of screenshots of people saying mean things about barrett and hotlinks to the entry for Peter Thiel without any actual connection being provided. The reason it failed is because the only other person involved at the admin level died and that person was the only one keeping it from being a Barrett Brown Battle Blog.

Emma Best also has a Wikipedia page, it's here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Best_(journalist) and you can see Barrett even gets a mention under their personal life tab. With citation.

As stated in my original post, I have been associated with Barrett to varying degrees over the past decade and a half. This is not an issue I'm simply reading up on or hearing about now and making my first opinions known. This is a continuation of a very long pattern of trying to bury those who disagree with him with accusations of collusion with the state, specifically the FBI. Luckily, the sec and open source people have had a much longer exposure to him than the anarchists and his word carries no weight whatsoever in those circles. It's become a meme to say things like "CITATION NEEDED BB" in response to anyone making an accusations because of how prevalent baseless claims are from BB himself. I can't speak for journalists as I'm not one and I'm not in with them in any intimate sense, but of the handful that I've spoken with over the past 5 years regarding the "resurrection of anonymous" (again, a ridiculous notion) none of them seemed particularly impressed with him either.

Anyway, if you'd like to follow Barrett's advice given in this interview on researching people you encounter in this field, feel free to look up how many accusations of FBI collusion I've made toward people in this area or how I speak to/about/with others who were active when I was. I'm easy to look up. I'm not simping for anyone or acting in any of their defense on a personality or friendship level. Apply the same barrett-given advice to barrett and you'll see years of desperate accusations toward absolute strangers. Red string connecting anyone and everyone to the feds with a big field of question marks between them. It's rotten stuff. Arm waving panic baiting whenever anyone says "yeah I'm gonna have to see some kind of documentation to believe this person is a fed." It's been the same list of names that everyone is working for since 2014.

For a journalist who did sometimes entertaining stickam chats and literally nothing else, it's astounding to me that he's being given so much credibility based on so little evidence. The basis for believing any of the people he's mentioned are feds is "because barrett said they were". He didn't deserve to go to prison, he did, and we all went to bat for him. The rest of the BB timeline has been tarnished by paranoid drug-fuelled attentionseeking and rapidly deteriorating relationships with anyone he's ever worked with. The rumors of Barrett's success have been greatly exaggerated.

anon (not verified) Wed, 07/17/2024 - 09:52

In reply to by lumpy (not verified)

Also, lumpy. Why is it me who you accuse of redirecting to ad hominem when EmmaAintDead's opening fucking sentence is "[Barret is] One of the biggest idiots" and writes a substanceless series of comments because Barrett went after (with evidence) feds and fed assets?

Was it because I said "fuck off" or because I drew a comparison between the two loudest camps who oppose or have turned on Barrett (when they previous loved him and loved his journalism, etc).

This is bigger than stupid gossip and you (the collective you) should really educate yourself on matter before you go adding to the noise or sharing your expert opinion. This is a truism for every fucking person on the internet, it seems.

actual lumpy (not verified) Wed, 07/17/2024 - 10:20

In reply to by anon (not verified)

i said i don't have a position, emma used ad hominem AND made actual criticisms which would need verification, true.

you didn't even manage that. but you're right, i don't have any info about any of this. brown's wikipedia page isn't entirely positive. the guy practically self describes as having a paranoid, self aggrandizing, persecution complex tho?! anyway, i'm saying i don't know shit about this, as explicitly as i can

anon (not verified) Tue, 07/16/2024 - 20:44

Not a fan of BB & pretty critical of the politics of Anon/LulzSec but would really appreciate a review of the collective experience of trying to radicalize hacktivism, dealing with the resulting repression, & scho on

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
X
s
1
p
k
#
G
6
Enter the code without spaces.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.