is privacy possible online? how do i know that CIA niggers didn't

>>62394950
people still are clueless about their own bodies when it comes to the effects of diet at a microscopic level, and you expect to be in control of a system you didnt 100% assemble and fabricate from the basic raw materials yourself?

The only way to be safe online is to have an airgapped sbc for encrypting and signing your data, you must transmit the data (strictly the encrypted data) using an insulated rs232 connector to a PC which is connected to the internet. if your computer has been online, or uses above a certain wattage, assume all data is compromised.

If your KDF takes less than 20 seconds to run, CIA niggers can read your data.

TELL ME YOU FUCKING TECHNIGGERS

>>62394950
No its impossible to have 100% privacy.
You didn't make the OS.
You most likely don't hide your internet activity from your ISP.
You have no idea what the CIA is capable of.

>>62395417
what if
the computer has no connection to your real world identity
the os is doesn't matter
i connect to the mainnet from a crosspersonal subnet
the cia are soft faggots

>>62395417
The alphabet boys' capabilities are vastly overrated. The CIA is still just a government organization, and moves slow as fuck. Idiots work there.

Shouldn't you be more concerned about the FBI?

>>62394950
Is there anyway to track a live gmail account for free? I just got turned over and need to find the shit responsible.

>>62394950
Well for starters you can assume the government wouldn't put their backdoors etc in ring 0 but rather ring -2