アノニマスの見解 Ep.21: デジタル庁の夜明け

Hello internet. And welcome back to ANONYMOUS NO KENKAI.

And how are you all enjoying 2021? With special guest appearances by two of the four horsemen…

Thankfully, Japan has managed to avoid some of the worst effects… so far, at least. There aren’t any shortages of fuel or food, and riots aren’t engulfing our cities. To the untrained observer, the worst of Japan’s current worries are wasteful spending on the Olympics and the incompetent bungling of an online vaccine reservation system.

But there’s a bigger threat lurking on the horizon, disguising itself under a layer of boring paperwork and government bureaucracy. The subject of today’s video…the Digital Agency. We’ve mentioned it before, but it deserves its own video for the threat it poses. Because the Digital Agency has the potential to centralize too much government power in too few hands, creating an unaccountable surveillance state. Or even worse, it could covertly place this surveillance apparatus under the control of multinational IT corporations.

But let’s begin with some background. Many in Japan have probably heard of the Digital Agency by now, if not the slogan they use to promote themselves… “Government as a Startup”. Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga made it a central policy of his administration in 2020, with the basic direction decided in November last year. The Agency is set to begin operations on September 1st 2021.
とはいえ、まずは背景についての解説から始めましょう。今まで「デジタル庁」というこれから新設される省庁名について、…もしくはここのキャッチコピーである「Government as a Startup」をお聞きになったことがあるでしょう。2020年に菅総理大臣はデジタル庁を看板政策にしました。そして去年の11月に基本的方向性が定まりました。デジタル庁は今年の9月1日に発足します。

The Digital Agency will be responsible for the administration of government IT on the national as well as the local level, creating a unified standard to replace the current silo approach where each ministry or local government create their own (sometimes mutually incompatible) systems in isolation. To do this, the Agency will have (or at least appears to have) strong supervisory authority over the IT budget and planning for other parts of government.

The Digital Agency will also be in charge of the “digital transformation” of Japan… where the penetration of information technology “changes people’s lives for the better in every way”. To this end, the Agency is to be given control of the MyNumber system from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and will push to distribute the unpopular MyNumber Card to almost all citizens by the end of 2022.
デジタル庁はさらに、日本のDX(デジタル・トランスフォーメーション)をという分野を担当します…「 ITの浸透が、人々の生活をあらゆる面でより良い方向に変化させる」という概念ですね。そのために、マイナンバーの所管は総務省からデジタル庁の一元的な体制に移行し、2022年度末には全国民にマイナンバーカードが隅々まで行き渡ることを目指すと言われています。

All of these decisions have been made with a speed uncharacteristic of the Japanese government. Only six months after the Agency’s direction was decided, six new bills related its establishment and operation were enacted. Takuya Hirai, current Minister for Digital Reform and future head of the Digital Agency itself, commented that he was surprised at the “unusual speed” of these decisions.

So far this isn’t particularly alarming, though. The government is good at setting up agencies and committees, and most of the time they end up mired in red tape and incompetence. But unfortunately, the story doesn’t end there.

As future head of the Digital Agency, Takuya Hirai had a history with the private sector before his career in politics started. He worked in Japan’s famous (or infamous) advertising agency Dentsu for six years, then worked as the president of “Nishinippon Broadcasting Company”, a regional TV and radio company, for 12 years.

During his political career, he has also been a strong proponent of modernization and digitization. In 2013, he was instrumental in lifting a government ban on using the internet for election campaigning, as well as pushing for other IT and cyber-security related laws.

His history in the private sector may have an influency on his plans to staff the Digital Agency. Of the 500 planned staff, around 100 are to be recruited from private sector IT companies. Which companies exactly is still unknown, but the Agency will operate a “revolving door” policy, where staff move back and forth between the private sector, national government, and local government positions.

So why is this a problem? Are we against modernizing or streamlining government services? Not exactly. It’s true that coordinating policy between different Ministries and levels of government would make it faster and easier to manage the day-to-day bureaucracy of Japan. Unfortunately, this idea also has many drawbacks, most of which the government of Japan either doesn’t care about, or doesn’t want you to think about.

For one, the “digital transformation” of government bureaucracy on every level means that all government paperwork would be stored in “the cloud”…which is to say, government computers that are not only perpetually online, but organized using a single unified system. This creates a single target for attackers to aim at, and one security vulnerability could potentially expose the personal, financial, and medical information of every Japanese citizen to both criminals and foreign governments.

In the past few months alone, multiple failures or breaches of government cybersecurity have made headlines. The Ministry of Defense’s poorly managed vaccine reservation system was found to be rife with vulnerabilities, and unauthorized access to a software tool designed by Fujitsu lead to data leaks from Japan’s national cybersecurity center, two ministries, the Narita International Airport Corp, and the Tokyo Olympic organizing committee.

Given this litany of failure, it seems obvious that the government is incapable of securing the data it already has. Is it really wise, then, to increase the amount of data they hold, or to centralize the way they hold it? When each part of government manages its own IT systems, at least the damage of a single vulnerability is contained to that system. The unified approach espoused by the Digital Agency would allow a single vulnerability to potentially affect the entire country. And when leaked personal information exposes Japanese citizens to fraud, crime, or worse, it doesn’t seem likely that the government will give them any assistance defending themselves, or compensate them for any damage.

But worse than incompetence is malice. The Digital Agency creates vast potential for both the government and private corporations to abuse the information under their control.

The centralization of all government IT systems makes the creation of Chinese style surveillance easier than ever. The “strong supervisory authority” granted to the Digital Agency would allow it access to systems held by other parts of government. One of these may be the National Police Agency or NPA.

In 2013, the NPA was given access to “XKEYSCORE” by the American NSA. XKEYSCORE is a program that collects and analyzes global internet data. Given that the jurisdiction of the NPA is largely domestic, it seems reasonable to assume they’re using XKEYSCORE to monitor the online communication of Japanese citizens.

In 2019, the NPA acquired blockchain surveillance technology to monitor transactions of Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other popular cryptocurrencies.

As IT-based systems, it seems reasonable to assume that the Digital Agency will have some level of access to both systems. And since the Digital Agency operates at the Cabinet level, and answers directly to the Prime Minister, national cybersecurity is hardly outside their jurisdiction.

The Digital Agency’s control over the MyNumber System also means it has access to records from the Ministry of Finance, given the connections to banking information and taxation.

Access to the surveillance powers of XKEYSCORE and blockchain surveillance from the NPA and financial information via MyNumber would allow to Digital Agency to not only collect all this information under one roof, but potentially to aggregate it. Functionally speaking, this is a Panopticon, where every aspect of a citizen’s life is monitored and recorded. Even if the current government doesn’t want to abuse this power, no barrier exists to prevent future administrations from doing so.

But the inclusion of the private sector only makes matters worse. Modern internet companies use surveillance as a source of profit. Google and Facebook are the most famous foreign examples of this, but Japanese IT companies are no different. The data collected under the Digital Agency is valuable to these businesses, and the “revolving door” policy for allowing private sector staff to easily enter and exit government positions creates the potential for backdoor access to this data, and inappropriate relationships with the government staff tasked with guarding it.

Even though only Japanese citizens are allowed to work for government, a Japanese citizen who moves between the Digital Agency and a foreign IT corporation creates a security threat. Limiting this to domestic corporations only doesn’t necessarily reduce the threat either. “Merchants have no country”, as the saying goes. Every company wants money, and valuable data acquired by a Japanese business can still be sold or traded overseas.

But the threat of the private sector isn’t limited to what they can take away from the Digital Agency, but also what they can bring into it. J.Score, for example, is a private company that gathers data on its users to assign them an “AI Score” which can offers rewards or financial lending…worryingly similar to systems like those created by Alibaba or Tencent in China.

J.Score is a joint venture by Mizuho Group and Softbank, two Japanese companies. Staff rotating between those companies and the Digital Agency would make it much easier to incorporate J.Score into a national Social Credit system like China’s. Remember, China initially authorized private companies to trial Social Credit as business ventures before adopting those same systems as a method of population control. There’s no reason to believe the same thing can’t happen to Japan.

As we’ve amply demonstrated, the potential harms of the Digital Agency far outweight any benefits they offer. But of course, this leads us to the question… what can we do about it?

Sadly, when the government is involved, there’s often little we can do to stop it. The Digital Agency will begin operations on September 1st, no matter what the citizens of Japan think or say. And refusing to give information to the government would not only make one’s life difficult, but in many cases is actually illegal.

So if our information is going to be stored in a government cloud where every hacker and corporation will steal it anyway, the very least we can do is attempt to minimize the amount of information they have.

The ability for XKEYSCORE to datamine your communications can be limited by using onion routing software like Tor or Lokinet, or a trusted VPN for daily internet use. On top of that, using software the incorporates End-to-End Encryption without requiring personal information also limits what information can be collected on you. Messenger applications like Session or the Matrix Protocol are good choices here, while mainstream applications like LINE or Facebook Messenger should be avoided at all costs. Software like OnionShare also allows short-term communication and data sharing with greater privacy and anonymity.

For social media and video, remember that companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Google are eager partners in surveillance around the world, including Japan. Using alternatives like Odysee, or federated systems like Pleroma and PeerTube on the Fediverse makes monitoring your online activity a little more difficult.

Operating Systems are no less guilty of cooperating with surveillance. While control over hardware is difficult for most people, there are options for control over software. Using Linux on PC, and either Lineage or Graphene on Android devices makes automated surveillance of your device more difficult. iPhone and Mac users… sadly, there’s little good news for you. You can choose to trust Apple if you wish, but otherwise you might want to look into new hardware.

On the financial side, avoid Cashless systems like PayPay at all costs. No matter how convenient they are, they record and share data on every transaction you make, and in the future they could be used to restrict your ability to spend your own money. Using physical cash for day to day transactions is still the most private way to do business. As long as cash remains popular and well circulated, businesses will be more hesitant to refuse it, and the government will have more difficulty trying to phase it out. India’s disastrous attempt at demonetization in 2016 failed in large part because cash remained so popular among so many. The more we insist on using cash, the harder it is for the government to get rid of it.

To escape blockchain surveillance, use privacy-respecting cryptocurrencies like Monero, Oxen, ZCash, or others. Rather conveniently, Japanese crypto exchanges were pressured into delisting these coins years ago. But fortunately, the decentralized exchange Bisq is available in Japanese. Buying Bitcoin or Ethereum with Japanese yen, and then converting it into privacy coins via Bisq is one path to restoring financial privacy in online, electronic payments.

Lastly, remember that not everybody in Japan is ready or willing to escape the systems of surveillance that are being created. The majority of Japanese citizens either don’t know, or don’t care about the threat of surveillance, and that thought alone makes it easy to fall into despair. But even if only 1% of Japan cares enough to actually do something, that can still be a community if we pull together and support each other.

We may be a small fraction of society, but using and sharing tools that allow us to secure our freedom and privacy creates a viable alternative to the Surveillance State being built by governments and corporations. And when those systems of control become too unbearable for the majority to tolerate any longer, we’ll be ready to grow and push back against the threat of the Digital Agency.

This was ANONYMOUS NO KENKAI… and until next time, MACHIUKENASAI.
これはアノニマスの見解でした… そして次回まで、待ち受けなさい。


アノニマスの見解 Ep.20: 「グレート・リセット」を防ぎ止めよう

Hello everyone. And welcome back to ANONYMOUS NO KENKAI.

The year 2020 is over, and a new year has begun. And as many people have come to realize, our problems don’t go away just by making a number increase. If anything, they’ve probably gotten worse. And promise to grow worse yet.

Of these problems, one of the biggest might be the (completely justified) loss of faith in mainstream institutions… particularly news media. To anybody paying attention, mainstream media has always been biased propaganda, of course. But over the last few years they’ve been doing a remarkably bad job of hiding it… to the point where even the common person in the street is starting to notice. And the vacuum created by this loss of faith is, unfortunately, filled by opportunists and lunatics in equal measure.

Now, I’m not saying this is necessarily by design… but it does result in a fog-of-war effect with regards to information online. Every nugget of truth is buried beneath overconfident speculation and straight-up lies. Hiding the truth in the age of information may not be easy, but a high enough noise-to-signal ratio makes it very difficult to verify, let alone find.

Case in point, the “Great Reset”. You may have heard the name before, but what exactly it is depends on who you ask. To some groups, it’s a plan by the World Economic Forum (WEF) to overthrow sovereign nations and install a communist one world government. To others, it’s a go-nowhere moonshot project cooked up at the Davos forum and doomed to failure. And to the media propagandists, it’s a fabricated conspiracy theory with no connection to reality.

Rather than argue over which version is correct, we’d like to cut through the fog of war entirely and examine the World Economic Forum’s own website on the Great Reset, where they make no effort to hide the fact that it does, in fact, exist and is being seriously considered by several world leaders. And as we’ll quickly see, even by the WEF’s own description, the Great Reset is a terrible idea that should never be realized.

The WEF begins by talking about the deep economic impact caused by COVID-19 lockdowns in countries across the world. These impacts are real, certainly… though largely caused by mandatory, government imposed closures enforced at virtual gunpoint. In the US and Europe in particular, businesses have been forcibly closed against the will of both owners and customers, and punishing fines have been given for the smallest infractions by the few businesses that are allowed to remain open. It’s interesting to note that a recent Standford study found “no clear benefits” to these lockdown measures… in other words, they did little to stop the spread of the Chinese virus. But they did, conveniently, bring about the “sharp economic downturn” that the WEF cites as justification for their plans.

“To achieve a better outcome, the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short”, says the WEF, “we need a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism”.

What specific changes does this “Great Reset” involve? The WEF is short on specifics, but big on lofty rhetoric. According to their site, they want to “steer the market towards fairer outcomes” and for governments to “promote more equitable outcomes”. What exactly does this mean? Your guess is as good as mine, but words like “fair” and “equitable outcomes” are certainly red flags. They may conjure positive images in most people’s minds, but they’re also very subjective. What constitutes “fair” is an opinion that requires a central authority to determine, and where necessary, adjust outcomes to create the kind of “fairness” it envisions. This is completely different from “equality of opportunity”, where people are given the same starting conditions but have to achieve results through their own effort.
「グレート・リセット」はどのような変革をもたらすのか? WEFは言葉遣いは仰々しいですが、その中身は乏しいです。サイトによれば、「より公平性のある市場を目指し舵取り」をしたい、そして世界中の政府に「より公平な結果を促進すること」をしてもらいたい。具体的に何をすべきかは我々の想像に任せられたらしい。でも「公平性」や「公平な結果」という言葉遣いは、一目して肯定的なイメージを呼び起こしますが、これらの言葉は実際には極めて主観的であり、危険信号と言えるでしょう。何が「公平」で何が「不公平」であるかどうかは、それぞれ異なる個人同士の意見の問題だし、事実上、決定するためには中央権力機構が必要です。その中央権力機構が決定する「公平な結果」を実現するには「強制的な調整」も必要です。これは「機会均等」、つまり同じ出発点から自分の努力で結果を得ることとは全く違います。

We are given a glimpse, however, of the WEF’s vision of a post-Great Reset world in the form of their marketing material. As far back as 2016, the WEF’s Twitter account posted an image declaring that in the year 2030 “you’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy”. Whether this was a suggestion, a promise, or a threat remains in question, since they deleted it last year after it started getting more negative attention than they wanted.
しかし、WEFは販促資料の形で彼らが部分的に「グレート・リセット後の世界観」を披露しました。かつて2016年に、WEFのTwitterアカウントはこの画像を投稿しました :「2030年、あなたの私有物は存在しなくなるだろう。だからこそ幸せになる」 これは提案なのか、約束なのか、それとも脅しなのか未だ不明ですが、その画像は去年に好ましくない形で注目を浴びた後、WEFが投稿を削除しました。

That image was based on a 2016 blog post by Ida Auken, a member of the Danish Parliament, who laid out her predictions for the year 2030 after the Great Reset was realized. These predictions include not owning your own clothing, sharing your house with random strangers, and living under round-the-clock total surveillance. Put simply, Ms. Auken’s idea of a perfect world was one where citizens owned no property at all, and only temporarily rented everything, including clothing and housing, from the government. Between “green energy” and recycling, Ms. Auken assumes there will never be a shortage of resources, and everybody can have whatever they want at any time.

After the post gained more attention, Ms. Auken attempted to clarify that this was not her utopia or dream of the future… but it’s very difficult not to read a tone of gushing praise in her predictions, nor the tone of condescension towards people who reject her fantasy world. As for the perpetual surveillance, her half-hearted concerns about it occupied a mere four sentences out of an 882-word essay. Hardly a balanced assessment of pros and cons.

It’s difficult to say whether Ms. Auken’s vision is representative of the WEF’s plans for the Great Reset, but the fact that her blog post made its way into their official PR material certainly suggests they approve of it. And that should be worrying for a number of reasons. No matter how utopian her vision of a post-scarcity future may be, it is built on the premise of stripping human beings of their agency. The reality of resource limits and the flaws of centrally planned economies means that inevitably, people will stop being able to get whatever they ask for, and will start being told what they can and can’t have… whether they’re happy with it or not. And when you own nothing, not even the clothes on your back or the roof over your head, this means your survival is completely dependent on whoever provides them to you.

The power to provide you with everything also necessarily means the power to deny you access to anything. Considering we already live in a world where mainstream political parties in the US or Australia are openly discussing denying banking or travel services to people for their political beliefs or medical decisions, it’s very believable to think a Great Reset government would happily do the same. Pair that with the total surveillance that Ms. Auken fully admits will exist, and you have the makings of a disturbing dystopia where you get to choose between total obedience to your benefactors, or being left a penniless outcast…similar to how Chinese Social Credit already functions.

Whatever the WEF’s real plans are for the Great Reset, it’s difficult to dismiss the whole thing as an impossible dream project. Leaders in the UK and Canada have already spoken in support of the idea, with terms like “build back better” as their slogan. And always insisting that COVID-19 has created a “small window of opportunity” that must be exploited quickly “before its too late”.

Rushed decision-making in a crisis is almost universally a bad idea, and sweeping changes to our society and economy should not be made by a small handful of oligarchs at the Davos Forum. Given that the WEF’s partners include Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and large firms with ties to the authoritarian Chinese government (to say nothing of other sinister, influential groups), there is almost no reason to believe the WEF’s ideas for a Great Reset will benefit the average citizen. Many of these partners are actively engaged in censorship and authoritarianism, and they will absolutely try to influence the shape of this new society to their own benefit. Far from Ida Auken’s utopia, the post-Great Reset world is more likely to be an Orwellian dystopia.
危機的状況の中で、重要なことに関して急いで決断してしまうと、物事は大抵劣悪な方向へ進むこととなります。また、とある判断が社会や経済にとって劇的な変化が伴う場合は、それをダボス会議に参加資格があるような、少数の選ばれたエリート達のみに任せるべきではありません。 WEFのパートナーの中にはグーグル、アマゾン、フェイスブック、アップル社、そして中国政府とつながりがある大企業(そして他の不吉な集団)も含まれていることも忘れないで欲しいのです。 WEFが計画する「グレート・リセット」という代物は一般の国民の利益になるわけがありません。そのパートナーの中には検閲や権威主義的な行為に賛同・参加する団体があまりにも多いのです。彼らはグレート・リセット計画に対し、自分たちの利益のために大いに影響を与えることでしょう。しかしそれは、イーダ・アウケン氏が夢想した理想的な世界とは程遠く、ジョージ・オーウェルが小説『1984年』で描いていたようなディストピアにすぎないでしょう。

Whether the Great Reset is a world domination plot or a foolish bureaucratic pipe dream, the threat it poses is the same. Sweeping changes on the scale the WEF proposes have all the same potential for damage either way. Rather than argue about the WEF’s intentions or loyalties, we’re better off focusing on our common area of interest: trying to prevent it from happening in the first place.
さて、一体グレート・リセットとは世界を支配するための計画なのでしょうか。それとも愚かな官僚支配主義的な妄想にすぎないのでしょうか。いずれにせよ、もたらされる危険は同じです。WEFが求めているような急激過ぎる変革は全世界の社会にダメージを及ぼす可能性が十分にあります。 WEFの本当の目的について議論するより、共通の目的に集中させる方が効果的です。

There’s no denying that problems exist in our societies and economies. And where an opportunity exists to make changes, it should be taken. But for these changes to be lasting and positive, they need to be created consensually by individuals and communities from the bottom up, not unilaterally by elites and oligarchs from the top down. The Great Reset is a bad idea, and the next time you see a wealthy executive or elite politician urging the need to “build back better”, you should remember that they don’t have your best interests at heart.

This was ANONYMOUS NO KENKAI… and until next time, MACHIUKE NASAI.


In the second year of the Reiwa Era, Japan is facing unprecendented change. Along with the arrival of a new Prime Minister, the nation is also being promised a new “Digital Agency” that will cut through the red tape of the old bureaucracy and modernize government for the betterment of its citizens.

But will it truly better the lives of citizens? Or will it only enhance the power of an already powerful government?

One of the policy goals of this “Digital Agency” is to expand the use of the already unpopular MyNumber system, which consolidates the personal and financial information of citizens into a single database under constant government surveillance.

In recent years, we have also seen the creation of Chinese-style Social Credit score systems such as “JScore”, which offer an inescapable Panopticon in exchange for a few paltry virtual points or discount coupons. Though JScore is a private venture, it is already known that Japan’s “Digital Agency” will lean heavily on the private sector. The possibility for the integration of JScore into the MyNumber system is not only possible, but likely.

Finally, the cooperation of certain Japanese agencies… most notably the Cabinet Intelligence Research Office and the Directorate for Signals Intelligence… with foreign intelligence agencies shows that not only is total surveillance of the Japanese internet happening, it is largely done at the behest of foreign powers.

The likelihood that all of these things to be integrated and expanded upon under the “Digital Agency” creates the potential for a total surveillance state under which the citizens’ right to privacy will be violated as never before.

That potential is already in the process of being realized. It was only one year ago that the Japanese Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications wanted to request Japanese ISPs to actively block websites under the pretense of stopping manga piracy. Now the Ministry has yet another “interesting proposal” to offer.

On May 23rd this year, Japanese wrestler Hana Kimura tragically ended her own life. The media was quick the seize upon the story, making hateful internet comments the sole reason for Hana Kimura’s passing. Popular anger was mobilized, and then exploited to lobby for amendments to laws governing the Disclosure of Sender Identification Information. These laws provide liability protection to service providers and online platforms when requested to disclose personal information of their users in response to lawsuits.
今年の5月23日に、女子プロレスラー木村 花さんは悲しいことに自ら命を絶ってしまいました。マスコミは早急にこの事件に付け込み、木村さんの自殺を全部オンライン中傷コメントのせいにしました。これを口実に世論を利用し、政府が発信者情報開示に関する法律への改正を働き掛けました。この法律は、情報の流通によって権利の侵害があった場合について、プロバイダーの損害賠償責任の制限そして発信者情報を開示する権利を定めます。

Under new proposals, internet service providers and platform operators would be requested to not only maintain logs of user IP addresses and timestamps of user activity, but also to disclose phone numbers used for Two-Factor Authentication. Lawyers in favor of these amendments even speak of automated infrastructure to more quickly and easily harvest phone numbers and other identifying information on request from providers.

Online slander can certainly cause problems and even harm to individuals, but increased surveillance is not an acceptable solution. Indeed, any such surveillance power is likely to be abused under the umbrella of a future “Digital Agency”, with the definition of “slander” expanded to include government critics and independent journalists.

As we have often said in the past, relying on third parties to defend your rights is almost the same as having no rights at all. They only exist as far as your ability to defend them yourself, and the right to privacy is no different. If the Japanese government wishes to collect identifying information from online platforms, then our only choice is to use platforms that cannot provide any identifying information at all.

In the past, we have introduced a variety of software solutions to allow you to protect your own privacy online. This time、in response to the Caller Information Disclosure proposals, we wish to introduce “Session”.

Session is an open-source messaging application which uses decentralised storage servers and an onion routing protocol to send end-to-end encrypted messages with minimal exposure of user metadata. Session works to reduce metadata collection in several ways:
セッション はオープン・ソース、安全なメッセンジャーアプリです。分散型記憶サーバ、そしてオニオンルーティング・プロトコルにより、メタデータの暴露をできる限り防止しながら、終端間暗号化されたメッセージを通信します。

Firstly, Session does not rely on central servers, instead using a decentralised network of thousands of nodes.

Secondly, Session ensures that IP addresses cannot be linked to messages sent or received by users.

Thirdly, Session does not ask or require users to provide a phone number or email address when registering a new account. Instead, it uses cryptographic keys as the basis of an account’s identity.

Session has recently been translated into Japanese, and is available for download on a variety of platforms. Session is also part of a larger project, “Lokinet”, which provides more tools and infrastructure to help you protect your own privacy online. We are currently translating Lokinet documentation into Japanese, in hopes for a Japanese version on final release.

We encourage all Japanese internet users to follow the development of both Session and Lokinet, and begin embracing privacy protecting infrastructure now, before the “Digital Agency” fully rises to power.

アノニマスの見解 Ep.15:”EUNOMIA”又は”私は如何にして心配するのを止めて社会信用システムを愛するようになったか”


Hello everyone. And welcome to another episode of “ANONYMOUS NO KENKAI”. And a very exciting episode it is, because we’ve got an insider leak of some interesting info about a project called “EUNOMIA”, in coordination with the Fediverse’s own “Free Speech Axis”.

Long time viewers of this series might remember Episode 5, where we talked about Mastodon, GNU Social, and Plemora. In particular, you might remember a man by the name of Gargron, also known as Eugen Rochko. He’s going to be important to this story, so you might want to go watch that episode if you don’t know why he’s important.
このシリーズの長年のファンは「マストドン、GNUソーシャル、Plemora」についての第5話を覚えてるかもしれませんね。特に、「Gargron」(別名Eugen Rochko)という男も思い出すかもしれないですね。彼がこの話にとって重要なので、新登録者はぜひ第5話をご覧下さい。

But first, let’s talk about “Fake News”. Fake News is a really big problem these days, if you listen to media and politicians. Spies, extremists, and scammers are all supposedly using the internet to spread fake stories and trick the public into believing the wrong information.

And of course, the same media companies and politicians are ready…eager, even…to offer solutions to the problem. Journalists name and shame online personalities. Silicon Valley companies like Facebook and Twitter routinely engage in purges of “fake news” from their platforms, silencing or even banning accounts that spread it. How exactly they discern fake news from truth remains a mystery, unfortunately…

Some governments, notably China, have taken stronger measures. China’s infamous “social credit” system does a lot of things, but apparently one thing that can reduce your national loyalty score is “spreading fake news”…of course, the Chinese government gets to decide whether news is fake or not. The military government in Thailand, meanwhile, has been very active in using its own “Computer Crime Act” to arrest its critics, claiming they spread “false information”.

But the civilized nations of the Western world insist that they’re different from their totalitarian counterparts. Their campaign against fake news is sincere, and in the best interests of democracy. Interestingly, though, they have little to say about the fake news they participate in creating. Fake news like the Covington High story, where multiple supposedly reputable American news outlets spent days reporting flat-out lies about a group of high school boys, while Twitter looked the other way as outrage mobs led by celebrities harassed and threatened children. Thankfully the truth was livestreamed, but where was their concern for fake news then?

Then there’s the RussiaGate scandal…two years of politicians and media companies insisting that US President Donald Trump was a secret Russian asset, until an investigation disproved it as conspiratorial nonsense. No matter one’s opinion on the man, these are reckless and irresponsible lies.

These are only two examples, but there are more…far too many to go into here. And in none of these cases do the media or politicians admit responsibility. Yet they want to tell us what news is fake or real?

The reality is, no matter where you go, its not uncommon for the authorities to say one thing and do another. And the unilateral solutions they impose always seem to create more problems than they fix.

And that brings us to our main topic, “EUNOMIA”…an EU initiative to create a software solution to solve the fake news problem. …yeah, I think you can see where this is going.

From the European Commission’s own website, they describe EUNOMIA as “a fully decentralised, intermediary-free and open-source solution for addressing three key challenges: which social media user is the original source of a piece of information; how this information has spread and been modified in an information cascade; and how likely it is to be trustworthy…EUNOMIA actively encourages democratic citizen participation in content verification by allowing voting on content trustworthiness and influencing the reputation of content generators and sharers”.

In other words, EUNOMIA is going to keep track of who said what, when, and where. It’ll track who shared that information, and with whom. Finally, it’ll host an online popularity contest to decide who’s telling the truth or not, and brand people with a number score based on the results. I think it should be clear how much of a bad idea that is. It sounds worryingly close to Chinese social credit.

But who cares, right? It’s just the EU, and Facebook and Twitter are already heavily censorsed hellscapes. Well, yeah…about that. Remember when we mentioned Mastodon and Gargron? Guess who’s on the list of contributors to the project…getting paid 63,290 euros to participate? Eugen Rochko, Gargron himself.
でも大した問題ではないでしょう?EUの問題ですし、FacebookやTwitterはすでに監視されてる。いえいえ、実際はその点には面白い話があるのです…動画の冒頭でマストドンとGargronさんについて述べましたよね?6万3千ユーロの引き換えに、誰がEUNOMIAの開発に参加しているのでしょうか?Eugen Rochkoさん、Gargron本人です。

Why would the creator of Mastodon be working on EUNOMIA? Maybe because Mastodon, and the wider Fediverse, is intended to be its testbed. In fact, the EUNOMIA project description itself clearly states that it is “ideal for evaluation on similarly open, decentralised and federated new social media networks”.

To be clear, the Fediverse…a decentralized federation of alternative social media services…is the place where people go to escape the censorship, authoritarianism, and surveillance of mainstream social media. It’s a place where they can speak freely and tell jokes without fear of being banned, or even arrested. What EUNOMIA proposes is to bring in the worst aspects of both mainstream social media and Chinese style social credit. No surprise it’s so unpopular.

Of course, the creators of EUNOMIA are quick to deny this. The project’s own Mastodon-dot-social account says it will “not in any way involve Mastodon social, and…will not involve anyone without their explicit consent”. All well and good, but it’s worth noting that we have no guarantee that this will always be true, or even if it’s true now.

Comparisons to social credit are also denied, since the project claims its purpose is “to assist social media users in determining trustworthiness of information”. In other words, it isn’t a central authority deciding what’s true, it’s just a tool to help other people vote on what they think is true. Personally, I don’t enjoy the idea of crowd-sourced social credit any more than the centralized variety. If anything, the outrage mobs and groupthink we’ve seen on Twitter makes me fear social credit by mob-rule even more.

But aside from that, there’s no escaping the reality that such a system would necessarily entail tracking and analyzing conversations, necessitating a panopticon-like surveillance of discourse across the Fediverse. Even if they claim that participation is voluntary, once the infrastructure is built, how easy would it be to just expand it after the fact? Or for other people to inherit the project and expand it later? This could especially be worrying to Japanese Fediverse instances, as these software tools will likely be localized and imported by certain characters if they prove successful in the EU.

Moreover, the idea of voting or scores to rate trustworthiness implies a system that discourages individuals making their own assessments about the truth, and instead blindly trusting the opinions of the majority. The creation of cliques and groupthink in such a system would be inevitable, and any search for truth would quickly be drowned out.

Apparently I wasn’t the only one who had these concerns, because somebody inside the EUNOMIA project decided to leak chat logs from their internal discussions. And some of the things they have to say only deepen my concerns.

For one, EUNOMIA will likely involve datamining instances via public APIs. No surprise, given datamining firms like SYNYO GmbH are key members of the project. They claim it will be opt-in and anonymized, but given the volume of data they’d likely need to build their models, its hard to believe that promise will last long. As for anonymisation, studies have shown how easy it is to re-identify users from aggregate datasets.
まず第一に、EUNOMIAはインスタンスの公開APIを使ってデータマイニングを行うそうです。「SYNYO GmbH」というデータマイニング企業がプロジェクトに参加するので、驚くほどではない事実です。収集はオプトインのみ、個人情報は匿名化されると言われますが、統計模型を築くために大量のデータが必要だと思います。自主的参加が足りない場合、その約束を守れるのでしょうか?そして匿名化について、データ匿名性を奪うのは意外と簡単だということを調査は示しています。

Secondly, EUNOMIA appears to be using some very questionable sources as reference for their models…namely the New York Times and Facebook. Remember, the NYT was central to spreading both the Covington High lie and the RussiaGate hoax. And Facebook has repeatedly been exposed as a biased actor in the way it controls how information trends on its platform. Hardly credible experts on identifying fake news when they couldn’t even identify their own.
第二に、EUNOMIAは統計模型を築くには信頼性に疑問のある情報源を利用している。特にNew York TimesとFacebook。忘れないてはなりません、New York Timesはコビントン高校とRussiaGateのデマを広めることに最大の影響を与えました。そしてFacebookがトレンディング・トピックを歪曲していることがすでに発覚しました。自分で作ったフェイクニュースを発見できなければ、情報の信用性を究明する資格があるのでしょうか?

Lastly, they internally refer to criticism of the project as “paranoia”, downplaying the validity of concerns and showing a lack of self-reflection, or even an understanding of why the Fediverse reacts negatively to them.

Bottom line, given the people involved, the histories of behaviour, and the attitudes on display, there are a lot of red flags surrounding the EUNOMIA project. What we can do to avoid it or mitigate the damage it may cause isn’t clear, yet. But identifying the threat is a good first step. The leaked info is linked in the description. I’d also like to make a Japanese translation eventually.

Fake News does exist, and it can be a problem, but it’s not going to be solved by an app or an algorithm. Technological solutions cannot fix human problems, and trust scores do nothing to encourage critical thought. If the goal of EUNOMIA is to help people determine trustworthiness without defining it, then objective metrics shouldn’t be involved at all, no matter how democratic the process leading up to them. The only thing that can help social media users to seperate fact from fiction is critical thinking, common sense, and personal responsibility when both producing and consuming information. And if they lack those qualities, then no piece of software is going to save them.

To every member of the Fediverse, the answer is clear; Say No to Eunomia. And Eugen…if you really want to make the Fediverse a better place, consider donating your 63,000 euro bribe to a media literacy program instead.

This was ANONYMOUS NO KENKAI, and until next time…MACHIUKENASAI

アノニマスの見解 Ep.12: 公開ブロックチェーンの落とし穴

Hello everyone, and welcome back to アノニマスの見解. It’s been a while since the last episode. My apologies for the long delay.

Unfortunately, the forces of censorship and surveillance didn’t take a break during this period, and there’s a lot to catch up on.

As you might already know, Site Blocking has taken a turn for the worse, with DoS attacks against alleged pirate sites being proposed in government run study groups. CIRO and the Directorate for Signals Intelligence haven’t gone anywhere, and there’s no shortage of new hardware AND software vulnerabilities that threaten your privacy.

But today, we’re going to talk about something different; cryptocurrencies, and how they related to the idea of financial privacy. But first, some background.

In June of this year, Coincheck, one of Japan’s largest cryptocurrency exchanges, announced that it was suspending all trading in Monero, Zcash, Dash, and Auger… all currencies that are designed around the idea of user privacy. This was after the Financial Services Agency threatened stricter regulation of cryptocurrencies in Japan, strongly implying this was a response to government pressure.

Later that same month, the National Police Agency arrested multiple website operators for putting “Coinhive” into their websites. Coinhive is a distributed program that uses the computing power of website visitors to mine for Monero. But the NPA arrested them for violating a law banning computer viruses, implying they believed Coinhive to be a virus, even though there is no official judgement that this is accurate.

Finally, just last month, the National Police Agency announced their budget for 2019, including 2.7 billion yen to fight cyber threats. In that budget was a plan to purchase a blockchain surveillance system from overseas which would allow the NPA to gain a “bird’s eye view” of all transactions on the blockchains of major cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin and Ethereum, and possibly others. While no information on this system has been announced, there is a high possibility that this surveillance system will be “Elliptic”, one of the most well-known and popular blockchain surveillance tools.

Based on all of this news, it’s easy to understand that the Japanese government is struggling to assert control over the world of cryptocurrency in Japan. Privacy-focused cryptocurrencies like Monero are attacked, while surveillance tools to watch open blockchains are installed. The media talks about these measures as necessary to fight criminal money laundering. But as we’ve said in previous videos, empowering an authority to protect you doesn’t protect you from the authority itself. And government surveillance over individual finance can create many negative and unintended side effects.

Firstly, it’s important to remember that historically, total surveillance and central control over individual finance was not the norm. Whether through cash or barter, individuals have been able to privately exchange value for centuries. Regulations evolved over time as a means to counter abuse, but total surveillance and control over finance is a relatively recent development. However, many developed nations now favour credit or electronic payment systems over cash. Some countries, like India, have even tried to eliminate cash entirely, though often with disastrous results.

While a cashless society seems convenient, it comes with one very big problem; it takes power away from individuals and gives it to large, centralized institutions. With cash, two individuals can exchange value freely. I can invite my friend over for dinner, give him cash in exchange for something, and nobody can really interfere in our transaction. But with cashless electronic payment, the company running the system can monitor every transaction, and even deny transactions it doesn’t approve of. In a worst case scenario, it could even cut a user off from the system entirely. We saw a vivid example of this in 2010, when multiple banks and credit card companies arbitrarily and simultaneously cut Wikileaks off from donations. The power of centralized financial institutions to crush dissent is very real.

The threat of this power is two-fold; on the one hand, government pressure can have critics arbitrarily cut off from all finance. But on the other hand, the threat of being cut off also discourages dissent, and encourages self-censorship.

This is where cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin enter the picture. Being a peer-to-peer system, cryptocurrencies have no central control. Much like cash, they allow individuals to trade freely with each other. But unlike cash, cryptocurrencies allow these trades to happen at any distance. Two users in different countries can freely exchange value, as long as both are connected to the internet. Certainly there is the possibility of criminal abuse, just as with cash. But it also creates a check against the abuse of centralized power.

However, there is one massive Achille’s Heel to many cryptocurrencies; the public blockchain. The blockchain is a completely public ledger of every transaction on the network. Every detail of every transaction is recorded and shared publicly. This means your wallet address, your IP address, account balance, and every transaction are public knowledge. Not even bank accounts or credit card companies share this much information about their users.

So, while cryptocurrencies allow free exchange of value between individuals, the total panopticon of the public blockchain means the association between individuals can still be policed. Cryptocurrencies still need to be exchanged for cash via exchanges, and if the government can monitor every transaction on the blockchain, they can still order exchanges to cut off users they don’t like. If you donate Bitcoin or Ethereum to an opposition party, or a government critic, your account can be flagged by the authorities. If you use Bitcoin or Ethereum to pay for anything personal or embarassing, this can be used to blackmail you. Knowledge of perfectly legal but private activities can easily become a tool of control.

It’s worth noting, this isn’t only a problem from the government. A total public blockchain means anybody can find all of this information easily. But, with specialized surveillance tools like Elliptic, the speed and scope of government surveillance is a much bigger threat.

So what can we do about it? First, we need to understand that totally public blockchains are bad for individual users. Unfortunately, this means that using Bitcoin or Ethereum will always be a risk. We need to start using, promoting, and fighting to normalize cryptocurrencies that embed privacy into their infrastructure, like Monero, ZCash, Dash, or Augur. If you have cryptocurrency in public blockchains, consider moving some of it to more private cryptocurrencies. And finally, reject centralized corporate control and build markets and businesses that respect the privacy of their users. No one person can change the world alone, but each individual can change the way they do business. And if we all change together, then maybe the world can change with us.

This was アノニマスの見解, and until next time… 待ち受けなさい。

アノニマスの見解 Ep.10: フィッシング・バカ日記

Hello again, Internet. And welcome back to ANONYMOUS NO KENKAI.

Almost exactly one year ago, in March of 2017, we talked about surveillance and the cost of enforcement in Episode 3. At the time, the Japanese government was steamrolling through the Conspiracy Law and giving the Police worrying new powers to spy on the population.

Since then, we’ve heard very little about the Conspiracy Law, or government surveillance in Japan. But no news is not necessarily good news. Covert surveillance being what it is, we often only hear about it when it’s already too late, and rarely through mainstream channels. In fact, there’s reason to believe that the Japanese government is actively involved in monitoring its citizens right now. But as usual, to understand how, we need to look at some other news.

In October of 2017, Kaspersky Labs discovered a new breed of Android malware, which it named “SkyGoFree”. When news about SkyGoFree started appearing in early 2018, it was obvious this was a cut above your common Android trojan. Rather than serving up spam or installing crypto miners, SkyGoFree gave the attacker full control of the device. It could track location, record audio and keystrokes, and exfiltrate all data, including from the clipboard. It even had the ability to use “geofencing”; If GPS data showed the device was inside a target location, the microphone could automatically start recording and send the data to a remote server.

SkyGoFree also had custom payloads that targeted specific Social Media applications, including Facebook, WhatsApp, Viber, and (of particular interest to Japanese users) LINE. It could also secretly connect to malicious wifi hotspots, even if the user had wifi deactivated, making it easier to monitor targets.

Fortunately, SkyGoFree can’t very easily install itself on a target device. The usual method for infection is to direct a target to a fake website that imitates their mobile carrier, then trick them into downloading and installing an infected APK. SkyGoFree victims were almost exclusively found in Italy, so this isn’t a worldwide phenomenon. But the capabilities of this malware suggested it wasn’t some low level criminal operation. SkyGoFree was very likely developed as a Lawful Intercept tool for government and corporate use.

Who made SkyGoFree? That remains unknown, but Kasperky’s analysis of the source code found two things. First, comments were written in Italian. Second, certificates and control servers repeatedly used the word “negg”. Most media outlets talking about SkyGoFree have been careful to avoid making any accusations…it’s good way to get in legal trouble, so that’s understandable. But the fact is, there is an Italian IT company called “Negg International”, which offers cyber-security and mobile app services.
誰がSkyGoFreeを作ったかまだ不明です。でもカスペルスキーによるソースコードの分析に基づいた2つの手掛かりがあります。まず第一に、ソースコードのコメントはイタリア語で書かれました。第二に、「negg」という名前は認証と指令管制サーバーで用いられます。法的責任を恐れ、ほとんどのニュースサイトは非常に用心してSkyGoFreeについて報告していましたが、実は「Negg International」というイタリアのITセキュリティーとモバイルアプリ企業が存在します。

Attribution in cyber-security is notoriously difficult, and while the evidence pointing at Negg is compelling, it could just as easily be a red herring to throw off investigation. However, Italy is no stranger to spyware manufacturers. The now-infamous “Hacking Team” was an Italian company, after all. And after their fall from grace, it’s hardly impossible to imagine others would try to fill the gap.
サイバーセキュリティの世界にあって、責任帰属は非常に難しい問題です。Negg Internationalを示す証拠は有力ですが、真犯人は発覚を避けるための煙幕を作ったという可能性もあります。しかしそうは言っても、イタリアはマルウェア開発企業になじみがあります。評判の悪い「Hacking Team」はイタリアの企業でした。Hacking Teamが信用を失墜した後で、他の企業が市場の隙間を埋めると思ってもおかしくはないでしょう。

Now on to our second story. In March of 2018, The Citizen Lab reported that Egyptian and Turkish ISPs were redirecting non-HTTPS traffic to phishing sites that infected them with FinFisher brand government spyware, as well as cryptomining malware. This redirection was made possible by a piece of equipment called a “middlebox”, which transforms, inspects, filters, or otherwise manipulates traffic that passes through it.
次の話に進みましょう。2018年3月に、Citizen Labという人権団体の報告によると、エジプトとトルコのプロバイダーはユーザの暗号化されていないウェブトラフィックを偽サイトまでリダイレクトし、FinFisherという政府向けスパイウェアまたは仮想通貨マイニングマルウェアを感染させたという新事実が明らかにされました。これは「ミドルボックス」というネットワーク装置によって可能となりました。プロバイダーはミドルボックスを使って通信を傍受し、リクエストに応じて変更を加えることができます。

The middleboxes in question were PacketLogic brand devices, manufactured by a Canadian company, Sandvine (which was merged with an American company, Procera Networks, in 2017). Among other things, PacketLogic middleboxes are capable of something called “deep packet inspection” or “DPI”. This lets them study the contents of user web traffic, and change, redirect, or block it as desired.
問題になっているミドルボックスは「PacketLogic」というブランド名の装置でした。メーカーは「Sandvine」というカナダの企業です(そして2017年にProcera Networksというアメリカの企業と合併されました)。他にも多数の機能がありますが、Packet Logicのミドルボックスにはディープ・パケット・インスペクション(DPI)の機能があります。DPIを利用すれば、プロバイダーが通信の内容を傍受、変更、リダイレクトが可能で、思うがままにブロックすることができます。

Using Sandvine equipment, ISPs in Turkey and Egypt would detect unencrypted web traffic and redirect it to phishing sites, most likely at the request of the government, who could use spyware infected phones to spy on their citizens, and use cryptominers to fund their own black budgets.

So why is this important? What do Italian Android spyware and Turkish ISP middleboxes have to do with surveillance in Japan?

First of all, it’s already known that the Bureau of Public Security was in the market for Italian spyware in 2014. At the time they were buying Hacking Team’s “GALILEO” software, but it’s unknown whether they actually purchased it, or whether they used any other suppliers.
先ずは、2014年に日本の警視庁公安部がイタリアのスパイウェアの購入を希望していたことは既に知られています。あの時に彼らはHacking TeamのGALILEOスパイウェアを買おうとしましたが、結局Hacking Teamまたは他の供給者のスパイウェアを買ったかどうかは知られていません。

Regardless, the fact that they want spyware makes it safe to assume they intend to use it, and that they’ll seek to keep their spyware arsenal up to date. It is well within the mandate of Public Security to monitor anti-war, anti-globalism, and other social movements. The Conspiracy Law only makes it easier for them to do so.

Secondly, the same PacketLogic devices used in Turkey and Egypt also exist in Japan. In July 2015, Procera announced that Softbank would use PacketLogic middleboxes for their LTE network. It’s unknown whether these devices are deployed on other telecom carrier networks, but it’s likely they have similar equipment.
次は、エジプトやトルコに利用されたPacket Logicミドルボックスは日本にも利用されています。2015年7月に、Procera Networksは、ソフトバンクがPacket LogicをLTEネットワークに使用すると発表しました。他のテレコム会社が使うかどうかは知られていませんが、類似の装置は利用されている可能性は少なくないでしょう。

So, to recap: Public Security is responsible for monitoring social movements. Public Security almost certainly uses spyware. At least one Japanese telecom giant uses equipment that can infect smartphone users with spyware. And the Conspiracy Law makes it legal to use spyware on civic groups. Is the Japanese government actually doing this? Maybe. But doo they have the ability to do it? Absolutely.

We said this one year ago, but it bears repeating: if you are part of any social movement in Japan, you cannot afford to assume you are not a target. Even one lapse of judgement with your smartphone can turn you into a walking wiretap. Cyber-security is everyone’s problem, and it only takes one person to compromise the security of an entire group. So if you don’t want to be the weakest link, here’s some advice for you to follow:

Always check the URL of a site you visit, especially if you need to enter passwords or other sensitive data. Phishing sites often use similar-looking URLs, so if you feel something is suspicious, check carefully. Also, make sure the site is using HTTPS. You can usually see a green lock icon next to the URL. If a site that looks like your mobile provider or internet company is pressuring you into downloading an “update” or “virus cleaner”, consider that it might be a trick and do some research first.

If possible, use different devices for your activism and your daily life. If you have a smartphone you use for casual web surfing and social media, do not use it to communicate with your activist group. You’re more likely to visit infected sites or click on links during personal web surfing, so using the same device for both increases your risk considerably. It’s easy to go to a used electronics shop and buy a seperate laptop, phone, or tablet cash and carry. For bonus points, install a non-commercial OS like Qubes, Copperhead, or at least Lineage.

Don’t use the same accounts either. Even if you have to use the same device, using personal e-mail or social media accounts for activism is dangerous for the same reasons. Ideally, you should be using non-commercial open-source services hosted outside the country for things like e-mail and cloud storage.

Using a pocket wifi device is better than using an internal SIM card, or public wifi. Personal pocket wifi gives you more control over when your device is connected or not, as well as how many people are using the connection.

Use Tor or a out-of-country VPN for all online activism. When connecting your devices to the internet, you need to remember that your ISP is probably helping to spy on you. An encrypted tunnel to an out-of-state VPN makes it harder to monitor or tamper with your traffic.

Don’t use Apple products for activism. iCloud may be safe against most criminal hacking attempts (usually), but Apple has been happy to cooperate with government spying requests in China and elsewhere. iPads and iPhones are also harder to modify and change OS on. Android is far from perfect, but at least it gives you more options.

Similarly, don’t use big name social media for activism. Find and use an open source platform that does not rely on the central control of a commercial entity. Like Apple, Facebook, Twitter, and LINE will share your information with the police if ordered to.

Encrypt. Everything. Always. Never ask yourself if it’s necessary. It’s always necessary. It costs you nothing but time, and a little effort in the short term can save you a lot of trouble later on.

And finally, encourage all your members to share the same security practices. You can have the best security in your group, but if everybody else is infected with spyware, it doesn’t matter.

As the world spins deeper and deeper into dystopia, cyber self-defense becomes more and more a crucial life skill. If you get lazy about your security now, you might find it’s far too late when you come to regret it.

This was ANONYMOUS NO KENKAI, and until next time… MACHIUKENASAI.