Data hacked leaked on dark web

Know About Dark web –

‘The dark web is part of the internet that isn’t visible to search engines and requires the use of an anonymizing browser called Tor to be accessed.

It’s a hotbed of criminal activity. The number of such sites is rising fast which can harm any enterprise in the blink of an eye.

Its like a black market –

You can buy credit card numbers, all manner of drugs, guns, counterfeit money, stolen subscription credentials, hacked Netflix accounts and software that helps you break into other people’s computers.

Buy login credentials to a $50,000 Bank of America account for $500. Get $3,000 in counterfeit $20 bills for $600. Buy seven prepaid debit cards, each with a $2,500 balance, for $500 (express shipping included).

But not everything is illegal, the dark web also has a legitimate side. For example, you can join a ChessClub or BlackBook a social network described as the “the Facebook of Tor.”

Deep web vs. Dark web: What’s the difference?

The terms “deep web” and “dark web” are sometimes used interchangeably, but they are not the same. Deep web content includes anything behind a paywall or requires sign-in credentials. It also includes any content that its owners have blocked web crawlers from indexing.

The dark web is a subset of the deep web that is intentionally hidden, requiring a specific browser—Tor—to access. No one really knows the size of the dark web, but most estimates put it at around 5% of the total internet. Again, not all the dark web is used for illicit purposes despite its ominous-sounding name.

Why you should never go on the dark web?

Well, it’s not like you should never visit the dark web; It’s just risky to do anything in the dark web. You need a specialised software like Tor browser to access the dark web. Since the dark web is not like the general wen, it is highly anonymous so it’s a place for notorious hackers and cyber-terrorists.

A case for quiet diplomacy

(@the_hindu_editorial)

A public debate would have hindered the resolution of past standoffs with China

That means official confirmation –

On June 9, sources in the Indian Army said Indian and Chinese troops began a partial disengagement from some of the standoff points along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in eastern Ladakh, which has seen tensions since early May. That was the first official confirmation that there were ongoing multiple stand-offs along the LAC.

Our Strategy in dealing with China

Both sides have agreed on a broad plan to defuse four of the five points of discord. The situation at the fifth, Pangong Lake, remains uncertain, as also in Galwan valley and north Sikkim. The pattern of resolution of past stand-offs underlines the key role played by quiet diplomacy in unlocking complicated stand-off situations. Both the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) and National Democratic Alliance (NDA) governments have followed an approach that has coupled quiet diplomacy with a strong military posture, while at the same time allowing the adversary a way out. This has been the broad strategy in dealing with challenges from China across the LAC. And this strategy has generally worked.

It’s like – Do Your Work & Say Nothing…

The NDA government adopted a similar strategy during the 2014 stand-off at Chumar, which coincided with President Xi Jinping’s visit to India. Prime Minister Narendra Modi then was criticised by the Opposition for sitting on a swing with Mr. Xi in Gujarat while Chinese troops had crossed the LAC. Mr. Xi’s visit went ahead, while India quietly but forcefully stopped the Chinese road-building and deployed 2,500 soldiers, outnumbering the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

If the government had publicly announced in 2014 it was following a moratorium on patrolling up to India’s LAC to ease tensions, there would have likely been an uproar, just as there was in 2013 after Depsang.

Ultimately, in both cases, the objective was achieved. China, faced with firm resistance, was prevented from changing the status quo.

Coming to terms with reality

The tensions on the LAC are neither the first nor likely to be the last. With every incident, they are, however, getting increasingly politicised in an environment where there is a 24/7 demand on social media for information — and unprecedented capacity for disinformation.

The government needs to come to terms with it. First, it needs to keep the Opposition informed, which it is clear it hasn’t. Second, it needs to proactively engage with the media, even if that may be through low-key engagement as was the case on June 9, that does not escalate into a public war of words.

Related Articles

Responses

0 Shares
Share
WhatsApp
Telegram
Print