Anonymous does not support (@Minds)

by SpartaZC

via @HackRead:

In the last few days many tech journalists have been duped into posting articles in which it is claimed Anonymous supports an obscure social media website However, these allegations of support by the faceless collective of miscreants and activists is factually incorrect according to this thread in which two prominent Anons on twitter, @Anon2earth (a current admin for @YourAnonNews) and @YourAnonCentral (author of this post) discuss how both major accounts ostensibly on were not made by them and ask which Anons are actually supporting the obscure “new social media site”. However it appears that aside from a handful of newbloods (New Anons), the support for is unsurprisingly next to non-existent among the legion.

Anon questions who is supporting

When asked to verify which Anons were backing or helping build their website @Minds/ became slightly hostile and belligerent. As the examples below depict.

David claims to have been censored for asking which Anonymous groups support Minds.
@AnonyInfo questions @Minds account, gets passive aggressive response


Minds sarcastically responds to YAC and YAN for asking questions

Anonymous and others such as @Void_Sec have also taken steps to test just how secure @Minds really is, a claim which many media outlets chose to parrot without question. @Void_Sec managed to disclose multiple XSS holes in the platform which multiple tech journalists failed to notify their audience about.


Full disclosure post authored by Scott Arciszewski focuses on several cryptography design flaws.


It would be in everyone’s best interest for all those who covered the “Anonymous supports new social media network:” story without any due diligence to cover it again with the security problems.

Please update your articles or submit new ones exposing this scam. You have all been duped, one Facebook account does not speak for all of #Anonymous but many Anons together do have a larger voice, and our voice says “We do not support”. The twitter handle and domain for @Minds must have cost a significant sum; it is not unreasonable to speculate that a Facebook page could be paid off to claim “Anonymous supports a new encrypted Social Media site”. Anonymous claims to have infiltrated the site and that it has been proven to be completely insecure so claiming it to be secure is also a rather large mistake for journalists to make.