gmanka

GitHub source code allegedly offered for sale: Internal orgs and private repositories claimedA threat actor using the alias TeamPCP claims to be selling GitHub source code and internal organization data.The actor claims the dataset includes around 4,000 private repositories and says samples can be provided to interested buyers to verify authenticity.━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━Target: GitHubCountry: United StatesSector: Technology / Software Development / Source CodeIncident Type: Alleged Source Code SaleClaimed Exposure: Around 4,000 private repositoriesActor: TeamPCPPrice: Offers over $50,000━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━According to the post, the actor claims the material includes source code and internal organization data tied to GitHub’s main platform. The post also references a public file list and includes screenshots showing numerous repository archive names.Why it matters:If authentic, exposed source code and internal repository data could increase the risk of code review by hostile actors, vulnerability discovery, supply chain targeting, impersonation, phishing, and follow-on attacks against developer infrastructure.Status:This remains an unverified underground forum claim. The actor states this is not a ransom attempt and claims the data may be leaked publicly if no buyer is found.https://girlcockx.com/DarkWebInformer/status/2056831051742527507/by @uzbekiston82

📢 In case you missed it — ReVanced × Morphe drama recapUnless you've been living under a rock (yeah, this is old news at this point 😅), the ReVanced ecosystem had quite the shakeup.A group of developers and contributors split from the ReVanced project citing abusive behavior by the lead maintainer, and launched a new open-source patcher called Morphe. The fork comes from former ReVanced contributors, with active maintainers, a clear roadmap, and a more streamlined patching experience.And then things got spicy. ⚡The DMCA drama:Morphe filed a DMCA takedown against the ReVanced GitHub repo in March 2026, alleging that ReVanced had copied Morphe's code without following the GPL license terms. As required under copyright law, GitHub removed the ReVanced repository first and then began reviewing the case. ReVanced called the complaint legally baseless and submitted a counter-notice, kicking off a mandatory 14-day window, if no lawsuit is filed, GitHub can restore the repo.ReVanced's developers insist this is not a shutdown, and development has continued without interruption, a mirror repo is already live on GitLab.So basically: a messy internal split turned into a full-blown GPL licensing war between two open-source forks. Classic.Where things stand:→ ReVanced repo down on GitHub, mirrored on GitLab→ Morphe actively developing at https://github.com/MorpheApp/morphe-patches→ 14-day DMCA window in play, outcome TBD.🔗 https://morphe.software/🔗 https://revanced.appWhich side are you on? Still riding with ReVanced or jumped ship to Morphe? 👇

Фонд вільного ПЗ вимагає від Anthropic оприлюднити вихідний код ШІ Claude У 2024 році автори книг подали позов проти Anthropic, звинувативши компанію у використанні понад 7 мільйонів книг із піратських бібліотек LibGen та Pirate Library Mirror для навчання своїх ШІ. Потім, у червні 2025 року, суд виніс рішення, що навчання ШІ на легально придбаних книгах є допустимим, а на піратських - ні.Anthropic хотіла вирішити ситуацію легко й просто - грошима, але тут у справу втрутився Фонд вільного ПЗ.Представники фонду, перебираючи викорстані книги, знайшли книгу "Free as in Freedom: Richard Stallman's Crusade for Free Software", авторські права на яку належать Фонду вільного ПЗ. Ось тут і криється підводний камінь, адже книга видана за ліцензією GNU FDL, яка дозволяє вільне використання, але, у свою чергу, вимагає, щоб усі похідні роботи також залишалися вільними.Фонд заявив, що гроші їх не цікавлять, і якщо Anthropic не оприлюднить вихідний код, вони готові подати новий позов до суду (на додаток до вже існуючих).

Meta spent $26.3 million lobbying for "age verification" bills in 45 states. But the bills don't regulate social media. They regulate your operating system.Someone traced $2 billion in nonprofit grants and lobbying records. Here's what they found:1. Meta's lobbyist wrote Louisiana's age verification law. The sponsor confirmed it. It forces OS-level surveillance. Meta's platforms? Zero new requirements.2. Meta covertly funded an astroturf "child safety" group to push these bills nationally. It has no EIN, no incorporation records. It doesn't legally exist.3. $70M+ into state super PACs, deliberately fragmented across databases to dodge centralized tracking.4. On every social media bill, Meta fights. On the one bill regulating operating systems, Meta just "monitors."5. The EU solved this with zero-knowledge proofs. No biometrics. US bills mandate vendors that send your face to third-party clouds.Meta profits from harvesting data. They wrote laws forcing every device to broadcast your identity through a system-level API. They built the surveillance. They wrote the mandate. They exempted themselves.Every claim sourced from IRS filings, Senate disclosures, and state lobbying records.https://x.com/TFTC21/status/2032659362666164411