My first try at a AR pistol build.All done by me.And YouTube 🫣 here’s a list of the parts. SBA5 Pistol Brace-Law Tactical Folder-Spikes Tactical lower- Rave 140 drop in trigger- Rise Armament Lower Parts Kit-Adaptive Tactical LTG handle- Magpul Foregrip- 10 1/2” Anderson upper (.556)- Holosun HM3X Magnifier- Holosun HE512C Gold Dot- Streamlight ProTac HL-X Pro.Hit 2 gun shows and caught awesome post in a few groups here on Reddit for everything else. Took her to the range and she ran smooth. Very satisfied With the results!

Article Cover Showing List of Principles and Names of Researchers
Thanks to the good work of academic researchers across the globe, we have a data-driven way to evaluate the quality of whistleblower software. The papers we’ve looked to for this article include:

• Anonymous Javasript Cryptography and Cover Traffic in Whistleblowing Applications by Joakim Uddholm from the KTH Royal Institute of Technology
• A Simple and Robust End-to-End Encryption Architecture for Anonymous and Secure Whistleblowing published by Hariharan Jayakrishnan and Murali Ritwik from the Amrita School of Engineering
• CoverDrop: Blowing the Whistle Through A News App, Mansoor Ahmed-Rengers, Diana A. Vasile, Daniel Hugenroth, Alastair R. Beresford, and Ross Anderson

The authors lists the characteristics of a whistleblower submission system. They include:

1. Usability of the Software
2. Authenticity of the Receiver
3. Plausible Deniability of the Whistleblower
4. Availability of the System
5. Anonymity of the Whistleblower
6. Confidentiality and Integrity of the Disclosures

1. Usability of the Software

Managed Service
Usability is the linchpin of any good software system. No matter what your value proposition is — the most private, secure, or whatever — if your targeted audience cannot use the software, no amount of engineering genius will make a difference. As researcher Joakim Uddholm puts it:
“The system must be usable for both whistleblowers and journalists. Whistleblowers must be able to use the system without the protection features getting too much in the way, and journalists must be able to use the system without it interfering too much with their work routines.”
A key differentiator for Hush Line is that we’re a managed service, meaning you don’t have to host core infrastructure, operate dedicated networks, or hire specialists to start using the service. All a user needs to do to have an anonymous tip line is register an account.
UI for Hush Line Registration page
By providing a centralized service, we significantly reduce the risk of user error, making the service more consistent, predictable, and trustworthy.

Email Delivery

Hush Line can deliver messages directly to your email inbox. Users may enter their preferred SMTP information from Gmail or Riseup, for example, and any message submitted to their tip line will be delivered to their email account. Enabling users to set it and forget it makes using Hush Line effortless and integrates into the systems they’re already using.
SMTP Hush Line Settings

Clearnet and Tor Addresses

Hush Line is also available on both Clearnet and Tor Onion addresses. This approach is critical for users where Tor might be blocked or having anonymizing software on their device could be incriminating, like in the case of Ola Bini in Ecuador.
Screenshot of Ola Bini’s tweet about his conviction.
Since Hush Line can be accessed over a Clearnet address with the default browser already on your phone, your fingerprint will be the same as everyone else who just bought a new phone.

Making PGP Easy

Before, using PGP meant adopting cumbersome workflows that even stumped journalists at the heart of the Snowden disclosures. Journalist Glenn Greenwald didn’t have PGP set up, and didn’t have the time to learn how to do it, resulting in Snowden not being able to securely contact him. Even Snowden forgot to send his PGP key to journalists when initially contacting them.
Inbox view with Mailvelope browser extension.
Hush Line attempts to solve this problem through our integration of Mailvelope, a powerful open-source browser extension for Chrome and Firefox that enables users to create keys, decrypt and encrypt message directly in their browser, and export their public PGP key. For tip line owners, once adding their PGP key to Hush Line, all messages are end-to-end encrypted by default and when a tip comes in, they can read it within the Hush Line app. For whistleblowers, this means they don’t need to do anything to send a secure, anonymous message.

2. Authenticity of the Receiver

Verification System

Hush Line has a verification system for journalists, organizations, activists, or other public figures. Verified accounts receive a special badge on their message submission page so that people submitting messages know they’re contacting the right person. To be verified, users must submit proper information to prove their identity or approval to represent a company.
Submit Message page with a “Verified Account” badge.

Opt-In User Directory

Users may opt-in to a public directory where others can find their address. The default tab is prioritized to make it easy to find verified users. The directory is searchable, and a whistleblower can have confidence of the validity of an address.
Hush Line User Directory page

Account Reporting

The verification system and user directories are two ways to help ensure the authenticity of the receiver, but to help ensure the platform’s health, we enable users who have logged in to report spam or abuse accounts. We will address reported accounts immediately to determine the best next steps, whether deleting the account, sending a warning message, or other appropriate methods.

3. Plausible Deniability of the Whistleblower

No Downloads

Hush Line is accessible over a Clearnet address, so a user doesn’t have to download any new software to send an anonymous message. If someone wants to use a Tor-only tip line service on their mobile device, they must sign in to the Apple App Store or Google Play Store. To download Tor Browser, you need to provide a valid email address or phone number and possibly payment information, all considered personally identifiable information. Now that you’ve downloaded new software on your phone, your “fingerprint” has become unique to who you are. If you only have Robinhood, Tor Browser, Mastodon, Chrome, and Slack on your phone, the likelihood of someone else having only those same apps becomes less likely. If you have even 50 apps, your fingerprint will be more associated with you, possibly entirely unique. The more unique your fingerprint is, the less realistic a plausible deniability claim is.

One-Way Messaging

Most people fail to report information because they fear retaliation and the significant risks of whistleblowing. Hush Line is a one-way messenger explicitly designed to protect the individual submitting the message. If the person submitting a message feels comfortable enough to leave a contact method, they may or can submit a message without any further involvement.

Account-Free for Whistleblowers

Someone submitting a message does not need to create an account to use the app. This crucial feature allows a whistleblower to reduce the trail of information they leave behind. No credentials can be found if you have no username or password to save. And since Hush Line requires no special software, a message can be submitted from any phone or computer, from a pubic library or internet cafe, for example.
Success message after sending a message without an account.

4. Availability of the System

Centralized Services

By providing a centralized service, Hush Line is more reliably available by only requiring a single system to be maintained and secured. Centralizing our services protects users by removing the responsibility of managing specialized infrastructure and following complex workflows, which, if done incorrectly, could have real-world implications.
Decentralized systems help with censorship resistance (and Hush Line can also be self-hosted), but when there are tens, hundreds, or thousands of separate instances all disconnected from each other, there is no way to ensure the quality of those systems. What other software is on the server? Is it updated? Are any ports open? Who currently has or has had access? What hardware are they using? It’s impossible and foolhardy to assume that everyone will follow best practices consistently.
An analogous example of the inherent risks of decentralization is from the Mastodon network — a decentralized version of Twitter where anyone can run an instance. The database for Kolektiva.social, a service tailored to anarchist users, was compromised. In 2023, the home of its admin was raided for an unrelated event, and the FBI seized an unencrypted database backup.
Snippet from the Kolektiva admin account’s post after the raid.

5. Anonymity of the Whistleblower

Leaking IP Addresses

To make Hush Line accessible to as many people as possible, the app is available on a publicly accessible URL, which is what you might expect from any web service. However, when using a Clearnet URL, leaking a user’s IP address is a real possibility.
To help defend against this, we scrub IP addresses from our access logs to minimize the risk of this happening when you use our app. To remove the possibility of IP leaks in high-threat scenarios, we deploy Hush Line as a Tor Onion service.

Tor Support

Tor is a network that anonymizes your internet browsing activity. It acts as a proxy by randomly routing your request through its network of relays, hiding who is making the request. Tor also has a feature called Onion Services. An Onion service makes a website or application accessible through a special .onion address that is only available through the Tor Browser.
Message submission onion site.
When using a regular browser like Chrome or Firefox, when you enter an address like hushline.app the browser needs to know the server address for that URL. A long chain of services helps make it possible, from your ISP to DNS services, the server running the app, and more to make it possible to type something memorable like hushline.app instead of remembering and entering 64.23.155.36. Just as the browser needs to know the IP address of the target web server, your IP address is also necessary to know where to send the information.
Your IP address is essentially your customer ID for your internet service provider. All someone with the necessary authority needs to do is request the information of the owner of that IP, and your real identity is exposed.
Onion services defeat this kind of threat because they don’t operate using the same DNS and IP protocols. Tor Browser is connected to the Tor anonymizing network, and so are the Onion services that exist within it. When someone uses a .onion address, the request from the browser to the server and back never leaves the Tor network, completely sidestepping IP leakage.
To access Hush Line’s information site using our Onion address, enter `http://w25rxxn62dgix7qdbw4ot37m2y4ty7kxfrinspw4ce7jzse7pb6rhaqd.onion/\`, or to access the app’s Onion site, enter `http://ghj4vviaoccj4tj2r3ss52arbnchkfvs7uft4sgtrkuvdha5zjgo6yqd.onion\` in Tor Browser.

Timing Correlation

To know that two people are talking to each other, you don’t need to know the contents of their messages if you have enough metadata about the conversation. One such way to reveal important context about who might be talking to each other is to learn when the messages were sent. If there’s a flurry of activity from two accounts — one after the other, repeatedly, pausing at similar times, being active at similar times— someone analyzing the logs might assume those accounts are talking to each other.
To address this, we do not timestamp messages or relate accounts in any way. An attacker with access to the server cannot relate two messages on the platform, which is largely irrelevant as Hush Line is designed as a one-way messenger.

6. Confidentiality and Integrity of the Disclosures

Message Encryption

Hush Line uses PGP for message encryption, making the key owner the only one technically able to read the decrypted messages. Messages are end-to-end encrypted using OpenPGP.js, meaning our server will never see the decrypted contents.
Hush Line Inbox with an encrypted message.
We’re proactive about communicating with senders and receivers about the importance of the tip line owner adding their public PGP key, and we discourage sharing sensitive information if the receiver doesn’t encrypt their messages.
Unencrypted warning on a message submission page.

HTTPS

We use Let’s Encrypt for HTTPS certificates. When a site uses HTTPS, requests use the TLS protocol to encrypt data in transit from the browser to the server and back. This protects your activity from being monitored or tampered with while using the app.
For an attacker who can monitor network connections, instead of seeing which page you’re on or who you’re submitting a message to, the primary URL is only visible. So if a message submitter is on https://hushline.app/submit_message/artvandelay the recipient remains unobservable, and the only thing visible to a network snoop is https://hushline.app/.

Conclusion

There are many tip-line solutions on the market, and it can be intimidating to choose the right one for you. We hope this article gives you a data-driven way to evaluate the software that fits your needs.

Additional Research

• A Secure Submission System for Online Whistleblowing Platforms. Volker Roth, Benjamin Gu ̈ldenring, Eleanor Rieffel, Sven Dietrich, Lars Ries Freie Universit at Berlin, FX Palo Alto Laboratory, Stevens Institute of Technology
• Anonymous Whistleblowing over Authenticated Channels. Thomas Agrikola, Geoffroy Couteau, and Sven Maier. CNRS, IRIF, Université de Paris, France, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
• Artifice: A Deniable Steganographic File System. Austen Barker Staunton Sample Yash Gupta Anastasia McTaggart Ethan L. Miller Darrell D. E. Long*,* University of California, Santa Cruz
• Anatomy of a whistleblowing system, SecureDrop

Do you have any questions, comments, or feedback? Follow us on Mastodon at @scidsg@fosstodon.org.
Originally posted on Medium: https://medium.com/p/51beb8b05eb1

Original Source: https://boringmoney.in/p/brightcom-made-a-profit-by-hiding (my newsletter Boring Money. If you like what you read, do visit the link and subscribe to receive future posts directly in your inbox)

The standard way for a company to make a profit is to produce a thing at some cost, then sell that thing at a higher cost, and pocket the difference. Another, if slightly frowned upon, way of making a profit is to not worry too much about what your company is producing or selling. Instead, at the end of the quarter, you can pick up your financial statements, take a pen, put some nice numbers under “revenue” and erase the numbers under “expenses”. On paper, the company’s making a profit either way.
The risk, apart from running out of money, is that the company might get caught. This month, Brightcom Group, an ad-tech company, got caught. [1] Here’s a SEBI enforcement order describing the stuff Brightcom did, and one of the many things it did was to show profits which didn’t exist.
Some intangible assets are under development
If your company buys, say, a truck, the standard way to account for this expense in your books is by dividing the cost of the truck by the number of years you expect this truck to last, and then adding this number to your expenses every year. This is slightly weird because you do pay cash upfront for the truck. But still, it’s useful to not have to call it an expense just for the first year because it is an asset that lasts many, many years.
If you buy a truck, account for it the standard way I described above, but then the truck meets with an accident and gets trashed the next day? Then that’s it. You have to now account for the full expense of the truck in one go and can’t split it into chunks every year.
In short, as long as an asset is “alive,” you can split its expense into chunks and account for each chunk every year. If it’s “dead,” you have to account for it right away.
Modern accounting is surprisingly thoughtful and there’s a weird in-between “alive” and “dead” that it allows for. Instead of buying an asset, if you’re building it, your asset is in some sense neither dead nor alive. So you can just, umm, add nothing to your expenses until you figure if your asset is actually dead or alive.
Brightcom was spending a lot on salaries, marketing, and stuff, but it didn’t want to show these expenses. So it decided that it wasn’t “spending” but instead “investing” in building an asset. From SEBI’s order, here’s Brightcom’s CFO:

Brightcom was building software and this software would eventually be an intangible asset. But, until Brightcom could figure whether this asset would eventually be dead or alive, it didn’t count any of its expenses as expenses, instead put it under an “intangible assets under development” category. This way, the company could show a nice profit because all its expenses were apparently assets. In all, the company hid ₹863 crore ($100 million) and showed a profit of ₹440 crore ($50 million) in 2020. If its expenses had actually been counted as expenses, Brightcom would’ve shown a loss of ₹428 crore.
https://preview.redd.it/a2xn3xc5bb1d1.jpg?width=762&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8b9bfd5cd84b25807c6025ad9a26980abc57d2da
Asset’s dead but it’s not an expense
One problem with showing your expenses as an “asset under development” is that this asset can’t be under development forever. At some point, depending on if this asset is dead or alive, you have to account for your expenses in some way.
… Or not. If your company makes any money, you put those figures in your profit and loss statement. This is simple and straightforward. But accounting isn’t simple and straightforward. If your company makes money, but it’s not a result of your actual business, then you can’t put it under the P&L. Instead, you have to account for it under a separate subheading called “Other Comprehensive Income”.
The idea behind this new sub-head is that the company's P&L is supposed to reflect its actual ability to make money. If you hold a lot of dollars and the price of the dollar goes up (or down), your company didn’t really do anything to make that profit (or loss) so you’d put it under Other Comprehensive Income and not in your P&L. So stuff like this wouldn’t affect your profit, on paper at least. [2]
Yes, of course, Brightcom recognised the ₹863 crore loss that it had hidden under “intangible assets under development” by categorising it as Other Comprehensive Income. SEBI wasn’t excited about it.
Share this post so that Boring Money can move from “asset under development” to P&L
Sell your stake but keep quiet about it
If a company is doing well, its founders don’t usually sell stock. So if a founder sells some shares, they have to tell everyone about it by regulation, because it could be a sign that things aren’t well.
There are three entities that need to know if a founder sells stock:

1. The company itself, via its registrar and transfer agent (RTA)
2. Depositories that hold stock on behalf of investors
3. Stock exchanges

1 and #2 are important, but they’re obvious. The company has to know if its founders sell stock, and so does the depository that actually moves the stock from one account to another. #3 is how the rest of the rest of the world gets to know. A founder sells some stock, files a disclosure in a stock exchange, the exchange updates its records and screams out that this has happened, and that’s how public investors know.

In March 2014, if you had asked Brightcom’s RTA, a depository, or a stock exchange about how much stake its founders owned, they would’ve all said, “about 40%”. If you asked them again in June 2022, the RTA and the depository would say “about 3.5%”, but the stock exchange would scratch its head and say “18.47%”.
That’s because Brightcom’s founders—primarily CEO Suresh Reddy, his friends and family—sold their stock but didn’t inform the stock exchanges. Here’s what they said when SEBI asked what’s up:

Man, I’m just some dumb guy writing about finance every once in a while, and even I know that if you pledge your shares as collateral to get a loan, you don’t transfer ownership. You just inform your depository and investors about it, and you still own the shares. Reddy & Friends transferred some of their shares to someone else (that is, sold them) and decided not to inform the stock exchanges. Then they used pledging as an excuse and everyone had different answers about how much stock they really owned.
How much money they make tho
When a company’s stock price shoots up in a short period of time, and there’s no concrete reason for it to happen, in all likelihood, it’s a scam. The management of the company may or may not be involved, but it definitely helps if they are.
Last month, I wrote about Sadhna, a company that SEBI charged with running a pump-and-dump. The founders owned a lot of shares, they spread some false news, the share price shot up, then happily sold their stock to naive investors, and made a profit. If you see Brightcom’s share price trajectory without knowing any of the company’s other shenanigans, it might seem a similar story. The stock price was around ₹3 in January 2021. By December, it was at ₹117. 40X in a year is definitely not normal.
In a pump-and-dump, it’s important for those running the fraud to own shares before the price goes up. The fraud that Reddy & Friends are accused of, which I described above, was of selling stock and hiding the fact that they sold it. By early 2021, they had in fact sold 80% of their shares and it’s only later that the share price started going up.
But wait, here’s more from SEBI:

In 2020 and 2021, Brightcom sold a large chunk (almost 15% stake) of shares to a group of investors. [3] Later, Suresh Reddy—who had been selling Brightcom shares all these years—became a partner at these entities that had just bought a large chunk of stock.
It’s all a bit confusing but here’s what I think happened. In late 2020 and early 2021, it had become apparent if you called yourself a tech company, investors would push your price up. The finer details didn’t matter. Brightcom, of course, happened to be an “ad-tech” company. So there was a decent chance that its share price would go up (or it could be made to go up, there are ways). But since Reddy & Friends had already sold nearly all of their shares, they needed to buy more shares so that they could sell them when the price went up. But they couldn’t buy them directly—because how would they justify selling shares so soon?—so they got some proxy investors to do so on their behalf.
As expected, the share price did go up. A lot. Around the same time, SEBI started investigating the company because of all the shady stuff it had done over the years. If the proxy investors were to sell this stock now, SEBI would definitely catch on, it was already investigating them! So instead of selling any shares at crazy high prices, Reddy instead came out with his association with those proxy investors so that the total founder ownership would go back up to the exact amount expected [4] by the public, that is, 18.47%.
It’s possible that Reddy & Friends made some profit but SEBI says it needs more information to be sure about just how much it would be. It would’ve been easier to know had they also run a pump-and-dump for good measure.
Footnotes
[1] Technically, Brightcom got caught earlier when SEBI actually started investigating. But it’s just this month that SEBI put a nice document out with whatever its investigation found.
[2] This “Other Comprehensive Income” should be a small number. If it’s a huge figure more than your actual profit, there’s usually something fishy happening.
[3] Brightcom didn’t directly sell shares to the group of investors. Instead, it issued warrants. What this meant was that the investors had the right, but not the obligation, to buy shares from the company at a fixed price at a later date. This was a good way for these investors (who are now part of the founder group) to not risk too much money buying shares in case the price went down.
[4] Reminder, the reason that the public expected the founder group to own 18.47% was that they hadn’t informed the stock exchanges when they had reduced their stake.
Original Source: https://boringmoney.in/p/brightcom-made-a-profit-by-hiding

Original Source: https://boringmoney.in/p/brightcom-made-a-profit-by-hiding (my newsletter Boring Money. If you like what you read, do visit the link and subscribe to receive future posts directly in your inbox)

The standard way for a company to make a profit is to produce a thing at some cost, then sell that thing at a higher cost, and pocket the difference. Another, if slightly frowned upon, way of making a profit is to not worry too much about what your company is producing or selling. Instead, at the end of the quarter, you can pick up your financial statements, take a pen, put some nice numbers under “revenue” and erase the numbers under “expenses”. On paper, the company’s making a profit either way.
The risk, apart from running out of money, is that the company might get caught. This month, Brightcom Group, an ad-tech company, got caught. [1] Here’s a SEBI enforcement order describing the stuff Brightcom did, and one of the many things it did was to show profits which didn’t exist.
Some intangible assets are under development
If your company buys, say, a truck, the standard way to account for this expense in your books is by dividing the cost of the truck by the number of years you expect this truck to last, and then adding this number to your expenses every year. This is slightly weird because you do pay cash upfront for the truck. But still, it’s useful to not have to call it an expense just for the first year because it is an asset that lasts many, many years.
If you buy a truck, account for it the standard way I described above, but then the truck meets with an accident and gets trashed the next day? Then that’s it. You have to now account for the full expense of the truck in one go and can’t split it into chunks every year.
In short, as long as an asset is “alive,” you can split its expense into chunks and account for each chunk every year. If it’s “dead,” you have to account for it right away.
Modern accounting is surprisingly thoughtful and there’s a weird in-between “alive” and “dead” that it allows for. Instead of buying an asset, if you’re building it, your asset is in some sense neither dead nor alive. So you can just, umm, add nothing to your expenses until you figure if your asset is actually dead or alive.
Brightcom was spending a lot on salaries, marketing, and stuff, but it didn’t want to show these expenses. So it decided that it wasn’t “spending” but instead “investing” in building an asset. From SEBI’s order, here’s Brightcom’s CFO:

Brightcom was building software and this software would eventually be an intangible asset. But, until Brightcom could figure whether this asset would eventually be dead or alive, it didn’t count any of its expenses as expenses, instead put it under an “intangible assets under development” category. This way, the company could show a nice profit because all its expenses were apparently assets. In all, the company hid ₹863 crore ($100 million) and showed a profit of ₹440 crore ($50 million) in 2020. If its expenses had actually been counted as expenses, Brightcom would’ve shown a loss of ₹428 crore.
https://preview.redd.it/a2xn3xc5bb1d1.jpg?width=762&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8b9bfd5cd84b25807c6025ad9a26980abc57d2da
Asset’s dead but it’s not an expense
One problem with showing your expenses as an “asset under development” is that this asset can’t be under development forever. At some point, depending on if this asset is dead or alive, you have to account for your expenses in some way.
… Or not. If your company makes any money, you put those figures in your profit and loss statement. This is simple and straightforward. But accounting isn’t simple and straightforward. If your company makes money, but it’s not a result of your actual business, then you can’t put it under the P&L. Instead, you have to account for it under a separate subheading called “Other Comprehensive Income”.
The idea behind this new sub-head is that the company's P&L is supposed to reflect its actual ability to make money. If you hold a lot of dollars and the price of the dollar goes up (or down), your company didn’t really do anything to make that profit (or loss) so you’d put it under Other Comprehensive Income and not in your P&L. So stuff like this wouldn’t affect your profit, on paper at least. [2]
Yes, of course, Brightcom recognised the ₹863 crore loss that it had hidden under “intangible assets under development” by categorising it as Other Comprehensive Income. SEBI wasn’t excited about it.
Share this post so that Boring Money can move from “asset under development” to P&L
Sell your stake but keep quiet about it
If a company is doing well, its founders don’t usually sell stock. So if a founder sells some shares, they have to tell everyone about it by regulation, because it could be a sign that things aren’t well.
There are three entities that need to know if a founder sells stock:

1. The company itself, via its registrar and transfer agent (RTA)
2. Depositories that hold stock on behalf of investors
3. Stock exchanges

1 and #2 are important, but they’re obvious. The company has to know if its founders sell stock, and so does the depository that actually moves the stock from one account to another. #3 is how the rest of the rest of the world gets to know. A founder sells some stock, files a disclosure in a stock exchange, the exchange updates its records and screams out that this has happened, and that’s how public investors know.

In March 2014, if you had asked Brightcom’s RTA, a depository, or a stock exchange about how much stake its founders owned, they would’ve all said, “about 40%”. If you asked them again in June 2022, the RTA and the depository would say “about 3.5%”, but the stock exchange would scratch its head and say “18.47%”.
That’s because Brightcom’s founders—primarily CEO Suresh Reddy, his friends and family—sold their stock but didn’t inform the stock exchanges. Here’s what they said when SEBI asked what’s up:

Man, I’m just some dumb guy writing about finance every once in a while, and even I know that if you pledge your shares as collateral to get a loan, you don’t transfer ownership. You just inform your depository and investors about it, and you still own the shares. Reddy & Friends transferred some of their shares to someone else (that is, sold them) and decided not to inform the stock exchanges. Then they used pledging as an excuse and everyone had different answers about how much stock they really owned.
How much money they make tho
When a company’s stock price shoots up in a short period of time, and there’s no concrete reason for it to happen, in all likelihood, it’s a scam. The management of the company may or may not be involved, but it definitely helps if they are.
Last month, I wrote about Sadhna, a company that SEBI charged with running a pump-and-dump. The founders owned a lot of shares, they spread some false news, the share price shot up, then happily sold their stock to naive investors, and made a profit. If you see Brightcom’s share price trajectory without knowing any of the company’s other shenanigans, it might seem a similar story. The stock price was around ₹3 in January 2021. By December, it was at ₹117. 40X in a year is definitely not normal.
In a pump-and-dump, it’s important for those running the fraud to own shares before the price goes up. The fraud that Reddy & Friends are accused of, which I described above, was of selling stock and hiding the fact that they sold it. By early 2021, they had in fact sold 80% of their shares and it’s only later that the share price started going up.
But wait, here’s more from SEBI:

In 2020 and 2021, Brightcom sold a large chunk (almost 15% stake) of shares to a group of investors. [3] Later, Suresh Reddy—who had been selling Brightcom shares all these years—became a partner at these entities that had just bought a large chunk of stock.
It’s all a bit confusing but here’s what I think happened. In late 2020 and early 2021, it had become apparent if you called yourself a tech company, investors would push your price up. The finer details didn’t matter. Brightcom, of course, happened to be an “ad-tech” company. So there was a decent chance that its share price would go up (or it could be made to go up, there are ways). But since Reddy & Friends had already sold nearly all of their shares, they needed to buy more shares so that they could sell them when the price went up. But they couldn’t buy them directly—because how would they justify selling shares so soon?—so they got some proxy investors to do so on their behalf.
As expected, the share price did go up. A lot. Around the same time, SEBI started investigating the company because of all the shady stuff it had done over the years. If the proxy investors were to sell this stock now, SEBI would definitely catch on, it was already investigating them! So instead of selling any shares at crazy high prices, Reddy instead came out with his association with those proxy investors so that the total founder ownership would go back up to the exact amount expected [4] by the public, that is, 18.47%.
It’s possible that Reddy & Friends made some profit but SEBI says it needs more information to be sure about just how much it would be. It would’ve been easier to know had they also run a pump-and-dump for good measure.
Footnotes
[1] Technically, Brightcom got caught earlier when SEBI actually started investigating. But it’s just this month that SEBI put a nice document out with whatever its investigation found.
[2] This “Other Comprehensive Income” should be a small number. If it’s a huge figure more than your actual profit, there’s usually something fishy happening.
[3] Brightcom didn’t directly sell shares to the group of investors. Instead, it issued warrants. What this meant was that the investors had the right, but not the obligation, to buy shares from the company at a fixed price at a later date. This was a good way for these investors (who are now part of the founder group) to not risk too much money buying shares in case the price went down.
[4] Reminder, the reason that the public expected the founder group to own 18.47% was that they hadn’t informed the stock exchanges when they had reduced their stake.
Original Source: https://boringmoney.in/p/brightcom-made-a-profit-by-hiding

Hello everyone!
In 2016 I was looking for music to play Minecraft and one day in the search engine I put "minecraft remix 1 hr" and one of the first suggestions was a video with electronic music, the background image was the character from an anime called "afro samuray "and at the bottom it had a gray stripe that put the name of each song that was played, the video itself did not last an hour but I think it lasted a maximum of 55 minutes (many of the songs I already found a long time ago on Monstercat and NCS in approximately 2017 and 2018).
The song I'm looking for is the first song in the video since I never found it on any of the channels. I ask for your help to see if by any chance any of you have the video, the song or any memory of seeing it. Here I leave you a recreation of what the video looked like and I also leave you the playlist of songs already found.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBInCznKK_QbUw4F7ZpbB8TzsGR4r_mOs
I hope you can help me and I apologize for the translator's English since I am not an English speaker.
Postscript. If I remember more things I will update.