STOP YOUR CHAT CONTROL ππ€£ #DIGITAL_FREEDOM_LUNARISSEC
π₯6π€3

Channel
@Lun4risSec
On this record: Topic Β· Growth Β· Engagement Β· Reactions Β· Posts Β· Cite this entry
1,354subscribers
+111 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register Β· movement among entries of 1,000β3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1003733257070 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @Lun4risSec |
| Created | Between 1 February 2026 and 25 May 2026 β estimated from Telegramβs id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 11 October 2026 |
| Measurements held | 17 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 11 October 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/Lun4risSec |
Hacking & security β a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channelβs own recent posts on 18 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 75% confidence. This is a modelβs judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured β it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 11 Oct 2026, 00:21 | 1,354 | +34 |
| 5 Oct 2026, 04:57 | 1,320 | -3 |
| 26 Sept 2026, 12:19 | 1,323 | +10 |
| 15 Sept 2026, 18:58 | 1,313 | -4 |
| 11 Sept 2026, 18:58 | 1,317 | +1 |
| 7 Sept 2026, 09:40 | 1,316 | +8 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 10:49 | 1,308 | +4 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 14:23 | 1,304 | +10 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 10:25 | 1,294 | +3 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 11:03 | 1,291 | +11 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 20:22 | 1,280 | +12 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 19:18 | 1,268 | +13 |
| 15 Aug 2026, 02:47 | 1,255 | +3 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 18:52 | 1,252 | +7 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 14:35 | 1,245 | +2 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 23:01 | 1,243 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 18:34 | 1,243 | first reading |
19 posts held, back to 25 May 2026 β the reader has not yet reached the start of this channelβs public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page of Telegramβs post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute β we hold 19 posts for this entry, the most recent from 3 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
264 reactions across 19 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 58.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| β€ | 155 | 58.7% | |
| π₯ | 28 | 10.6% | |
| π | 23 | 8.71% | |
| π₯° | 23 | 8.71% | |
| π | 13 | 4.92% | |
| π | 7 | 2.65% | |
| β€βπ₯ | 6 | 2.27% | |
| π«‘ | 4 | 1.52% | |
| π€ | 3 | 1.14% | |
| β | 2 | 0.758% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities β π is thanks in one channel and mourning in another β so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one β 4.34K, 1.2M β so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 19 of the 19 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegramβs own count on each post β not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above β those same posts carry 264 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by βa reaction total printed elsewhere on the pageβ.
Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 25 May 2026 to 3 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
STOP YOUR CHAT CONTROL ππ€£ #DIGITAL_FREEDOM_LUNARISSEC
π₯6π€3
πͺπΊ Wake up, wake up, seriously... make an effort! And you want to impose "Chat Control"? That's pretty ironic when your own systems still have security flaws like this. We're warning you once again: stop your "Chat Control" project. You may think you're winning, but don't forget that there will always be another vulnerability, you may win a point, sure, but not the war. Why push for "Chat Control" when the world isβ¦
β€8π«‘4π₯1
STOP YOUR CHAT CONTROL ππ€£ #DIGITAL_FREEDOM_LUNARISSEC
π8
πͺπΊ Another vulnerabilityβ¦ Seriously, make an effort! And you want to impose "Chat Control"? That's pretty ironic when your own systems still have security flaws like this. We're warning you once again: stop your "Chat Control" project. You may think you're winning, but don't forget that there will always be another vulnerability, you may win a point, sure, but not the war. Why push for "Chat Control" when the worldβ¦
β€10π2
STOP YOUR CHAT CONTROL ππ€£ #DIGITAL_FREEDOM_LUNARISSEC
π₯°6π₯4π3
πͺπΊ Another vulnerabilityβ¦ Seriously, make an effort! And you want to impose "Chat Control"? That's pretty ironic when your own systems still have security flaws like this. We're warning you once again: stop your "Chat Control" project. You may think you're winning, but don't forget that there will always be another vulnerability, you may win a point, sure, but not the war. Why push for "Chat Control" when the worldβ¦
β€10π₯4
STOP YOUR CHAT CONTROL π #DIGITAL_FREEDOM_LUNARISSEC
β€13
πͺπΊ If I understand correctly, you want to impose "Chat Control" while your own systems are poorly secured, the whole world is laughing. The whole world does not want your flawed system. We stand for digital freedom. Say no to Chat Control, we want digital freedom, privacy. Why push for "Chat Control" when the world is already facing constant cyberattacks from hackers, a poorly designed system will only weaken securiβ¦
β€17π₯4π2π2
Be aware that we have already identified the vulnerabilities in your systems. Your technological arrogance will be your downfall. Every measure you adopt to control us strengthens our determination to resist you π #DIGITAL_FREEDOM_LUNARISSEC
π₯°16β€2π1π₯1
πͺπΊ We are LunarisSec, we issue an ultimatum regarding your mass surveillance project known as "Chat Control" We will not remain silent in the face of this unacceptable attack on our fundamental freedoms. Our demands are as follows: 1 - Immediate and definitive abandonment of the Chat Control project in both its 1.0 and 2.0 versions 2 - Constitutional protection of end-to-end encryption throughout the European Unionβ¦
β€10π₯8π3π1
π«π· A minor issue related to WhatsApp, we would like to clarify that no user data will be compromised or leaked. Our goal is to raise awareness about the risks that exist online, to remind people that no system is completely secure, and to highlight that protecting privacy remains a major challenge We are LunarisSec. Time destroys everything it creates. We don't break the rules, we rewrite them. Expect LunarisSec. [β¦
β€11π1
π«π· The official website of franceparebrise.fr had a critical security flaw, and we reported it. France is the country most affected by cyberattacks, so we are going to do something to help this country. We are LunarisSec. Time destroys everything it creates. We don't break the rules, we rewrite them. Expect LunarisSec. [+] LunarisSec X : https://x.com/cyb_r21643/status/2076669624238694846 #LunarisSec #Algeria #Misβ¦
β€8π1
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @Lun4risSec. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked β was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it β t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so β1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 11 October 2026 β this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
βLunarisSec π©πΏβ (@Lun4risSec), 1,354 subscribers as measured 11 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Lun4risSec.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV Β· JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.