Channel
@csec_cyberSecurity
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
1,002subscribers
-2 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001629491383 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @csec_cyberSecurity |
| Created | Between 1 December 2021 and 30 April 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 29 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 6 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 29 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/csec_cyberSecurity |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 29 Aug 2026, 00:03 | 1,002 | -1 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 02:17 | 1,003 | -1 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 21:45 | 1,004 | -4 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 07:58 | 1,008 | +4 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 22:24 | 1,004 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 20:03 | 1,004 | first reading |
9 posts held, back to 25 June 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s 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 — we hold 9 posts for this entry, the most recent from 27 July 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
69 reactions across 8 posts, in 4 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 81.2% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 56 | 81.2% | |
| 👏 | 9 | 13.0% | |
| ❤ | 3 | 4.35% | |
| ⚡ | 1 | 1.45% |
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 — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — 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 — 4.34K, 1.2M — 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 8 of the 9 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 69reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 9 most recent posts we hold, published 25 June 2026 to 27 July 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.
🔥 Happening Now 🔥 Summer Bootcamp Week 7 Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) 🌐 Tricking a server into fetching a URL it shouldn't - internal systems, cloud metadata, or private services hidden behind the firewall. Turning the server's own trusted network position into a way past defenses meant to keep outsiders out. — Cyber Security Division By Keneni Asefa @csec_cybersecurity @CSEC_ASTU #CSEC_ASTU #Cybersecur…
🔥7
🔥 Happening Now 🔥 Summer Bootcamp Week 6 Race Conditions ⚡ Sending multiple requests at the exact same moment, before the system finishes checking the first one. Exploiting that tiny timing gap to redeem a coupon twice, withdraw money twice, or slip past a check meant to only allow it once. — Cyber Security Division By Salahadin Sadik @csec_cybersecurity @CSEC_ASTU #CSEC_ASTU #Cybersecurity #WebSecurity #wee…
🔥6⚡1❤1
🔥 Happening Now 🔥 Summer Bootcamp Week 5 File Upload Vulnerabilities Bypassing extension filters. Faking content-types. Sneaking payloads past MIME checks. Understanding how missing validation, weak storage paths, and blind trust in file metadata turn a simple upload form into remote code execution. 📁 — Cyber Security Division By Sirajudin Seid @csec_cybersecurity @CSEC_ASTU #CSEC_ASTU #Cybersecurity #WebSecur…
🔥5
Researchers documented JadePuffer, what they believe is the first known “agentic ransomware”, which adapts in real time and retries steps to execute an end-to-end extortion operation Not a new kind of evil, exactly. Just the old kind with fewer coffee breaks.
🔥 Happening Now 🔥 Summer Bootcamp Week 4 Business Logic Flow & Broken Access Control Bypassing checks. Manipulating workflows. Understanding how broken logic and weak boundaries become full account takeover. 🔓" — Cyber Security Division By Lina Temam @csec_cybersecurity @CSEC_ASTU #CSEC_ASTU #Cybersecurity #WebSecurity #accesscontrol #businessflow #apitesting #Infosec #SummerBootcamp
🔥4
🏆 Another Proud Moment for CSEC_ASTU 🏆 Today, we proudly celebrate the outstanding achievements of our members at the ICCA CTF 2026. 🌟 Girum Senay, a CSEC graduate, secured 1st Place with exceptional cybersecurity skills 🌟 Yonas Sisay, a CSEC graduate, secured 2nd Place, continuing our tradition of excellence 🌟 Their results reflect dedication, hands-on experience, and the strength of our community Your achievemen…
🔥12❤1
🔥 Happening Now 🔥 Summer Bootcamp Week 3 Path Traversals & Command Injection Escaping directories. Executing commands. Understanding how trusted input becomes system compromise. ⚡ — Cyber Security Division By Beka Abebe @csec_cybersecurity @CSEC_ASTU #CSEC_ASTU #Cybersecurity #WebSecurity #CMDI #PathTraversal #CyberSecurityTraining #Infosec #SummerBootcamp
🔥3
we did it again🔥🔥1 st and 2 nd🔥🔥
🔥19
What an incredible experience hosting the #ICCA #CTF #2026! We are proud to have brought together cybersecurity enthusiasts, students, and professionals to test their skills, learn from one another, and engage in hands-on cybersecurity challenges. Events like these play a vital role in strengthening our cybersecurity community and fostering the next generation of cyber talent. A heartfelt thank you to the ECySA (Et…
👏9❤1
Showing the 9 most recent of 9 posts we hold for @csec_cyberSecurity. 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 ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 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.
Citation-graph rank — 284,807 of 1,627,445entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
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 29 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“CSEC_Cybersecurity” (@csec_cyberSecurity), 1,002 subscribers as measured 29 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/csec_cyberSecurity.
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 · 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.