Reply With Quote
A bit surprising that The Nation published that.
Holy wall of text batman
A bit surprising that The Nation published that.
Found it odd as well.
Something interesting from the article I hadn't seen before.
"Kirk Wiebe, the former SIGINT analyst at the NSA, thinks Forensicator could be “someone very good with the FBI,” but there is no certainty. Unanimously, however, all the analysts and forensics investigators interviewed for this column say Forensicator’s advanced expertise, evident in the work he has done, is unassailable. They hold a similarly high opinion of Adam Carter’s work.
Forensicator is working with the do ents published by Guccifer 2.0, focusing for now on the July 5 intrusion into the DNC server. The contents of Guccifer’s files are known—they were published last September—and are not Forensicator’s concern. His work is with the metadata on those files. These data did not come to him via any clandestine means. Forensicator simply has access to them that others did not have. It is this access that prompts Kirk Wiebe and others to suggest that Forensicator may be someone with exceptional talent and training inside an agency such as the FBI. “Forensicator unlocked and then analyzed what had been the locked files Guccifer supposedly took from the DNC server,” Skip Folden explained in an interview. “To do this he would have to have ‘access privilege,’ meaning a key.”
Boom. Game over.
"In effect, the new forensic evidence considered here lands in a vacuum. We now enter a period when an official reply should be forthcoming. What the forensic people are now producing cons utes evidence, however one may view it, and it is the first scientifically derived evidence we have into any of the events in which Russia has been implicated. The investigators deserve a response, the betrayed professionals who formed VIPS as the WMD scandal unfolded in 2003 deserve it, and so do the rest of us. The cost of duplicity has rarely been so high.
I concluded each of the interviews conducted for this column by asking for a degree of confidence in the new findings. These are careful, exacting people as a matter of professional training and standards, and I got careful, exacting replies.
All those interviewed came in between 90 percent and 100 percent certain that the forensics prove out. I have already quoted Skip Folden’s answer: impossible based on the data. “The laws of physics don’t lie,” Ray McGovern volunteered at one point. “It’s QED, theorem demonstrated,” William Binney said in response to my question. “There’s no evidence out there to get me to change my mind.” When I asked Edward Loomis, a 90 percent man, about the 10 percent he held out, he replied, “I’ve looked at the work and it shows there was no Russian hack. But I didn’t do the work. That’s the 10 percent. I’m a scientist.”
So it wasn't a remote hack. Hadn't we already mostly established that?
Whodunnit?
Didn't really see anything in there indicating the iden y of the person with the flashdrive.
Simplify it.
So who did all the non-July 5 activities?
Also not explained.
Crowdstrike shared the other activity, that involved poking around in the servers. One of the outside experts who criticized Crowdstrikes initial assessment, agreed that this other activity was Russian, and consistent with previous known Russian agents, as pointed out here.
There is also the nagging matter of the FBi attempting to warn the DNC that someone was rooting around their servers.
The FBI/NSA detect internet activity, not intranet activity. Someone downloading things onto a flash drive would not trigger the monitoring of US counter intelligence. What did US counterintelligence see that caused them to attempt to warn the DNC?
"game over"
If the theory doesn't explain all the evidence, you need to adjust your theory.
It's almost as if TSA and 4chan don't know or don't care about that.
The theory was that the DNC was not hacked. The theory proved out.
Mods please lock thread this one is game over. Boom.
What is the proof regarding non-July 5 events?
Already posted in this thread. Search Adam Carter
"Forensic investigations of do ents made public two weeks prior to the July 5 leak by the person or en y known as Guccifer 2.0 show that they were fraudulent: Before Guccifer posted them they were adulterated by cutting and pasting them into a blank template that had Russian as its default language. Guccifer took responsibility on June 15 for an intrusion the DNC reported on June 14 and professed to be a WikiLeaks source—claims essential to the official narrative implicating Russia in what was soon cast as an extensive hacking operation. To put the point simply, forensic science now devastates this narrative."
So what did the FBI see?CNN) — Federal investigators tried to warn the Democratic National Committee about a potential intrusion in their computer network months before the party moved to try to fix the problem, U.S. officials briefed on the probe tell CNN.
The revelation raises questions about whether the DNC could have done more to limit the damage done by hackers suspected of working for Russian intelligence.
The DNC brought in consultants from the private security firm CrowdStrike in April. And by the time suspected Russian hackers were kicked out of the DNC network in June, the hackers had been inside for about a year.
A person briefed on the DNC's response says the warning from the FBI and other agencies wasn't specific, and that the extent of the problem wasn't clear when the initial warnings came. DNC officials hired outside help after additional indications surfaced that their systems were compromised.
How did they know to warn the DNC?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKCN10E09H
Crowdstrike didn't come on board until April of 2016.
on them all you like.
What did the FBI see before then?
There has been forensic examination of all the wikileaks do ents?
That's news to me. Show me the people who examined them all.
And the 2015 breaches? Also inside jerb remember remember chalupa fusion game over?
Yeah read the detailed technical summaries
This pretty much puts the nail in the coffin of the hoax that Russsia hacked the DNC
Game over
You've never read any of this.
Read it at lunchtime
It was physically impossible for Russia to have hacked the DNC via eastern europe as Crowdstrike, DNC and US Intelligence has claimed
The cornerstone of the Russia collusion hoax has been devastated and the house of cards is coming down
CLAIM: Wikileaks Source for DNC Mails - STATUS: Not Verified"game over"
Um dont evade the point.
This proves it was physically impossible for Putin to hack the DNC servers through Eastern Europe as DNC claimed.
Also Guccifer docs were clearly adulterated.
Do you have anything to say about those 2 conclusions?
What does this have to do with the Guccifer "hack"?
What does this have to do with the Guccifer "hack"?
Exactly.
Not sure I'm following. Do you have a point?
Yup Russia had nothing to do with the DNC hack.
Ball is on the Governments court
Stupid re probably cant even send an email without help
Just made it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
