4 ms·

> Actually this is a pretty clear sign of a state sponsored attack So are you saying that the Russian government either unintentionally left a trail (IOCs) on

> Actually this is a pretty clear sign of a state sponsored attack So are you saying that the Russian government either unintentionally left a trail (IOCs) on the server, or intentionally left a trail because it wanted to be detected? Or are you simply claiming that "Guccifer 2" is on the payroll of the Russian government? (or some combination of the above)...

dogma1138 10y ago
I'm not saying it was Russia, I'm saying that anyone these days that hacks such a high profile target and then parades around and does show and tells has a sponsor. The fact that some of the leaked emails/information of from the "Guccifer" et al. hacks have also been tampered with in order to achieve a specific political goal also hints at a higher objective which isn't something one usually associates with cybercrime or even hacktivism. Criminals would steal, sell and run and hide (not that you could hide these days if you break into a US government network), hacktivists would not usually tamper with the information they release as it goes against their own philosophy.
- grandalf 10y ago
  > have also been tampered with What tampering has occurred?
  - dogma1138 10y ago
    The documents were edited, to what extent/purpose it is unknown. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36913000 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36913000 http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/06/guccifer-leak-of-dnc-trump-research-has-a-russians-fingerprints-on-it/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/06/guccifer-leak-of-dnc... The emails released in 2013 also show some signs of tampering, there were incidents of duplicate headers and the times of some of the emails were strange (mostly related to Benghazi ironically) this was a copy paste error but again no one knows to what extent the "content" if and was tampered with.
    - grandalf 10y ago
      It seems as if anyone who had actually hacked the server would have the emails in a more raw format which could be authenticated in the event that one or more of the emails are newsworthy.

dogma1138 10y ago

I'm not saying it was Russia, I'm saying that anyone these days that hacks such a high profile target and then parades around and does show and tells has a sponsor. The fact that some of the leaked emails/information of from the "Guccifer" et al. hacks have also been tampered with in order to achieve a specific political goal also hints at a higher objective which isn't something one usually associates with cybercrime or even hacktivism. Criminals would steal, sell and run and hide (not that you could hide these days if you break into a US government network), hacktivists would not usually tamper with the information they release as it goes against their own philosophy.

grandalf 10y ago
> have also been tampered with What tampering has occurred?
- dogma1138 10y ago
  The documents were edited, to what extent/purpose it is unknown. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36913000 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36913000 http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/06/guccifer-leak-of-dnc-trump-research-has-a-russians-fingerprints-on-it/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/06/guccifer-leak-of-dnc... The emails released in 2013 also show some signs of tampering, there were incidents of duplicate headers and the times of some of the emails were strange (mostly related to Benghazi ironically) this was a copy paste error but again no one knows to what extent the "content" if and was tampered with.
  - grandalf 10y ago
    It seems as if anyone who had actually hacked the server would have the emails in a more raw format which could be authenticated in the event that one or more of the emails are newsworthy.