3 ms·

There is no reason for them to not source the evidence they're using to attribute it to the Russians What if the source is an actual human asset within the mal

There is no reason for them to not source the evidence they're using to attribute it to the Russians What if the source is an actual human asset within the malicious organization? What if the source is a compromised server of the Russian organization? What if the source is a legal wiretap on a bad actor?

h4nkoslo 10y ago
Assuming it was Russia, and that they did derive it from some secret means, public announcing they discovered it but not giving the source makes that inference more likely. That's why eg in World War II, the allies only acted on Enigma intercepts if there was a plausible alternate source. So my inference is that they're lying about having sufficient evidence to definitively point at the rooskies, or they're being reckless with sourcing.