4 ms·

Throwaway because I work in a related field. This is a public service announcement: if you haven't seen enough information to prove to you, independent of the

Throwaway because I work in a related field. This is a public service announcement: if you haven't seen enough information to prove to you, independent of the claims of the White House, CIA & FBI, that Russia was behind this, you should file a Freedom of Information Act Request for sufficient evidence to independently reach that conclusion. Citizens of the US in particular should do this to hold their government accountable -- we can not let it be accepted that because POTUS says something, and maybe has confirmation from "anonymous sources" within the CIA & FBI (e.g. as reported by the NYTimes[1]), that it must be true. Muckrock[2] makes it dirt-simple to file a FOIA request. Hold the government accountable -- they work for us. 1: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/obama-russia-election-hack.html?_r=1 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/obama-russia-election-h... 2: https://www.muckrock.com https://www.muckrock.com

wavefunction 10y ago
I don't really care that much about this specific event. It's a bunch of liars (Russian government, various US intelligence services, Russian and American politicians) trying to tell me that "the other guy" is a liar and did something bad. My life continues as it does, working against all those listed above because none of them particularly deserve my assistance or respect.
- digler999 10y ago
  on top of that, the leaks were real. If they were "leaking" phony information, I might have an issue. But this "hack" gives high-ranking politicians a taste of their own medicine. What POTUS calls a "hack", I prefer to call "warrant-less wiretapping". and it's for "security". I'm 'secure' from hillary clinton's corruption, therefore, violating her right to privacy is ok. same thing they do to each US citizen
jamesgblaine 10y ago
While there's no harm in filing additional FOIA requests, let's also add some deductive reasoning to the mix. Is this consistent with Russia's actions in other countries and contexts (as well as their own)? Yes. http://warontherocks.com/2016/11/trolling-for-trump-how-russia-is-trying-to-destroy-our-democracy/ http://warontherocks.com/2016/11/trolling-for-trump-how-russ... Have individuals close to the Kremlin strongly implied they had a role in this and have senior Russian officials stated clearly that they had contact with the Trump campaign during the election? Yes. http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.752386 http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.752386 Did Russia even object today on the grounds that the allegations about their role were false? On the contrary, they were practically doing a victory lap. There are plenty of debates still very worth having about whether the actions taken today are appropriate, whether a hostile stance towards Russia is merited, etc. But I've seen enough to convince me that Russia was engaged in an information operations campaign to cast doubt about the U.S. election and help Trump on the margins.
- showmeevidence 10y ago
  Russia has denied involvement with this incident in the past[1]. I would encourage considering applying the same standard that we would apply to a trial by jury. Simply indicating that someone is a repeat offender, and would have reason to commit an offense again, does not itself meet a standard of evidence of actually committing that offense. 1: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/kremlin-denies-putin-dnc-hacks-232686 http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/kremlin-denies-putin-d...
- geggam 10y ago
  I am wondering why people think nations have ever stopped attempting to influence others ? Covert hacking happens everywhere. The US openly bribes other nations or sends troops to motivate them to change.
tptacek 10y ago
Much of the evidence you'd be looking for is specifically exempt from FOIA.
- showmeevidence 10y ago
  Yes, there are specific exemptions, but a properly worded FOIA request should be able to maneuver around them. For example, Exemption 7[1] would protect "from disclosure information which would reveal techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions or that would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law," but a properly worded request would seek the information that those techniques uncovered, not the techniques themselves. 1: http://www.foiadvocates.com/exemptions.html http://www.foiadvocates.com/exemptions.html
  - tptacek 10y ago
    You are not going to be able to use FOIA to discover national security secrets, no matter how carefully you word the requests. By all means, try, but you're trying to use FOIA to uncover literally the exact kinds of information the law excludes from FOIA.
    - showmeevidence 10y ago
      This is predicated on the evidence, should it exist, of a Russia-backed security incursion being classified a national security secret. While such a hypothetical claim would have questionable value, would it be worth classifying a bit of information, say, like "the attack ingress point was IP address x.x.x.x, which is owned by Russian military?"
      - nl 10y ago
        Of course it is classified. And of course no state backed actor is going to use a military owned IP. And there won't be one single source of evidence which points to it, it will be hundreds of small circumstantial points which taken together point to the conclusion. Those won't ever be released because they will give away sources and techniques.
hackuser 10y ago
This post is from a brand new account, and it only adds FUD to the conversation - it adds no knowledge and has nothing to back up its claims or questions. It's a pattern that should look familiar by now ...
- showmeevidence 10y ago
  I'm not perpetuating any particular agenda other than that people should request enough information to form their own opinions. Throwaway accounts for political conversations are an occupational necessity for my line of work.
vilhelm_s 10y ago
Sure, you can go ahead and file a FOIA request. But according to the NYT article you linked to, 'the forensic evidence was accompanied by “human and technical” sources in Russia, which appears to mean that the United States’ implants or taps in Russian computer and phone networks helped confirm the country’s role.' [0] CIA will not give you information about its secret agents in the Kremlin just because you ask nicely. 0: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us/politics/russia-hack-election-dnc.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us/politics/russia-hack-el...

wavefunction 10y ago

I don't really care that much about this specific event. It's a bunch of liars (Russian government, various US intelligence services, Russian and American politicians) trying to tell me that "the other guy" is a liar and did something bad. My life continues as it does, working against all those listed above because none of them particularly deserve my assistance or respect.

digler999 10y ago
on top of that, the leaks were real. If they were "leaking" phony information, I might have an issue. But this "hack" gives high-ranking politicians a taste of their own medicine. What POTUS calls a "hack", I prefer to call "warrant-less wiretapping". and it's for "security". I'm 'secure' from hillary clinton's corruption, therefore, violating her right to privacy is ok. same thing they do to each US citizen

jamesgblaine 10y ago

While there's no harm in filing additional FOIA requests, let's also add some deductive reasoning to the mix. Is this consistent with Russia's actions in other countries and contexts (as well as their own)? Yes. http://warontherocks.com/2016/11/trolling-for-trump-how-russia-is-trying-to-destroy-our-democracy/ http://warontherocks.com/2016/11/trolling-for-trump-how-russ... Have individuals close to the Kremlin strongly implied they had a role in this and have senior Russian officials stated clearly that they had contact with the Trump campaign during the election? Yes. http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.752386 http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.752386 Did Russia even object today on the grounds that the allegations about their role were false? On the contrary, they were practically doing a victory lap. There are plenty of debates still very worth having about whether the actions taken today are appropriate, whether a hostile stance towards Russia is merited, etc. But I've seen enough to convince me that Russia was engaged in an information operations campaign to cast doubt about the U.S. election and help Trump on the margins.

showmeevidence 10y ago
Russia has denied involvement with this incident in the past[1]. I would encourage considering applying the same standard that we would apply to a trial by jury. Simply indicating that someone is a repeat offender, and would have reason to commit an offense again, does not itself meet a standard of evidence of actually committing that offense. 1: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/kremlin-denies-putin-dnc-hacks-232686 http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/kremlin-denies-putin-d...
geggam 10y ago
I am wondering why people think nations have ever stopped attempting to influence others ? Covert hacking happens everywhere. The US openly bribes other nations or sends troops to motivate them to change.

tptacek 10y ago

Much of the evidence you'd be looking for is specifically exempt from FOIA.

showmeevidence 10y ago
Yes, there are specific exemptions, but a properly worded FOIA request should be able to maneuver around them. For example, Exemption 7[1] would protect "from disclosure information which would reveal techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions or that would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law," but a properly worded request would seek the information that those techniques uncovered, not the techniques themselves. 1: http://www.foiadvocates.com/exemptions.html http://www.foiadvocates.com/exemptions.html
- tptacek 10y ago
  You are not going to be able to use FOIA to discover national security secrets, no matter how carefully you word the requests. By all means, try, but you're trying to use FOIA to uncover literally the exact kinds of information the law excludes from FOIA.
  - showmeevidence 10y ago
    This is predicated on the evidence, should it exist, of a Russia-backed security incursion being classified a national security secret. While such a hypothetical claim would have questionable value, would it be worth classifying a bit of information, say, like "the attack ingress point was IP address x.x.x.x, which is owned by Russian military?"
    - nl 10y ago
      Of course it is classified. And of course no state backed actor is going to use a military owned IP. And there won't be one single source of evidence which points to it, it will be hundreds of small circumstantial points which taken together point to the conclusion. Those won't ever be released because they will give away sources and techniques.

hackuser 10y ago

This post is from a brand new account, and it only adds FUD to the conversation - it adds no knowledge and has nothing to back up its claims or questions. It's a pattern that should look familiar by now ...

showmeevidence 10y ago
I'm not perpetuating any particular agenda other than that people should request enough information to form their own opinions. Throwaway accounts for political conversations are an occupational necessity for my line of work.

vilhelm_s 10y ago

Sure, you can go ahead and file a FOIA request. But according to the NYT article you linked to, 'the forensic evidence was accompanied by “human and technical” sources in Russia, which appears to mean that the United States’ implants or taps in Russian computer and phone networks helped confirm the country’s role.' [0] CIA will not give you information about its secret agents in the Kremlin just because you ask nicely. 0: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us/politics/russia-hack-election-dnc.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us/politics/russia-hack-el...