5 ms·

What? Has any evidence of the Russia Election Interference/Hacking become available in the public domain?

by mowenz 9y ago

ryanlol 9y ago
Yes, technical analysis by leading security firms. Malware samples from compromised networks, strongly attributable phishing campaigns.
- mowenz 9y ago
  Can you provide a source please? Edit: I was downvoted for kindly asking for a source?
  - ryanlol 9y ago
    https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democratic-national-committee/ https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democ... At this point it's essentially impossible to make a credible claim that Russia did not compromise the DNC network. At best you could try to argue that they weren't the only ones to do so, but that feels like grasping at straws.
    - mowenz 9y ago
      I have seen this and also the criticisms of it. I am not understanding what exactly is the definitive proof here, can you help me understand? To be fair, the criticisms were that they were hired by the DNC after the DNC dragged their feet on giving the FBI access. For some reason they gave this firm the right of way. The original report has also since been revised and had portions retracted... So it wasn't a gold standard of evidence to begin with. To be fair there are many respectable people (who are strongly anti-Trump) questioning this[1]. 1-https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/heres-the-public-evidence-russia-hacked-the-dnc-its-not-enough/ https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/heres-the-public-evidenc...
      - ryanlol 9y ago
        >I am not understanding what exactly is the definitive proof here, can you help me understand? There's no definitive proof, there's evidence. This is as definitive as it gets, we've got a report by some of the best people in the field that's also been corroborated by the US DHS. I'm sure this is far better evidence than anything that exists to the contrary, people get convicted on shakier grounds every day. It is not disputable that DNC servers were infected by Russian government malware.
        mowenz 9y ago
        Why is it definitive? Are you able to help me understand that? Was the initial report they retracted more or less definitive? Remember the Iraq War was also started with lies corroborated by the US Gvt and the courts did not pose an obstacle to it... I dont care if men eith epilletes tell me so. I want to see the proof.
        ryanlol 9y ago
        >Was the initial report they retracted more or less definitive? At this point you're just trolling. >The company removed language that said Ukraine's artillery lost 80 percent of the Soviet-era D-30 howitzers, which used aiming software that purportedly was hacked. Instead, the revised report cites figures of 15 to 20 percent losses in combat operations, attributing the figures to IISS.
        mowenz 9y ago
        Hey, hey now, I am kindly asking a reasonable question, and I and others are raising reasonable concerns and now you started to slinging mud. Do you actually have any technical facts to substantiate your "as definitive as it gets" statement? Because slinging mud makes you look unreasonable in my eyes and I'd like to know what facts stand behind your argument.
        micheljones 9y ago
        > It is not disputable that DNC servers were infected by Russian government malware. Because the signatures of 'Russian government malware' were found? Same signatures we recently found CIA can (and does) easily fake?
    - trowway21 9y ago
      You realize that crowdstrike retracted the report? They were called out by some kids on the internet and got some media coverage, Feinstein commented the next morning, regretfully admitting crowdstrike, the only evidence they had, had to retract, here is the 'hard evidence.' https://weaponizedautism.wordpress.com/2017/04/09/trump-dns-logs-fabricated/ https://weaponizedautism.wordpress.com/2017/04/09/trump-dns-...
      - openasocket 9y ago
        You're talking about a different report, about the presence of X-agent in Ukrainian artillery. And it wasn't a full retraction, it was just a correction, which did not undermine the key points. https://www.crowdstrike.com/wp-content/brochures/FancyBearTracksUkrainianArtillery.pdf https://www.crowdstrike.com/wp-content/brochures/FancyBearTr... The correction had to do with mis-representing the number of troops killed, it did not dispute that an X-agent variant was found on the artillery.
    - micheljones 9y ago
      http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-28/something-stinks-here-crowdstrike-revises-retracts-parts-explosive-russian-hacking-r http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-28/something-stinks-he...
    - shard972 9y ago
      I think ill wait till a government agency can corroborate this, considering the current political climate I don't think you can trust a the conclusions of a hired company.
    - letmein 9y ago
      lol Crowdstrike is a total joke. Everything they do is to cover up the horrible truth. DNC, Podesta and Hillary's got totally fucking pwnd by NSA's stolen virus arsenal. They were the Shadowbrokers very first target. The whole "muh Russia" narrative is a big fat lie to cover for NSA's ass blowing in the wind. Because what would happen if folks discovered it was NSA's direct fault for the election getting rigged on both sides? NSA has gone so far in their extremism that now they can't let anyone blame them for their actual fuck ups that endanger all of us. The weirdest thing about Guccifer isn't what he did, nor how he did it, nor why, but that he's is still, today, tweeting in public, mocking NSA, which I know they know, and yet they do nothing. I won't tell you who. If you're smart, you'll find him. He loves puzzles, and he's the best I've ever seen at it. Think of it as a meritocracy. If you're worthy, you'll figure it out on your own and join the club. The real story behind Guccifer is why NSA covered up for Guccifer. I don't know if Guccifer the Shadowbroker is ex-NSA or even active NSA, but whoever he is, there is no way to separate what he did from what NSA did. Think I'm larping? Then why do I have screenshots of Podesta's Gmail password reset 3 months before it happened, and the Clinton Foundation's Exchange admin panel and the CMS for their backup vendor? Everything Crowdstrike has said is laughably wrong. They're so shitty at cyber they deserve to get popped like Sony. Maybe it already happened, who knows? ;) Crowdstrike won't exist in less than 2 years. You'll see.
- knowaveragejoe 9y ago
  To add to this, here's a comprehensive list of everything related to just the 2016 US presidential campaign: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20... Nevermind their track record interfering elsewhere. Cue the whataboutism WRT the US meddling in other's elections.

What? Has any evidence of the Russia Election Interference/Hacking become available in the public domain?

by mowenz 9y ago

What? Has any evidence of the Russia Election Interference/Hacking become available in the public domain?

Yes, technical analysis by leading security firms. Malware samples from compromised networks, strongly attributable phishing campaigns.

mowenz 9y ago
Can you provide a source please? Edit: I was downvoted for kindly asking for a source?
- ryanlol 9y ago
  https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democratic-national-committee/ https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democ... At this point it's essentially impossible to make a credible claim that Russia did not compromise the DNC network. At best you could try to argue that they weren't the only ones to do so, but that feels like grasping at straws.
  - mowenz 9y ago
    I have seen this and also the criticisms of it. I am not understanding what exactly is the definitive proof here, can you help me understand? To be fair, the criticisms were that they were hired by the DNC after the DNC dragged their feet on giving the FBI access. For some reason they gave this firm the right of way. The original report has also since been revised and had portions retracted... So it wasn't a gold standard of evidence to begin with. To be fair there are many respectable people (who are strongly anti-Trump) questioning this[1]. 1-https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/heres-the-public-evidence-russia-hacked-the-dnc-its-not-enough/ https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/heres-the-public-evidenc...
    - ryanlol 9y ago
      >I am not understanding what exactly is the definitive proof here, can you help me understand? There's no definitive proof, there's evidence. This is as definitive as it gets, we've got a report by some of the best people in the field that's also been corroborated by the US DHS. I'm sure this is far better evidence than anything that exists to the contrary, people get convicted on shakier grounds every day. It is not disputable that DNC servers were infected by Russian government malware.
      - mowenz 9y ago
        Why is it definitive? Are you able to help me understand that? Was the initial report they retracted more or less definitive? Remember the Iraq War was also started with lies corroborated by the US Gvt and the courts did not pose an obstacle to it... I dont care if men eith epilletes tell me so. I want to see the proof.
        ryanlol 9y ago
        >Was the initial report they retracted more or less definitive? At this point you're just trolling. >The company removed language that said Ukraine's artillery lost 80 percent of the Soviet-era D-30 howitzers, which used aiming software that purportedly was hacked. Instead, the revised report cites figures of 15 to 20 percent losses in combat operations, attributing the figures to IISS.
        mowenz 9y ago
        Hey, hey now, I am kindly asking a reasonable question, and I and others are raising reasonable concerns and now you started to slinging mud. Do you actually have any technical facts to substantiate your "as definitive as it gets" statement? Because slinging mud makes you look unreasonable in my eyes and I'd like to know what facts stand behind your argument.
      - micheljones 9y ago
        > It is not disputable that DNC servers were infected by Russian government malware. Because the signatures of 'Russian government malware' were found? Same signatures we recently found CIA can (and does) easily fake?
  - trowway21 9y ago
    You realize that crowdstrike retracted the report? They were called out by some kids on the internet and got some media coverage, Feinstein commented the next morning, regretfully admitting crowdstrike, the only evidence they had, had to retract, here is the 'hard evidence.' https://weaponizedautism.wordpress.com/2017/04/09/trump-dns-logs-fabricated/ https://weaponizedautism.wordpress.com/2017/04/09/trump-dns-...
    - openasocket 9y ago
      You're talking about a different report, about the presence of X-agent in Ukrainian artillery. And it wasn't a full retraction, it was just a correction, which did not undermine the key points. https://www.crowdstrike.com/wp-content/brochures/FancyBearTracksUkrainianArtillery.pdf https://www.crowdstrike.com/wp-content/brochures/FancyBearTr... The correction had to do with mis-representing the number of troops killed, it did not dispute that an X-agent variant was found on the artillery.
  - micheljones 9y ago
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-28/something-stinks-here-crowdstrike-revises-retracts-parts-explosive-russian-hacking-r http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-28/something-stinks-he...
  - shard972 9y ago
    I think ill wait till a government agency can corroborate this, considering the current political climate I don't think you can trust a the conclusions of a hired company.
  - letmein 9y ago
    lol Crowdstrike is a total joke. Everything they do is to cover up the horrible truth. DNC, Podesta and Hillary's got totally fucking pwnd by NSA's stolen virus arsenal. They were the Shadowbrokers very first target. The whole "muh Russia" narrative is a big fat lie to cover for NSA's ass blowing in the wind. Because what would happen if folks discovered it was NSA's direct fault for the election getting rigged on both sides? NSA has gone so far in their extremism that now they can't let anyone blame them for their actual fuck ups that endanger all of us. The weirdest thing about Guccifer isn't what he did, nor how he did it, nor why, but that he's is still, today, tweeting in public, mocking NSA, which I know they know, and yet they do nothing. I won't tell you who. If you're smart, you'll find him. He loves puzzles, and he's the best I've ever seen at it. Think of it as a meritocracy. If you're worthy, you'll figure it out on your own and join the club. The real story behind Guccifer is why NSA covered up for Guccifer. I don't know if Guccifer the Shadowbroker is ex-NSA or even active NSA, but whoever he is, there is no way to separate what he did from what NSA did. Think I'm larping? Then why do I have screenshots of Podesta's Gmail password reset 3 months before it happened, and the Clinton Foundation's Exchange admin panel and the CMS for their backup vendor? Everything Crowdstrike has said is laughably wrong. They're so shitty at cyber they deserve to get popped like Sony. Maybe it already happened, who knows? ;) Crowdstrike won't exist in less than 2 years. You'll see.
knowaveragejoe 9y ago
To add to this, here's a comprehensive list of everything related to just the 2016 US presidential campaign: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20... Nevermind their track record interfering elsewhere. Cue the whataboutism WRT the US meddling in other's elections.