6 ms·

My case as already been said better by others: "In the physical world of crime investigation, common sense dictates that the perpetrator of a crime may use any

My case as already been said better by others: "In the physical world of crime investigation, common sense dictates that the perpetrator of a crime may use any weapon and not just one made in the country of his birth, and that the developer or manufacturer of the weapon most likely isn’t the criminal. And yet, those seemingly crazy assumptions are made every day by cybersecurity companies involved in incident response and threat intelligence. The malware was written in Russian? It was a Russian who attacked you. Chinese characters in the code? You’ve been hacked by the Peoples Liberation Army." https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/the-dnc-breach-and-the-hijacking-of-common-sense-20e89dacfc2b https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/the-dnc-breach-and-the-hijac...

staunch 9y ago
"The person or persons responsible are unknown, but let’s assume that CrowdStrike is correct and the responsible party are Russian hackers employed by one or more of Russia’s intelligence services. They used APT28 malware developed and maintained by a Russian lab." Another out-of-context quote from the same article...this is fun ;-) No informed person is claiming Russia did it merely because it was "written in Russian". They're all basing it on many pieces of circumstantial evidence. Don't crime investigators also look at the criminal history, motivations, and opportunity of the suspect? I'd say you're doing a disservice to that author by taking his quote out of context. He's very clearly not making the simplistic straw man argument that you are. It sounds like he suspects the Russians did it, as is rational, but wants real proof -- and not just circumstantial evidence. That is a totally reasonable demand.
- KekDemaga 9y ago
  >It sounds like he suspects the Russians did it, as is rational, but wants real proof -- and not just circumstantial evidence. That is a totally reasonable demand. That is all I ask as well. Considering we are accusing a nation with nuclear weapons of an act of war the evidence must be much more than circumstantial. The FBI wasn't even permitted to investigate the server personally yet, let's start there instead of relying on private contractors paid by the DNC.
  - akhilcacharya 9y ago
    > of an act of war the evidence must be much more than circumstantial When does "circumstantial" end? When there are "little green men" in Tallinn? How about Alaska?
    - KekDemaga 9y ago
      >When does "circumstantial" end? Why not just wire up the nuclear missile system to all government servers and launch should a Russian IP address be detected?
      - akhilcacharya 9y ago
        The idea that we can choose to ignore an attack on our sovereignty by a third-rate pariah state is beyond absurd. The US is the super power here, not the other way around. We set the terms.
        KekDemaga 9y ago
        So war over a couple emails? I'd rather not servicemen die to retain the illusion that the DNC isn't corrupt.
        akhilcacharya 9y ago
        The hacks didn't even reveal that. They did, however, release personal information on donors as well as the dirt from American heros personal emails (Colin Powell and John McCain) who just happen to be anti-Putin.
        KekDemaga 9y ago
        Then how did they "hack the election" if the content was so benign?
        9y ago
darkarmani 9y ago
> The malware was written in Russian? It was a Russian who attacked you. You don't think that investigators can deal with misleading evidence? The country of origin is still a clue that can fit together with other clues.
- KekDemaga 9y ago
  I'd like to see what the FBI can learn if given access to the server, currently they have not been permitted access and all reports have come from third parties paid by the DNC. Similar third party accounts not funded by the DNC make claims that directly contradict the narrative portrayed by those who have been funded by them: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-10/new-research-shows-guccifer-20-files-were-copied-locally-dnc-not-hacked-russians http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-10/new-research-shows-...

staunch 9y ago

"The person or persons responsible are unknown, but let’s assume that CrowdStrike is correct and the responsible party are Russian hackers employed by one or more of Russia’s intelligence services. They used APT28 malware developed and maintained by a Russian lab." Another out-of-context quote from the same article...this is fun ;-) No informed person is claiming Russia did it merely because it was "written in Russian". They're all basing it on many pieces of circumstantial evidence. Don't crime investigators also look at the criminal history, motivations, and opportunity of the suspect? I'd say you're doing a disservice to that author by taking his quote out of context. He's very clearly not making the simplistic straw man argument that you are. It sounds like he suspects the Russians did it, as is rational, but wants real proof -- and not just circumstantial evidence. That is a totally reasonable demand.

KekDemaga 9y ago
>It sounds like he suspects the Russians did it, as is rational, but wants real proof -- and not just circumstantial evidence. That is a totally reasonable demand. That is all I ask as well. Considering we are accusing a nation with nuclear weapons of an act of war the evidence must be much more than circumstantial. The FBI wasn't even permitted to investigate the server personally yet, let's start there instead of relying on private contractors paid by the DNC.
- akhilcacharya 9y ago
  > of an act of war the evidence must be much more than circumstantial When does "circumstantial" end? When there are "little green men" in Tallinn? How about Alaska?
  - KekDemaga 9y ago
    >When does "circumstantial" end? Why not just wire up the nuclear missile system to all government servers and launch should a Russian IP address be detected?
    - akhilcacharya 9y ago
      The idea that we can choose to ignore an attack on our sovereignty by a third-rate pariah state is beyond absurd. The US is the super power here, not the other way around. We set the terms.
      - KekDemaga 9y ago
        So war over a couple emails? I'd rather not servicemen die to retain the illusion that the DNC isn't corrupt.
        akhilcacharya 9y ago
        The hacks didn't even reveal that. They did, however, release personal information on donors as well as the dirt from American heros personal emails (Colin Powell and John McCain) who just happen to be anti-Putin.
        KekDemaga 9y ago
        Then how did they "hack the election" if the content was so benign?
        9y ago

darkarmani 9y ago

> The malware was written in Russian? It was a Russian who attacked you. You don't think that investigators can deal with misleading evidence? The country of origin is still a clue that can fit together with other clues.

KekDemaga 9y ago
I'd like to see what the FBI can learn if given access to the server, currently they have not been permitted access and all reports have come from third parties paid by the DNC. Similar third party accounts not funded by the DNC make claims that directly contradict the narrative portrayed by those who have been funded by them: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-10/new-research-shows-guccifer-20-files-were-copied-locally-dnc-not-hacked-russians http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-10/new-research-shows-...