5 ms·

The problem with these allegations is they always seem to have this sort of issue, as well as logical problems. Some of the things in the article don't really m

The problem with these allegations is they always seem to have this sort of issue, as well as logical problems. Some of the things in the article don't really make any sense. For instance they state that they way they decided that Guccifer was part of the GRU is that on one occasion the IP for that Twitter account was from the GRU. They then state that that must mean that the Russians must have forgotten to log onto their VPN first. But I mean, what? Using a dedicated VPN makes no real sense in the era of TOR, and such a mistake would have been literally impossible with TOR. It's also mentioned in the article that "The US (or a partner)" hacked at least two GRU computers. If this is the case then it's safe to assume other actors could have as well, and suddenly what exactly does a login from the GRU IP actually mean? Or in the machines that the GRU allegedly hacked, their behavior was discovered by the presence of logs that the hackers apparently had to manually delete? State level malware does not automatically delete logs? Wow. And then they allegedly rented servers in Arizona and Illinois for illicit activities, knowing full well that their are a gazillion different domestic digital surveillance programs being carried out by the NSA? And then apparently they were exchanging emails, literally discussing theft of DNC materials, in plain text without encryption? These things just never really make any logical sense. It simultaneously tries to paint Russians as these super hackers capable of achieving anything. And then it also shows them getting busted making mistakes that I'd like to call amateur, but that implies that these are mistakes even an amateur might reasonably make, which is probably doubtful. It's bizarre.

duxup 8y ago
I really don't see your descriptions as that odd or "problems." So some Russians didn't use Tor because you think they should have (it's not like the US government isn't already aware of TOR...). I just don't see that as a big deal or at all surprising... Beyond that are you saying that some other actor hacked a GRU computer and framed them or something? That's a pretty big leap there without anything to it. As for logs having your malware just delete logs automatically could be useful at times... less so other times. I would think you would want to choose to do it when you wanted. A lot of malware does log wiping, I'd be tempted to look for log changes over time just to find malware based on that alone..... suddenly missing logs would be a big sign. Beyond that I'm not going to get into it. These seem like just you and me logicing things out in our head and that doesn't mean we're right or wrong. Humans don't make sense at times, they dork up, that isn't surprising to me. Just because some of it is curious to me and maybe choices I wouldn't have made, doesn't make it not true, or those choices as odd or wrong as we might thing anyway.
craigc 8y ago
Two other points worth noting 1. The FBI never had physical access to the hacked servers and were relying completely on the report from a third party company, CrowdStrike: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/313555-comey-fbi-did-request-access-to-hacked-dnc-servers http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/313555-comey-fbi... 2. The former tech director of the NSA, William Binney, claimed that the data could not have been copied remotely because the download speed was around 22 MB/s (176 Mb/s) which he and a team concluded was not possible for a remote hack with servers in Russia and routing through a commercial VPN service: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/ https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-r...
- reefoctopus 8y ago
  >During former FBI director James Comey’s testimony to the House Intelligence Committee, Comey was asked whether the FBI had ever received the DNC’s hacked hardware. >He said they did not, but obtained access from a review of the system performed by CrowdStrike, a third-party cybersecurity firm. >"We got the forensics from the pros that they hired which -- again, best practice is always to get access to the machines themselves, but this, my folks tell me, was an appropriate substitute," Comey said. >DNC spokeswoman Adrienne Watson told PolitiFact that the DNC cooperated with the FBI’s requests, which resulted in the DNC providing a copy of their server. >"An image of a server is the best thing to use in an investigation so that your exploration of the server does not change the evidence (just like you don’t want investigators leaving their own DNA around a physical crime scene) and so that the bad actors cannot make changes to the evidence while you are looking at it," Watson said. "Any suggestion that they were denied access to what they wanted for their investigation is completely incorrect." http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/16/donald-trump/missing-servers-donald-trump-vladimir-putin/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/...
- peteretep 8y ago
  > 2. The former tech director of the NSA, William Binney etc It's interesting, this is the second time I've seen this talking point in two days. The first one linked to a slightly less blog-ish source, and pointed out that this "fact" had been established in _The Nation_, a reasonably well-respected and left-sympathetic newspaper. Here's the article in The Nation: https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/ https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-qu... It now has a gigantic disclosure in front of it which takes most of the weight of the "findings" away.

duxup 8y ago

I really don't see your descriptions as that odd or "problems." So some Russians didn't use Tor because you think they should have (it's not like the US government isn't already aware of TOR...). I just don't see that as a big deal or at all surprising... Beyond that are you saying that some other actor hacked a GRU computer and framed them or something? That's a pretty big leap there without anything to it. As for logs having your malware just delete logs automatically could be useful at times... less so other times. I would think you would want to choose to do it when you wanted. A lot of malware does log wiping, I'd be tempted to look for log changes over time just to find malware based on that alone..... suddenly missing logs would be a big sign. Beyond that I'm not going to get into it. These seem like just you and me logicing things out in our head and that doesn't mean we're right or wrong. Humans don't make sense at times, they dork up, that isn't surprising to me. Just because some of it is curious to me and maybe choices I wouldn't have made, doesn't make it not true, or those choices as odd or wrong as we might thing anyway.

craigc 8y ago

Two other points worth noting 1. The FBI never had physical access to the hacked servers and were relying completely on the report from a third party company, CrowdStrike: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/313555-comey-fbi-did-request-access-to-hacked-dnc-servers http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/313555-comey-fbi... 2. The former tech director of the NSA, William Binney, claimed that the data could not have been copied remotely because the download speed was around 22 MB/s (176 Mb/s) which he and a team concluded was not possible for a remote hack with servers in Russia and routing through a commercial VPN service: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/ https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-r...

reefoctopus 8y ago
>During former FBI director James Comey’s testimony to the House Intelligence Committee, Comey was asked whether the FBI had ever received the DNC’s hacked hardware. >He said they did not, but obtained access from a review of the system performed by CrowdStrike, a third-party cybersecurity firm. >"We got the forensics from the pros that they hired which -- again, best practice is always to get access to the machines themselves, but this, my folks tell me, was an appropriate substitute," Comey said. >DNC spokeswoman Adrienne Watson told PolitiFact that the DNC cooperated with the FBI’s requests, which resulted in the DNC providing a copy of their server. >"An image of a server is the best thing to use in an investigation so that your exploration of the server does not change the evidence (just like you don’t want investigators leaving their own DNA around a physical crime scene) and so that the bad actors cannot make changes to the evidence while you are looking at it," Watson said. "Any suggestion that they were denied access to what they wanted for their investigation is completely incorrect." http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/16/donald-trump/missing-servers-donald-trump-vladimir-putin/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/...
peteretep 8y ago
> 2. The former tech director of the NSA, William Binney etc It's interesting, this is the second time I've seen this talking point in two days. The first one linked to a slightly less blog-ish source, and pointed out that this "fact" had been established in _The Nation_, a reasonably well-respected and left-sympathetic newspaper. Here's the article in The Nation: https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/ https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-qu... It now has a gigantic disclosure in front of it which takes most of the weight of the "findings" away.