4 ms·

In the case of WMDs in Iraq, it was based loosely off single and misused British intelligence. There is overwhelming evidence with the DNC hack from the cybers

In the case of WMDs in Iraq, it was based loosely off single and misused British intelligence. There is overwhelming evidence with the DNC hack from the cybersecurity industry and intelligence communities.

einpoklum 7y ago
Evidence cannot be "from the cybersecurity industry and intelligence communities"; it can only be from the affected machines. I believe you are conflating there being assertions by those communities with there being evidence. If I am mistaken - please provide a link to such evidence. I also remember that there was a report by many US intelligence agencies "confirming" the assessment - but they were all basing their opinion on the opinions by other agencies and/or CrowdStrike, the DNC-associated cyber-security firm which had actual access to the servers.
- FDSGSG 7y ago
  > DNC-associated cyber-security firm which had actual access to the servers. Why use the wording "DNC-associated firm" instead of "firm hired by DNC"? They're working with the GOP too https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-cybersecurity-202/2019/11/04/the-cybersecurity-202-gop-house-campaign-arm-uses-crowdstrike-despite-trump-conspiracy-theories/5dbf22d488e0fa10ffd20b34/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-cyb...
  - einpoklum 7y ago
    That's stronger than a mere association actually, at least w.r.t. this issue. The DNC was interested in deflecting criticism regarding the leaked information, and arguing "We're under attack by Russia!" is very useful to that end. So, the firm they hired reaches this conclusion, opaquely, and based on exclusive access to the machines, which are then not examined by any other party.
    - FDSGSG 7y ago
      That's literally standard practice. It really sounds like you're accusing CrowdStrike of lying with zero evidence to back that up.
      - einpoklum 7y ago
        I'm not accusing them of lying, I'm just saying that CrowdStrike claims are not uninterested third-party claims. On this matter they are not much more trustworthy than their contractors; and they need to present evidence to make their case to the public.

einpoklum 7y ago

Evidence cannot be "from the cybersecurity industry and intelligence communities"; it can only be from the affected machines. I believe you are conflating there being assertions by those communities with there being evidence. If I am mistaken - please provide a link to such evidence. I also remember that there was a report by many US intelligence agencies "confirming" the assessment - but they were all basing their opinion on the opinions by other agencies and/or CrowdStrike, the DNC-associated cyber-security firm which had actual access to the servers.

FDSGSG 7y ago
> DNC-associated cyber-security firm which had actual access to the servers. Why use the wording "DNC-associated firm" instead of "firm hired by DNC"? They're working with the GOP too https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-cybersecurity-202/2019/11/04/the-cybersecurity-202-gop-house-campaign-arm-uses-crowdstrike-despite-trump-conspiracy-theories/5dbf22d488e0fa10ffd20b34/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-cyb...
- einpoklum 7y ago
  That's stronger than a mere association actually, at least w.r.t. this issue. The DNC was interested in deflecting criticism regarding the leaked information, and arguing "We're under attack by Russia!" is very useful to that end. So, the firm they hired reaches this conclusion, opaquely, and based on exclusive access to the machines, which are then not examined by any other party.
  - FDSGSG 7y ago
    That's literally standard practice. It really sounds like you're accusing CrowdStrike of lying with zero evidence to back that up.
    - einpoklum 7y ago
      I'm not accusing them of lying, I'm just saying that CrowdStrike claims are not uninterested third-party claims. On this matter they are not much more trustworthy than their contractors; and they need to present evidence to make their case to the public.