>Well, it's also fair to say your comment is designed to cast doubt on the article's claim, despite the fact that you have no proof whatsoever to the contrary.

>Well, it's also fair to say your comment is designed to cast doubt on the article's claim, despite the fact that you have no proof whatsoever to the contrary. I have proof that they have not printed any evidence for their statement in this article. It's your decision whether you believe they should be trusted without evidence, I personally don't think so. >Did they say it was the only evidence they had to tie the incident to China linked hackers, or was that one thing they were willing to share? They also found a supposed job listing with tenuous links as well, I linked it elsewhere. I have no clue if they have better evidence.