Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails...

    How often we were told with a certainty that the Russians did in fact hack the DNC servers to help Trump?

    Declassified transcripts: CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails

    Declassified documents released by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff show the president of CrowdStrike Services — a computer-and-network-security firm hired to investigate the hacking of Democratic National Committee servers — couldn't say for certain that Russians downloaded Democratic Party emails.

    During the interview made public Thursday, Shawn Henry explained that CrowdStrike found some evidence that information was taken from DNC servers, but it was not conclusive.

    https://justthenews.com/government/c...irmed-russians
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

  • #2
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    How often we were told with a certainty that the Russians did in fact hack the DNC servers to help Trump?
    I'm shocked

    That was pretty much the be-all and end-all premise the Dems used to support that the whole phony narrative.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by seanD View Post
      I'm shocked

      That was pretty much the be-all and end-all premise the Dems used to support that the whole phony narrative.
      Lying scum bags...
      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by seanD View Post
        I'm shocked
        I'm even shockeder.

        That was pretty much the be-all and end-all premise the Dems used to support that the whole phony narrative.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          I'm even shockeder.



          How can anyone, even our leftist friends, not see this whole Russia thing as a coup attempt against a duly elected president?
          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by seer View Post
            How can anyone, even our leftist friends, not see this whole Russia thing as a coup attempt against a duly elected president?
            And the question remains, who downloaded that data? I've heard Seth Rich's name thrown around which was quickly, and I mean furiously shut down by any media sources as an absurd conspiracy theory! But now...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              I'm even shockeder.




              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by seanD View Post
                And the question remains, who downloaded that data? I've heard Seth Rich's name thrown around which was quickly, and I mean furiously shut down by any media sources as an absurd conspiracy theory! But now...
                Didn't he end up dead?
                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                Comment


                • #9
                  Here is the full quote


                  MR. HENRY: I can't say based on that. But I think I said earlier that there was some - and I want to make sure I'm correct here -- that there were some hash values, which are algorithms essentially, that were provided by the FBI that were consistent with files that were on the DNC. I think that that is accurate
                  MR. CONAWAY: So how did the FBI get those if they didn't get them fromyou?
                  MR. HENRY: I don't know.
                  [Discussion off the record.]
                  MR. HENRY: They had gotten them from documents that had been dumped, and then they created the hash value, the algorithm.
                  MR.CONAWAY:Oh, it was dumped into the public arena?
                  MR. CONAWAY: Oh, I got you' Got you, got you'


                  So, for those who don't know, a hash value of a file means you take a big file and mix up the data in a clever way to get a much smaller value (e.g. 97f674d1e001697fd685da6ce17789b9). The odds of two different files having the same hash value is effectively 0 (should be 1 / (2^128)). You can try this for yourself here.

                  What he's saying is that they can't prove that the files on the DNC server were taken. They can say for sure that the files which appeared in the wild have the same hash value as the files which were on the DNC server. So that the files were taken is really not in doubt, just they did not have the kind of absolute proof which could potentially exist (e.g. if you watched someone logged in actually transferring the files).

                  That Russia was involved is not doubt according to that interview.


                  MR. CoNAWAY: We use the phrase ''the Russians did it.. or ''State actors.,.can you be more precise? You said cozy Bear was -- and I get them mixed up' One of them was the military.
                  MR. HENRY: GRU.
                  MR. CONAWAY. Say that again?
                  MR. HENRY: GRU? Russian miritary inteiligence? Fancy Bear.
                  MR. CONAWAY. All right. And Cozy Bear is?
                  MR, HENRY: was a Russian inteiligence service. unclear --
                  MR. CONAWAY: As to which one?
                  MR' HENRY: Yes, potentially. I mean, there's other intelligence servicesthat are Russia SVR and FSB. Not clear.
                  MR. CONAWAy: Okay.ls anybody out there good enough, I guess, for lack of a better phrase, torun a false-flag operation using the exact same tactics, techniques, and procedures that cozy Bear, Fancy Bear used that would have, in other words,caused us to look at the Russians and it was actually some other group doing it?ls anybody that good yet?
                  MR, HENRY: So, if you'll recall when I talked earlier about attribution, you look at data over the course of many intrusions over many years, and some of the infrastructure that we saw and some of the specific tactics and tools we've only seen associated with this particular actor, and it goes back many years.
                  MR. CONAWAY: Right.
                  MR. HENRY: So for somebody to do a false flag, as you've described it, it would've, I imagine, have been in play for many years. They would've had tohave acquired Russian command-and-control servers. They would've had to somehow acquire tools and software, malicious code that had been used up untilthis point only by what we believe was the Russian Government.


                  Sorry for any typos in the quotes, I cleaned things up a bit from the raw copy / paste from the PDF but didn't fix everything. I invite you to check these quotes for yourselves.

                  So this article is false both in technicality and spirit . This is why I hammer MM on pointing me to the original data and not just the article interpretations.
                  Last edited by DivineOb; 05-15-2020, 01:00 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by DivineOb View Post
                    Here is the full quote


                    MR. HENRY: I can't say based on that. But I think I said earlier that there was some - and I want to make sure I'm correct here -- that there were some hash values, which are algorithms essentially, that were provided by the FBI that were consistent with files that were on the DNC. I think that that is accurate
                    MR. CONAWAY: So how did the FBI get those if they didn't get them fromyou?
                    MR. HENRY: I don't know.
                    [Discussion off the record.]
                    MR. HENRY: They had gotten them from documents that had been dumped, and then they created the hash value, the algorithm.
                    MR.CONAWAY:Oh, it was dumped into the public arena?
                    MR. CONAWAY: Oh, I got you' Got you, got you'


                    So, for those who don't know, a hash value of a file means you take a big file and mix up the data in a clever way to get a much smaller value (e.g. 97f674d1e001697fd685da6ce17789b9). The odds of two different files having the same hash value is effectively 0 (should be 1 / (2^128)). You can try this for yourself here.

                    What he's saying is that they can't prove that the files on the DNC server were taken. They can say for sure that the files which appeared in the wild have the same hash value as the files which were on the DNC server. So that the files were taken is really not in doubt, just they did not have the kind of absolute proof which could potentially exist (e.g. if you watched someone logged in actually transferring the files).

                    That Russia was involved is not doubt according to that interview.


                    MR. CoNAWAY: We use the phrase ''the Russians did it.. or ''State actors.,.can you be more precise? You said cozy Bear was -- and I get them mixed up' One of them was the military.
                    MR. HENRY: GRU.
                    MR. CONAWAY. Say that again?
                    MR. HENRY: GRU? Russian miritary inteiligence? Fancy Bear.
                    MR. CONAWAY. All right. And Cozy Bear is?
                    MR, HENRY: was a Russian inteiligence service. unclear --
                    MR. CONAWAY: As to which one?
                    MR' HENRY: Yes, potentially. I mean, there's other intelligence servicesthat are Russia SVR and FSB. Not clear.
                    MR. CONAWAy: Okay.ls anybody out there good enough, I guess, for lack of a better phrase, torun a false-flag operation using the exact same tactics, techniques, and procedures that cozy Bear, Fancy Bear used that would have, in other words,caused us to look at the Russians and it was actually some other group doing it?ls anybody that good yet?
                    MR, HENRY: So, if you'll recall when I talked earlier about attribution, you look at data over the course of many intrusions over many years, and some of the infrastructure that we saw and some of the specific tactics and tools we've only seen associated with this particular actor, and it goes back many years.
                    MR. CONAWAY: Right.
                    MR. HENRY: So for somebody to do a false flag, as you've described it, it would've, I imagine, have been in play for many years. They would've had tohave acquired Russian command-and-control servers. They would've had to somehow acquire tools and software, malicious code that had been used up untilthis point only by what we believe was the Russian Government.


                    Sorry for any typos in the quotes, I cleaned things up a bit from the raw copy / paste from the PDF but didn't fix everything.

                    So this article is false both in technicality and spirit . This is why I hammer MM on pointing me to the original data and not just the article interpretations.
                    That doesn't change anything. They did not demonstrate that Russia did this, or even what was taken if anything...
                    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by seer View Post
                      That doesn't change anything. They did not demonstrate that Russia did this, or even what was taken if anything...
                      Assuming the interviewee was being honest, the evidence that it was Russia is far stronger than the evidence of Obamagate, Huntergate, and Readegate put together. Recall that I am a computer scientist so I understand the kinds of leaps necessary for someone to frame Russia for this hack. That it would be UKR, who has so many fewer resources than RUS, just makes it laughable.

                      Don't like my conclusion? Get a CS degree for yourself and then we can talk turkey. I explained that the odds of a hash collision is on the order of 1 / (2^128). You'd hang someone based on DNA evidence which gives orders and orders of magnitude worse odds.
                      Last edited by DivineOb; 05-15-2020, 01:11 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by DivineOb View Post
                        Assuming the interviewee was being honest, the evidence that it was Russia is far stronger than the evidence of Obamagate, Huntergate, and Readegate put together. Recall that I am a computer scientist so I understand the kinds of leaps necessary for someone to frame Russia for this hack. That it would be UKR, who has so many fewer resources than RUS, just makes it laughable.

                        Don't like my conclusion? Get a CS degree for yourself and then we can talk turkey. I explained that the odds of a hash collision is on the order of 1 / (2^128). You'd hang someone based on DNA evidence which gives orders and orders of magnitude worse odds.
                        Tell me, was it even proven that anything was actually taken?
                        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by seer View Post
                          Tell me, was it even proven that anything was actually taken?
                          You clearly either aren't reading what I write or don't care what I write. I answered this twice already.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by DivineOb View Post
                            Here is the full quote


                            MR. HENRY: I can't say based on that. But I think I said earlier that there was some - and I want to make sure I'm correct here -- that there were some hash values, which are algorithms essentially, that were provided by the FBI that were consistent with files that were on the DNC. I think that that is accurate
                            MR. CONAWAY: So how did the FBI get those if they didn't get them fromyou?
                            MR. HENRY: I don't know.
                            [Discussion off the record.]
                            MR. HENRY: They had gotten them from documents that had been dumped, and then they created the hash value, the algorithm.
                            MR.CONAWAY:Oh, it was dumped into the public arena?
                            MR. CONAWAY: Oh, I got you' Got you, got you'


                            So, for those who don't know, a hash value of a file means you take a big file and mix up the data in a clever way to get a much smaller value (e.g. 97f674d1e001697fd685da6ce17789b9). The odds of two different files having the same hash value is effectively 0 (should be 1 / (2^128)). You can try this for yourself here.

                            What he's saying is that they can't prove that the files on the DNC server were taken. They can say for sure that the files which appeared in the wild have the same hash value as the files which were on the DNC server. So that the files were taken is really not in doubt, just they did not have the kind of absolute proof which could potentially exist (e.g. if you watched someone logged in actually transferring the files).

                            That Russia was involved is not doubt according to that interview.


                            MR. CoNAWAY: We use the phrase ''the Russians did it.. or ''State actors.,.can you be more precise? You said cozy Bear was -- and I get them mixed up' One of them was the military.
                            MR. HENRY: GRU.
                            MR. CONAWAY. Say that again?
                            MR. HENRY: GRU? Russian miritary inteiligence? Fancy Bear.
                            MR. CONAWAY. All right. And Cozy Bear is?
                            MR, HENRY: was a Russian inteiligence service. unclear --
                            MR. CONAWAY: As to which one?
                            MR' HENRY: Yes, potentially. I mean, there's other intelligence servicesthat are Russia SVR and FSB. Not clear.
                            MR. CONAWAy: Okay.ls anybody out there good enough, I guess, for lack of a better phrase, torun a false-flag operation using the exact same tactics, techniques, and procedures that cozy Bear, Fancy Bear used that would have, in other words,caused us to look at the Russians and it was actually some other group doing it?ls anybody that good yet?
                            MR, HENRY: So, if you'll recall when I talked earlier about attribution, you look at data over the course of many intrusions over many years, and some of the infrastructure that we saw and some of the specific tactics and tools we've only seen associated with this particular actor, and it goes back many years.
                            MR. CONAWAY: Right.
                            MR. HENRY: So for somebody to do a false flag, as you've described it, it would've, I imagine, have been in play for many years. They would've had tohave acquired Russian command-and-control servers. They would've had to somehow acquire tools and software, malicious code that had been used up untilthis point only by what we believe was the Russian Government.


                            Sorry for any typos in the quotes, I cleaned things up a bit from the raw copy / paste from the PDF but didn't fix everything. I invite you to check these quotes for yourselves.

                            So this article is false both in technicality and spirit . This is why I hammer MM on pointing me to the original data and not just the article interpretations.
                            I don't understand why it's "unproven" the files were taken from the DNC server, considering how massive it was. Where else would they have been able to get those files, or is there some sort of way they could have intercepted the files in transit between servers?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by DivineOb View Post
                              You clearly either aren't reading what I write or don't care what I write. I answered this twice already.
                              Right, they can't prove that files were taken or that Russia did it. Something was likely taken, and Russia likely did it. This is well beyond the certitude we were lead to believe...
                              Last edited by seer; 05-15-2020, 01:44 PM.
                              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                              16 responses
                              160 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post One Bad Pig  
                              Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                              53 responses
                              400 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Mountain Man  
                              Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                              25 responses
                              114 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                              33 responses
                              198 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Roy
                              by Roy
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                              84 responses
                              379 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post JimL
                              by JimL
                               
                              Working...
                              X