New Research Shows Guccifer 2.0 Files Were Copied Locally Suggesting DNC Not "Hacked By Russians"

[AUFAN78 3,780]

Well this is interesting.............

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-10/new-research-shows-guccifer-20-files-were-copied-locally-dnc-not-hacked-russians

[TexasTiger 11,651]

Bending over backwards to defend Putin. You're a great little cultist.

[AUFAN78 3,780]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

Bending over backwards to defend Putin. You're a great little cultist.

Free thought was never your strong suit. You are a closed minded partisan hack unwilling to examine possibilities. How has that worked out for you thus far? Butt hurt, beaten and angry. Enjoy it a bit longer. 

[TexasTiger 11,651]

5 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Free thought was never your strong suit. You are a closed minded partisan hack unwilling to examine possibilities. How has that worked out for you thus far? Butt hurt, beaten and angry. Enjoy it a bit longer. 

I'm a freethinker. You're a non thinker. 

[AUFAN78 3,780]

Just now, TexasTiger said:

I'm a freethinker. You're a non thinker. 

I'll let your ignorant words stand as solid proof you are wrong. You are butt hurt, beaten and angry. Own it!

[TexasTiger 11,651]

14 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

I'll let your ignorant words stand as solid proof you are wrong. You are butt hurt, beaten and angry. Own it!

Quit embarrassing your parents.

[AUFAN78 3,780]

1 minute ago, TexasTiger said:

Quit embarrassing your parents.

Does your mom know you're in the basement typing smack? Or does she think you're down there being a good little boy?

[AU64 10,122]

9 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Does your mom know you're in the basement typing smack? Or does she think you're down there being a good little boy?

The modern leftist self proclaimed intellectual....not concerned with facts or evidence.    Snarky retorts are their frequent response...and nothing gained trying to compete on that level.

[Strychnine 1,799]

I would be happy if people writing op-eds would stop pontificating based on technical analysis that they do not even fully understand.  Reaching the conclusion that files were copied from a server to something in EST does not absolve the Russians or implicate locals.  It implicates no one, and all it tells you for certain is what at least one of the attack vectors was.  It is easier to compromise workstations (and their users) on the LAN where a server resides than it is to compromise a server directly.  If nothing else, the recent spread of a few variants of ransomware demonstrates how gullible users are, and how easily even corporate networks can be penetrated as a result.  Remote control of a workstation (with a completely oblivious user) is just as easily possible.  This is often used in the creation of botnets.

It is far more likely that a local workstation, and subsequently the email server, was compromised externally than it is that someone walked into the datacenter, rebooted the email server (which takes it offline) to a live Linux distro on USB flash drive, copied files to flash drive, then rebooted the server and walked out.  The former gives the attacker the leisure of time to do things in the background undetected, the latter requires physical intrusion and doing everything as fast as possible.  In other words, the former gives attacker(s) a very flexible timeline, and the latter is more like Mission Impossible.

[TexasTiger 11,651]

1 hour ago, AU64 said:

The modern leftist self proclaimed intellectual....not concerned with facts or evidence.    Snarky retorts are their frequent response...and nothing gained trying to compete on that level.

You're a factless cultist. You dismiss facts at every turn that don't fit your predetermined narrative. 

[homersapien 10,953]

2 hours ago, AU64 said:

The modern leftist self proclaimed intellectual....not concerned with facts or evidence.    Snarky retorts are their frequent response...and nothing gained trying to compete on that level.

Irony

[AUFAN78 3,780]

9 hours ago, AU64 said:

The modern leftist self proclaimed intellectual....not concerned with facts or evidence.    Snarky retorts are their frequent response...and nothing gained trying to compete on that level.

Noted and agree on all points. I should not have stooped to that level. Regardless, there is something fulfilling about b**** slapping a blind partisan. I'll try to do better, but no promises. 

[AUFAN78 3,780]

9 hours ago, Strychnine said:

I would be happy if people writing op-eds would stop pontificating based on technical analysis that they do not even fully understand.  Reaching the conclusion that files were copied from a server to something in EST does not absolve the Russians or implicate locals.  It implicates no one, and all it tells you for certain is what at least one of the attack vectors was.  It is easier to compromise workstations (and their users) on the LAN where a server resides than it is to compromise a server directly.  If nothing else, the recent spread of a few variants of ransomware demonstrates how gullible users are, and how easily even corporate networks can be penetrated as a result.  Remote control of a workstation (with a completely oblivious user) is just as easily possible.  This is often used in the creation of botnets.

It is far more likely that a local workstation, and subsequently the email server, was compromised externally than it is that someone walked into the datacenter, rebooted the email server (which takes it offline) to a live Linux distro on USB flash drive, copied files to flash drive, then rebooted the server and walked out.  The former gives the attacker the leisure of time to do things in the background undetected, the latter requires physical intrusion and doing everything as fast as possible.  In other words, the former gives attacker(s) a very flexible timeline, and the latter is more like Mission Impossible.

I would be happy if people writing op-eds stopped pontificating based on anonymous sources previously deemed unreliable and of course their own biases. Not likely to happen in today's media climate where facts simply don't matter.

The piece was offered by me as interesting and done so to invoke thought, not snark. But whatever. 

[AUFAN78 3,780]

9 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

You're a factless cultist. You dismiss facts at every turn that don't fit your predetermined narrative. 

You are guilty of precisely what you accuse others of doing. Age old tactic. Doesn't fly with me, but do carry on. 

[AUFAN78 3,780]

7 hours ago, homersapien said:

Irony

[augolf1716 20,285]

9 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

You're a factless cultist. You dismiss facts at every turn that don't fit your predetermined narrative. 

 

[TexasTiger 11,651]

1 hour ago, AUFAN78 said:

You are guilty of precisely what you accuse others of doing. Age old tactic. Doesn't fly with me, but do carry on. 

I'm open to where the facts take us-- you blindly dismiss any info that reflects badly on Dear Leader.

[AUFAN78 3,780]

5 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

I'm open to where the facts take us-- you blindly dismiss any info that reflects badly on Dear Leader.

Wrong again. I am open to many possibilities. You are a blind partisan. 

[TexasTiger 11,651]

22 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Wrong again. I am open to many possibilities. You are a blind partisan. 

Blah, blah, blah. Rinse, lather and repeat.

[AUDub 10,769]

28 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Wrong again. I am open to many possibilities. You are a blind partisan. 

Linking Zerohedge unironically is not the mark of an open mind.

[AUFAN78 3,780]

14 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

Linking Zerohedge unironically is not the mark of an open mind.

Please consider why that smells of a partisan remark. Your disdain for Zerohedge has been noted, not that it really matters to me. Like other publications, they hit on some and miss on others. Seems to be the norm right? So why not use some critical thought and formulate and opinion from multiple sources, not just partisan ones?

[AUDub 10,769]

9 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Please consider why that smells of a partisan remark. Your disdain for Zerohedge has been noted, not that it really matters to me. Like other publications, they hit on some and miss on others. Seems to be the norm right? So why not use some critical thought and formulate and opinion from multiple sources, not just partisan ones?

You cite them with such regularity it's ridiculous. You're not using them to formulate an opinion. You're parroting them. Anarcho-capitalist, unabashedly pro-Drumpf claptrap. It's like linking naturalnews or globalresearch.ca

[AUFAN78 3,780]

Just now, Bigbens42 said:

You cite them with such regularity it's ridiculous. You're not using them to formulate an opinion. You're parroting them. Anarcho-capitalist, unabashedly pro-Drumpf claptrap. It's like linking naturalnews or globalresearch.ca

That your opinion. Wrong, but an opinion nonetheless. Whatever.

[AUDub 10,769]

44 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

That your opinion. Wrong, but an opinion nonetheless. Whatever.

No it's decidedly true. Of course they're anarcho-capitalist. They call themselves Tyler Durden for Heaven's sake.

And the logical pretzels they twist themselves into in defense of Drumpf are hilarious. You do yourself a disservice by linking such bull****.

[DKW 86 7,175]

13 hours ago, Strychnine said:

I would be happy if people writing op-eds would stop pontificating based on technical analysis that they do not even fully understand.  Reaching the conclusion that files were copied from a server to something in EST does not absolve the Russians or implicate locals.  It implicates no one, and all it tells you for certain is what at least one of the attack vectors was.  It is easier to compromise workstations (and their users) on the LAN where a server resides than it is to compromise a server directly.  If nothing else, the recent spread of a few variants of ransomware demonstrates how gullible users are, and how easily even corporate networks can be penetrated as a result.  Remote control of a workstation (with a completely oblivious user) is just as easily possible.  This is often used in the creation of botnets.

It is far more likely that a local workstation, and subsequently the email server, was compromised externally than it is that someone walked into the datacenter, rebooted the email server (which takes it offline) to a live Linux distro on USB flash drive, copied files to flash drive, then rebooted the server and walked out.  The former gives the attacker the leisure of time to do things in the background undetected, the latter requires physical intrusion and doing everything as fast as possible.  In other words, the former gives attacker(s) a very flexible timeline, and the latter is more like Mission Impossible.

This. A lot of the reading, specifically about Podesta, was that his was nothing more than a dimestore social media exploit. It has been suggested it was nothing more than a poorly done request to reset his pw. If you had $1BN worth of security going, it would mean nothing if your Users are that gullible. Poor Level 8 Issues will always trump good policy, hardware, etc. A social media exploit like that can be done by anyone with modest skills. That doesnt mean it wasnt a government (Russian) level exploit, with all the skill sets etc for doing real damage, knowing you did them in with a dime store trick would be almost anti-climactic. It does work however. No one ever went broke betting on Americans and stupidity.