CIA says "High Confidence" that Putin involved with Hacking

[tupac chopra]

I am in charge of cyber-security for a contractor to the US government..

Would your job be in danger if you vigorously expressed an alternate view? Just asking

 

[tupac chopra]

So once again where is the actual proof that the Russians under Putin hac


ked Democrat files and leaked them??

I don't think any has been made public.

Was Claim by Department of Homeland Security and FBI About Russian Hacking Fake News?

Editor’s note: David Spring, M. Ed., is a retired college instructor from Seattle who specializes in website design and security. This article has been very lightly edited at Truthdig; its information was not affected. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

On December 29, 2016, the Hill posted an article discussing a 13-page report that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security presented as “evidence” of Russian hacking in US elections.

Wikileaks has repeatedly stated that the source of its leaks was a disgruntled Democratic Party insider.

However, President Obama issued a press release on December 29, 2016, using the DHS-FBI report to justify increasing sanctions against Russia.

I therefore decided to see what the evidence was of Russian involvement in US elections. The Hill article linked to this 13-page government press release.

The government press release written by DHS-FBI did not mention Wikileaks. Nor did the report provide any evidence of Russian hacking in the US elections. Instead, the press release stated that “technical indicators” of Russian hacking were in the “CSV file and XML file attached with the PDF.” However, there was no CSV or XML file or link attached with the PDF. I was eventually able to find these two files at this link.

To see the evidence of Russian hacking firsthand, I downloaded the CSV file and converted it into a spreadsheet. The CSV file and the XML file both contained the same data. Here is the XML link to this data which can be viewed online in a web browser.

Both files provide a list of 895 “indicators” of Russian hacking. Unfortunately, nearly all of these indicators are simply IP addresses. In other words, it is a list of 895 servers from more than 40 countries around the world. But the list also includes a few website domain names. (A domain name is simply the name of the website such as Youtube.com.) I looked up these website domain names with this tool, which tells us who owns the domain names and where they are located.

My review confirmed that none of these domain names have any relationship to Russian government hackers.

 

[whichphilosophy]

No based on the US legal system as I am qualified in Law and investigate fraud as part of my job which included UK Law, Chinese, HK and UAE Laws.

What an impressive list of irrelevant "qualifications".
I am in charge of cyber-security for a contractor to the US government. I probably know more about the ins and outs of these things than you do. So what? Neither you nor I have sat in on the salient briefings. It comes down to this: you are convinced that the agencies and individuals expressing the consensus opinion are either all lying in conspiracy, or have been misled by some agency or individuals they trusted.

So my point is very clear. Until there is a full unbiased investigation and since this involves another state the decision should rest with an international court. If this were in the USA this would have to be settled in the legal system in an unbiased manner.

What world ARE you living in? Regardless of any international court reality show spectacle, the Russians always have and always will continue to make every attempt to interfere in US politics. Until and unless it is clearly not to their advantage to do so, the default assumption must be that they are trying to do so. Whether or not you or some other lawyers could get them found "not guilty" of some specific act in court, is of zero consequence.

Like it or not, you are stuck with your baseless opinion, and it continues to contradict the expressed opinions of the most informed people dealing with this case. Bitch and moan about jumping to conclusions if you must (for lack of any cogent argument), but these conclusions had already been reached in July, by those in the know. Unless, as I am sure you'd like to assert, they were lying then, and are sticking to their lie now.

I work with a lot of IT people but not for state security though I have been involved with corporate security (Major UK, US, UAE companies). Knowledge of IT is something most people you will deal with lack, but this is about ensuring the accusations made are substantiated by an objective investigation. The burden of proof is to establish the flow of information that could directly be linked to the Russian groups, demonstrate how this was governmental and came from Putin or his office. This fits in with every legal test for other crimes such as murder, fraud and robbery etc.
There is no harm in having an opinion, but we should wait until all the investigations have been completed including participation of the suspected party (Russia).
The Russians 'hack' and so do the Americans the British, Israelis, Arabs and everyone plus several civilian hackers.
Since this is an accusation against Russia, Russia (or anyone who would be accused) has a right to a fair response as all nations have equal rights in law. This also ensures a more likely possibility of all the evidence being reviewed.

Unilateral investigations can risk missing important facts that do not fit a preconceived picture. (We all have preconceived pictures).

The best solution would be something like the Court of International Justice or perhaps an international Arbitration body. I doubt if a joint Russian-American committee would work well on this. Such may take a considerable amount of time with claims and counter claims but more likely produce a clear picture of where any blame would rest.

On the other hand it could also take years. Maybe it will never be fully concluded. This however is better than a unilateral own investigation.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I don't think any has been made public.

Was Claim by Department of Homeland Security and FBI About Russian Hacking Fake News?

Editor’s note: David Spring, M. Ed., is a retired college instructor from Seattle who specializes in website design and security. This article has been very lightly edited at Truthdig; its information was not affected. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

On December 29, 2016, the Hill posted an article discussing a 13-page report that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security presented as “evidence” of Russian hacking in US elections.

Wikileaks has repeatedly stated that the source of its leaks was a disgruntled Democratic Party insider.

However, President Obama issued a press release on December 29, 2016, using the DHS-FBI report to justify increasing sanctions against Russia.

I therefore decided to see what the evidence was of Russian involvement in US elections. The Hill article linked to this 13-page government press release.

The government press release written by DHS-FBI did not mention Wikileaks. Nor did the report provide any evidence of Russian hacking in the US elections. Instead, the press release stated that “technical indicators” of Russian hacking were in the “CSV file and XML file attached with the PDF.” However, there was no CSV or XML file or link attached with the PDF. I was eventually able to find these two files at this link.

To see the evidence of Russian hacking firsthand, I downloaded the CSV file and converted it into a spreadsheet. The CSV file and the XML file both contained the same data. Here is the XML link to this data which can be viewed online in a web browser.

Both files provide a list of 895 “indicators” of Russian hacking. Unfortunately, nearly all of these indicators are simply IP addresses. In other words, it is a list of 895 servers from more than 40 countries around the world. But the list also includes a few website domain names. (A domain name is simply the name of the website such as Youtube.com.) I looked up these website domain names with this tool, which tells us who owns the domain names and where they are located.

My review confirmed that none of these domain names have any relationship to Russian government hackers.

The picture is still far from clear hence my preceding post.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I am in charge of cyber-security for a contractor to the US government..

Would your job be in danger if you vigorously expressed an alternate view? Just asking

I hope not as there is a need for dissenting views and skeptics to allow a more objective investigation to remove any bias.

 

[Elixir]

I am in charge of cyber-security for a contractor to the US government..

Would your job be in danger if you vigorously expressed an alternate view? Just asking

Heh... no. I'm an owner/partner of the contracting Company. If I wanted to tailor my views to conform with best Company interests, I'd be spouting off a lot like whichphilosophy - a Russia-denying trumpophile. After all, Trump promises to double the CBP budget, and they're our single biggest customer.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Would your job be in danger if you vigorously expressed an alternate view? Just asking

Heh... no. I'm an owner/partner of the contracting Company. If I wanted to tailor my views to conform with best Company interests, I'd be spouting off a lot like whichphilosophy - a Russia-denying trumpophile. After all, Trump promises to double the CBP budget, and they're our single biggest customer.

There's nothing wrong with holding disparate views as it means we can look at things from a different angle. However Obama and the Demagogues plus the Washington Post have already spoken so they must be right

 

[Elixir]

The best solution would be something like the Court of International Justice or perhaps an international Arbitration body.

Lol! You call THAT a "solution"??? What do you imagine it would "solve"?
You seem not to have read my post, WP. Find Putin guilty, find him not guilty - do you really think that would modify his behavior one iota? Lawyers and courts are impotent in this matter.

 

[barbos]

The best solution would be something like the Court of International Justice or perhaps an international Arbitration body.

Lol! You call THAT a "solution"??? What do you imagine it would "solve"?
You seem not to have read my post, WP. Find Putin guilty, find him not guilty - do you really think that would modify his behavior one iota? Lawyers and courts are impotent in this matter.

US have been messing with other countries elections and getting away with it since forever.

 

[fromderinside]

US have been messing with other countries elections and getting away with it since forever.

Provide your alt-right sources for that please.

 

[Elixir]

Lol! You call THAT a "solution"??? What do you imagine it would "solve"?
You seem not to have read my post, WP. Find Putin guilty, find him not guilty - do you really think that would modify his behavior one iota? Lawyers and courts are impotent in this matter.

US have been messing with other countries elections and getting away with it since forever.

...and... ??
Were you thinking that there was someone here who didn't know that?
Not just "messing with elections", either. In fact, that's one of the more blunt instruments (along with assassination) that is brought to bear when the US sees leadership they'd like to get rid of.
Maybe you should take this as an opportunity to teach whichphilosophy the facts of life.

 

[barbos]

US have been messing with other countries elections and getting away with it since forever.

...and... ??
Were you thinking that there was someone here who didn't know that?
Not just "messing with elections", either. In fact, that's one of the more blunt instruments (along with assassination) that is brought to bear when the US sees leadership they'd like to get rid of.
Maybe you should take this as an opportunity to teach whichphilosophy the facts of life.

I am just glad you admit that US pointing fingers and alleging is very ironic, especially considering that US have been messing up with elections in Russia itself.

 

[Will Wiley]

US have been messing with other countries elections and getting away with it since forever.

...and... ??
Were you thinking that there was someone here who didn't know that?
.

It certainly seems that way. There are lots of intelligent Americans on this forum but they tend to leave these topics alone. The ones who tend to react and post a lot on these topics the most seem blinded to that reality

 

[Elixir]

...and... ??
Were you thinking that there was someone here who didn't know that?
Not just "messing with elections", either. In fact, that's one of the more blunt instruments (along with assassination) that is brought to bear when the US sees leadership they'd like to get rid of.
Maybe you should take this as an opportunity to teach whichphilosophy the facts of life.

I am just glad you admit that US pointing fingers and alleging is very ironic, especially considering that US have been messing up with elections in Russia itself.

Ironic isn't a problem. Letting foreign powers influence our elections is a problem. We will never fix it entirely, any more than we will stop being an intrusive influence on others' political systems. But it is our obligation to make every attempt to minimize outside influence, just as it is every other country's obligation to try to minimize the influence of the US on their elections.
What is REALLY counterproductive is taking a head-in-sand approach and denying that anyone - especially Russia or China - is meddling in our affairs.

 

[barbos]

I am just glad you admit that US pointing fingers and alleging is very ironic, especially considering that US have been messing up with elections in Russia itself.

Ironic isn't a problem. Letting foreign powers influence our elections is a problem. We will never fix it entirely, any more than we will stop being an intrusive influence on others' political systems. But it is our obligation to make every attempt to minimize outside influence, just as it is every other country's obligation to try to minimize the influence of the US on their elections.
What is REALLY counterproductive is taking a head-in-sand approach and denying that anyone - especially Russia or China - is meddling in our affairs.

I did not say ironic was a problem.

 

[Elixir]

Ironic isn't a problem. Letting foreign powers influence our elections is a problem. We will never fix it entirely, any more than we will stop being an intrusive influence on others' political systems. But it is our obligation to make every attempt to minimize outside influence, just as it is every other country's obligation to try to minimize the influence of the US on their elections.
What is REALLY counterproductive is taking a head-in-sand approach and denying that anyone - especially Russia or China - is meddling in our affairs.

I did not say ironic was a problem.

Okay. I'm really happy to have made you "glad" simply by acknowledging the super-obvious irony of the US complaining about foreign meddling. I imagine a similar response from the residents at the Home for the Easily Amused.

 

[ksen]

Hey guys, remember when the American Left used to not believe a word US intelligence agencies would say?

Me too.

Good times.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The best solution would be something like the Court of International Justice or perhaps an international Arbitration body.

Lol! You call THAT a "solution"??? What do you imagine it would "solve"?
You seem not to have read my post, WP. Find Putin guilty, find him not guilty - do you really think that would modify his behavior one iota? Lawyers and courts are impotent in this matter.

If it turns out that Putin/Russia are not guilty or guilty it means that all sides have been heard and that any verdict is credible. However given the evidence hasn't been fully presented we cannot say either way. The US experts can of course investigate further, and where this has been done produce the reports. If I were involved I would not be a cyber expert but could simply mentor them on how to gather evidence and not come to conclusions

 

[whichphilosophy]

I am just glad you admit that US pointing fingers and alleging is very ironic, especially considering that US have been messing up with elections in Russia itself.

Ironic isn't a problem. Letting foreign powers influence our elections is a problem. We will never fix it entirely, any more than we will stop being an intrusive influence on others' political systems. But it is our obligation to make every attempt to minimize outside influence, just as it is every other country's obligation to try to minimize the influence of the US on their elections.
What is REALLY counterproductive is taking a head-in-sand approach and denying that anyone - especially Russia or China - is meddling in our affairs.

Assuming this was influenced the public are waiting to hear how. Meanwhile we can hope the US doesn't interfere anymore in the affairs of other countries because it makes things so much worse.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Julian Assage again states WIKI LEAKS didn't come from the Russians, so the 'investigation' should identify the actual source.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/assange-russian-government-was-not-wikileaks-source-163633069.html



WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange claimed in a new interview that he is completely confident that the Russian government was not the source of the hacked emails that his organization released leading up to the U.S. presidential election. He also shrugged off the question of whether the politically damaging emails affected the outcome of the race.

The publisher of classified and private information released embarrassing emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

Inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, Fox News political pundit Sean Hannity asked Assange to address the allegation that WikiLeaks was a tool employed by Moscow to interfere with the U.S. election.

“Can you say to the American people, unequivocally, that you did not get this information about the DNC, John Podesta’s emails, can you tell the American people 1,000 percent that you did not get it from Russia or anybody associated with Russia?” Hannity inquired.

“We can say, we have said repeatedly that over the last two months, that our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party,” Assange responded.

Democrats have argued that the WikiLeaks email dumps were conducted as part of an orchestrated plot to tilt the election in favor of Donald Trump, who frequently showers praise on Russia and its leaders. Despite Assange’s claims, the U.S. intelligence community has said it is certain that Russia was behind the cyberattacks that led to the WikiLeaks disclosures. Experts have also linked “Guccifer 2,” the hacker who claims to have leaked the DNC emails, to the Kremlin.



And

Assange said he believes the Obama administration is trying to delegitimize Trump before his predecessor enters the White House.

“They are trying to say that President-elect Trump is not a legitimate president,” he said.

According to Democrats, the leak of thousands of Podesta’s emails were particularly damaging to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. An earlier hack this summer led to the resignation of DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and renewed distrust of the Democratic establishment among supporters of Bernie Sanders’ primary campaign.

When asked if the emails WikiLeaks published changed the outcome of the election, Assange said, “Who knows?” He also argued that if they had, the responsibility lies not with WikiLeaks but the people who penned the emails in the first place.

Will the 'investigation' consider this evidence?