Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Technical report on DNC hack [pdf]

us-cert.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 502 posts

Re: Technical report on DNC hack [pdf]

#111

Post by myf01d »

chipgap98 wrote: post #95
myf01d wrote: post #89

Even if Wikileaks never published anything, She would have still lost. She had the greatest help, money and collusion from government, media, international community elites and her party and still lost against the most unpopular and unfit candidate of all time who got more than 300 electoral votes. That's how loser and corrupt she is. Just get over it.

That is unfortunately something we will never get to know. Trump's election is tainted by both the Russian DNC hack and the FBI letter released immediately before the election. It is impossible to know what would have happened without these two events

It would have made zero difference, the MSM was dedicated 24/7 to attack Trump on every little detail, remember the locker room talk which was released 3 weeks before the election day? was that a chance do you think? remember the tens of women who came and claimed Trump raped or harassed them within the last 2 weeks before the election? could have any candidate recover from it? and yet Trump won fair and square. The media really showed disdain to the low income people and the DNC were totally confident that changing demographics of america is sufficient to win them any presidential election and simply the struggling people in central america are nothing to them.

Re: Technical report on DNC hack [pdf]

#112

Post by acjohnson55 »

mundo wrote: post #85
parktheredcar wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bloomberg article I read ( http://archive.is/j5wRd ) presented it as evidence. Maybe other publications are doing the same. >As part of the administration’s response, the FBI and Homeland Security Department also released a report with technical evidence intended to prove Russia’s military and civilian intelligence services were behind the hacking and to expose some of their most sensitive hacking infrastructure.

The "evidence" cited is not the handful of unclassified details included, it's the fact that the FBI and DHS are willing to go on record publicly accusing Russia. There are no asterisks or weasel-words or "allegedly"s. Just a clear "Russia did it." There are only two possible explanations for that: 1) A massive conspiracy in which the leaders of practically the entirety of the US military/intelligence community are w…

Of course, Iraq and WMD do little to build confidence.

Not that I don't believe you -- motive and opportunity for Russia are crystal clear here, and given that the results of the election are not going to be overturned, I see little gain for the current administration to lie about this.

Re: Technical report on DNC hack [pdf]

#114

Post by cmdrfred »

grandalf wrote: post #42
okreallywtf wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why trust them in the first place, look at the evidence and if you disagree with a conclusion, be able to say why. This is the whole problem we're dealing with right now - people just decide they do or do not trust something. Don't agree with a fact check? Just call it bogus and move on, even though it might be a 50 point case they make why bother finding a flaw in their reasoning and using that to refute their concl…

The basic flaws I'd mention are: - Multiple state actors (or well-funded non-state actors) likely compromised the emails. - A state actor could also have faked the "trail" that points to Russia. - The rest of the evidence is circumstantial. Sure, if we pretend we live in a pre-stuxnet, script kiddie sort of world, this was likely a high level state sponsored attack, but it seems preposterous that a state actor would…

This is my issue with it. I know I can pull this off without getting caught, hell half the people here can, why can't a Russian super hacker team?

Re: Technical report on DNC hack [pdf]

#115

Post by saltyworker »

gipp wrote: post #98
myf01d wrote: post #89

Even if Wikileaks never published anything, She would have still lost. She had the greatest help, money and collusion from government, media, international community elites and her party and still lost against the most unpopular and unfit candidate of all time who got more than 300 electoral votes. That's how loser and corrupt she is. Just get over it.

This stopped being about Hilary Clinton over a month ago. This is extremely important regardless of who is President.

is it though?

we have been spying and counterspying on russia for decades. this is literally not news at all.

the real news is the distraction campaign drummed up by HRC & Co to cover up their shady dealings during the democratic campaign.

Re: Technical report on DNC hack [pdf]

#116

Post by dv_dt »

grandalf wrote: post #42
okreallywtf wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why trust them in the first place, look at the evidence and if you disagree with a conclusion, be able to say why. This is the whole problem we're dealing with right now - people just decide they do or do not trust something. Don't agree with a fact check? Just call it bogus and move on, even though it might be a 50 point case they make why bother finding a flaw in their reasoning and using that to refute their concl…

The basic flaws I'd mention are: - Multiple state actors (or well-funded non-state actors) likely compromised the emails. - A state actor could also have faked the "trail" that points to Russia. - The rest of the evidence is circumstantial. Sure, if we pretend we live in a pre-stuxnet, script kiddie sort of world, this was likely a high level state sponsored attack, but it seems preposterous that a state actor would…

Exactly, it could just as easily be China making it look like Russia did it...

Re: Technical report on DNC hack [pdf]

#117

Post by walshemj »

naturally2014 wrote: post #103
mundo wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "evidence" cited is not the handful of unclassified details included, it's the fact that the FBI and DHS are willing to go on record publicly accusing Russia. There are no asterisks or weasel-words or "allegedly"s. Just a clear "Russia did it." There are only two possible explanations for that: 1) A massive conspiracy in which the leaders of practically the entirety of the US military/intelligence community are w…

I'd guess a third option, actually: It's just a best guess, but they don't like being questioned. If they had damning evidence it'd be in their interest to release it.

Not if it would give any humint sources away and they may have kicked out people to allow a source to step into their shoes - as the UK did to put there man in as the Resident in London

Re: Technical report on DNC hack [pdf]

#119

Post by joshmn »

__jal wrote: post #51

This is a magic report. Over the next 24 hours, it will transform a huge number of people into experts on intelligence reporting requirements, hacking, sources and methods, and diplomacy.

I agree. Similar reports have transformed the majority of my Facebook friends from interns to lawyers and judges in a matter of minutes.

Re: Technical report on DNC hack [pdf]

#120

Post by walshemj »

1_2__3 wrote: post #74
sigmar wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems notable that many of these comments are jumping on this for not providing proof that it was Russia, when that was not the intention of the report. The first page states- >This JAR provides technical indicators related to many of these operations, recommended mitigations, suggested actions to take in response to the indicators provided, and information on how to report such incidents to the U.S. Government.

Not only many of these comments, but a few commenters jumping on the thread within minutes trying to repeatedly question or throw shade on Russia's role in this.

well I suppose their phones will work really well from now on wink
Post reply on HN