Critiques of the DHS and FBI’s Grizzly Steppe Report

Post by normaljoe » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 10:12 PM UTC

rahrahrah wrote: post #6

mundo wrote: post #4

> But why is this so bad? Because it does not follow the intent laid out by the White House and confuses readers to think that this report is about attribution and not the intended purpose of helping network defenders. Looking at the comments in yesterdays' thread[1], this is absolutely true - many, many people posted some variation of "What? There's no evidence proving Russian involvement in here at all!" 1. https:/…

That's right, I was one of those confused people. I assumed this would be the WH presenting what evidence they have. Sooo... still no public evidence that Russia leaked the DNC and Podesta's e-mails?

Post by yarou » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 10:15 PM UTC

firasd wrote: post #9

yarou wrote: post #7

Has Scheiner written anything on this report? I will say this; the Podesta emails revealed a lot about the internal politics of the DNC. Why are we not treating this type of leak with the same level of respect as the Ellsberg leaks? Or for that matter, the Snowden leaks? Who is really controlling the narrative here?

What was the public interest in his lobster recipe? Or creating a paranoid frenzy that got shots fired at a Pizza place? Randomly dumping personal emails isn't the same as Ellsberg and Snowden working with reporters to blow the whistle on specific transgressions in war and mass surveillance. Interesting article exploring this issue of exercising discretion and developing new ethics in the age of leaks: http://www.nyt…

Post by drvdevd » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 10:17 PM UTC

Gargoyle wrote: post #8

sigmar wrote: post #3

The white house and the document itself never list attribution as the goal. Robert M Lee seems to think because it refers to the attackers as Russia, it is confusing readers. The summary at the beginning makes it clear to me that the document is presupposing the attacker is Russia as to be consistent with all future public reports. I don't think this is the best written report, but his conjecture around completely le…

The timing of the release of this document, at the same time as the announcement of sanctions on Russia for the hacking, can't be overlooked. It's quite reasonable to assume the release of this report was intended to create the impression of evidence for attribution, even if it actually contains no such thing. Otherwise why not release it on any other day to avoid confusion? It looks to me like the confusion was quit…

Post by rrggrr » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 10:19 PM UTC

firasd wrote: post #14

rrggrr wrote: post #10

This is theatre. Were Congress to expand tort law to mandate standards and consequences similar to products liability regulations for other products, then the attack surface available to state and non-state actors would meaningfully shrink. If there is one thing the plaintiff's lawyers excel at, it is inflicting extensive expenses and pain on parties who negligently or fraudulently create, fund creation, or use produ…

Agreed. I wrote this on FB last year when people were calling hacks 'cyberwar': I’m still not sure what to think of the Sony hack. I instantly rejected the idea that it amounted to “cyber war”, but beyond that, I think governments can take a legitimate interest in digital attacks on private companies, same as law enforcement would get involved in a physical attack on a corporate building. I think the main response to…

Post by mullingitover » Fri, Dec 30, 2016, 10:24 PM UTC

yarou wrote: post #13

firasd wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was the public interest in his lobster recipe? Or creating a paranoid frenzy that got shots fired at a Pizza place? Randomly dumping personal emails isn't the same as Ellsberg and Snowden working with reporters to blow the whistle on specific transgressions in war and mass surveillance. Interesting article exploring this issue of exercising discretion and developing new ethics in the age of leaks: http://www.nyt…

Obviously the pizzagate stuff is stupid and unfounded. It does a great disservice to people that were victims of real sexual abuse. But can't you see the vast amount of corruption? The DNC rigged the primary for one candidate. We need to hold our political parties accountable for their actions.