31–40 of 114 posts
The poor man's hacking technique worked great. Instead of focusing on the tools, focus on the results. I bet you're one of those people who uses microservices to run his 100 visitors/day blog just because it's the shiniest new paradigm.
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…
http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/
The press never covered most of it because a lot of the leaks are things that make them look bad. For example, Glenn Thrush:
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/12681
> No worries > Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains > to u > Please don't share or tell anyone I did this > Tell me if I fucked up anything
He tried to get out of this by saying he was just fact-checking. But that normally doesn't require a request for secrecy and one would just send specific items they wanted fact checked, not a prerelease copy of the article.
The poor man's hacking technique worked great. Instead of focusing on the tools, focus on the results. I bet you're one of those people who uses microservices to run his 100 visitors/day blog just because it's the shiniest new paradigm.
Your comment would have been fine without the personal attack/insult.
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?
...which is not actually part of the government. I expect political parties to have internal politicking, which is somewhat bad. But ultimately parties are private organizations that are subject to quite different laws and obligations than parts of the government.
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?
Don't get your hopes up. Bruce Schneier drank the Kool-Aid and is completely on board with the "ruskies did it because experts agree" narrative: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/08/hacking_the_v...
Look at how he calls whistleblowing "organizational doxing" and he urges a swift and exemplary response to the "national security threat". Somewhere along the way, the respectable security writer became a silly neo-mccarthyist pundit.
Still lacking any evidence that voting machines were hacked or any part of the electoral process was hijacked. The worst damage? Emails related to the actual rigging of the Democrat Party primaries and the collusion of the media with the Democrat party. Its very hard for me to believe that a state actor is behind such seemingly altruistic actions. Voters saw the worst of Trump and Clinton and choose the lessor of two…
Seems obvious that leaks assisting the pro-Putin candidate were not altruistic.
The poor man's hacking technique worked great. Instead of focusing on the tools, focus on the results. I bet you're one of those people who uses microservices to run his 100 visitors/day blog just because it's the shiniest new paradigm.
The results are that someone got into Podesta's gmail for some few days. The pros use methods that allow them to keep long term access and which keep you from knowing that you have been hacked to begin with. Look at the NSA's TAO catalog for examples of how the pros work. You can wipe your servers and still be hacked. I don't seriously believe that the NSA is out there sending phishing emails. They're too busy using…
The poor man's hacking technique worked great. Instead of focusing on the tools, focus on the results. I bet you're one of those people who uses microservices to run his 100 visitors/day blog just because it's the shiniest new paradigm.
The results are that someone got into Podesta's gmail for some few days. The pros use methods that allow them to keep long term access and which keep you from knowing that you have been hacked to begin with. Look at the NSA's TAO catalog for examples of how the pros work. You can wipe your servers and still be hacked. I don't seriously believe that the NSA is out there sending phishing emails. They're too busy using…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No idea why you're bringing politics into this. All I said was no evidence has been made public by the government.
Correct, no evidence has been made public by the government (yet). Much of their evidence is probably classified. However, see here for evidence from private sector firms: https://www.reddit.com/r/NeutralPolitics/comments/52uj5c/do_...