Assange interview

[ReptilianPeon]

Julian Assange, a cyber security expert himself (not like Hilary's cheerleaders from Correct the Record) said security was so lax even a child (specifically a fourteen year old) hack into Hilary's records. That's how bad Hilary is at cyber security. She and the DNC were practically begging to get hacked and it's only now that they lament about Russian hackers.

The Democrats don't want to talk about substance (well, substantive issues affecting voters) and would use all kinds of excuses to justify a heavy corrupt candidate like Hilary. I sounds as though they want Donald to win in 2020 as well!

[Tiberius]

And where's the evidence Brian? What are the allegations? What was actually hacked?

The evidence will be in server logs which I'm sure the FBI / CIA have access to. As other people have said, the FBI / CIA don't have to publicly present the evidence; they are going to present it to Congress and to the President.

It really astounds me that people actually blame fucking Russia for Hillary being one of the most corrupt politicians going.

There will be some people who do that sure, but even if Russia isn't to blame for Hillary losing, the fact that Russia may have influenced the election at all is a bad thing. These are two separate issues. There should be an investigation and the results of that investigation should be listened to (as well as scrutinized) because it is a big deal if a foreign government has the ability to influence a US election, even in a small way.

Last time the CIA and FBI together assured us of anything, we spent a decade not finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The reality is that they don't know where the hackers are from. If there is credible evidence it was the Russians, they would at least say what it was. Maybe wikileaks can find out and leak that.

So because they were wrong in the past, they must also be wrong now? Terrible logic. The reality is, finding evidence for weapons of mass destruction in a foreign country is a lot harder than finding evidence of foreign hacking on domestic servers which you have physical access to. Server logs exist, and they are usually verbose.

The CIA and FBI haven't revealed any evidence because that's not their job. They present their findings to Congress and the President before anything is made public, and they are doing that this week.

Julian Assange, a cyber security expert himself (not like Hilary's cheerleaders from Correct the Record) said security was so lax even a child (specifically a fourteen year old) hack into Hilary's records. That's how bad Hilary is at cyber security. She and the DNC were practically begging to get hacked and it's only now that they lament about Russian hackers.

The Democrats don't want to talk about substance (well, substantive issues affecting voters) and would use all kinds of excuses to justify a heavy corrupt candidate like Hilary. I sounds as though they want Donald to win in 2020 as well!

Assange is not a cyber security expert. He was a hacker in the 80's and 90's, and in modern times I haven't seen any work from him that suggests he is knowledgable about hacking / cyber security today, especially at an expert level.

The problem with his statement is you can apply it to practically anyone in the past 5 years. So many people and companies have been hacked. I bet even the RNC have servers that are insecure, I bet they have been hacked in the past too. Computer security is difficult.

[scoobysnack]

Former high level psychological warfare specialist for the CIA said before the election, people in the US who didn't want to deal with Clinton's corruption released the info, but you will never hear this man's name on the news.

[Minimalist]

The reality is that they don't know where the hackers are from. If there is credible evidence it was the Russians, they would at least say what it was.

It seems they do, Capn.  I expect nothing else from Drumpfucks, though.  How many hotels are you building in Moscow?

[ReptilianPeon]

[Tiberius]

I don't really see an issue with the FBI using the results of a third party like CrowdStrike. Forensic analysis is something that private security companies can do effectively, and the government doesn't really have an upper hand there. So honestly the fact that the FBI didn't investigate the physical servers but instead just read the report from CrowdStrike doesn't change my opinion on things. Unless we are to suppose that CrowdStrike's report was inaccurate, but I think that starts going down the line of conspiracies. As far as I'm aware CrowdStrike isn't affiliated with the DNC, so I'm happt that their report is independent.

As for the password issue, is there any actual source for that other than Assange? While it's totally possible that he used a stupid password like that, I'm not one to just take Assange at his word.

[LostLocke]

She and the DNC were practically begging to get hacked and it's only now that they lament about Russian hackers.

Yep. And now our President-Elect literally doesn't care about America getting hacked.

[Napoléon]

Yep. And now our President-Elect literally doesn't care about America getting hacked.

You talk like the Russian government has hacked into the Pentagon mainframe.

When we say "America getting hacked", let's be clear, what actually got hacked? I've seen some people thinking that the bloody voting machines themselves were hacked because of the confusion caused by how this is reported.

[ReptilianPeon]

In terms of the password issue, I imagine the evidence for John's password is in the Wikileaks leaks somewhere. Yes, Julian could be lying, but he people could easily check something like that and call him out on it.

And also, on the third party report it did seem odd the DNC denied the FBI access but if the company is well known and trusted then I suppose there is no issue.

[Tiberius]