It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Roger Stone Asks for Evidence Russians Hacked DNC Server

page: 8
43
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2019 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: tanstaafl

Again why would they tamper with their own data?

Objection: asked and answered.


How would that help them or the FBI learn who hacked them?

Objection: asked and answered.


Do you think they planted data implicating the Russians?

Correct again, and another sign you are not a totally lost cause.




posted on May, 16 2019 @ 11:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
To do the forensics, you have to remove the drives and remove the controllers from the drives, replacing it with specialist controllers.


Well, you can do an awful lot without going to that extreme, but yes, to do a full forensics analysis, you are correct.

That said, no one has answered my question about what kind of drive we are talking about.

If it was solid state, that could change dramatically what is required to do the forensics.


The forensic 'read' takes days, if not weeks,

If it is an old magnetic spinning rust drive, maybe, but it would depend on the size of the drive...


during which a power down interrupts the process significantly

Which is why you would only do such a thing while on a large server grade UPS plugged into a local power source that has a generator backup.


and may produce false results unless resumed exactly from the physical point (in location and timing of the heads), not always an easy task. It is far easier to let the process complete.

Of course. I only upgrade firmware on our workstations when plugged into a UPS.



posted on May, 16 2019 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
Sure, the images can be tampered with, but due to the multiplicity of images and the way they tend to cross verify each other, it is far easier to tamper with the server.

And Crowdstrike maintained possession of both and refused access to anyone else.



posted on May, 16 2019 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl


Do you think they planted data implicating the Russians?

Correct again, and another sign you are not a totally lost cause.


That's the thing. The "evidence" was so obvious it looked like a setup. If you wanted to implicate the Russians, those are all the things you would do. Are Russia the big bad guys again, or do they have the hacking skills of a 4th grader? They can't have it both ways.



posted on May, 16 2019 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

The only way to know if the image is accurate is to compare it. The only one who can do that is CS. That means literally nothing on the image can be verified as accurate.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 01:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

What you say is meaningless, the experts all agree the speed in question is impossible. The fact you don't understand, well, the facts, is nor surprising. They all agree the speed in question is what would be expected with a local transfer. The actual reason why it's not important is because it's possible the speed was attained by a transfer later on down the road, not the original theft.


So are you saying that the concept of the hackers using a VPN with a local caching proxy is unreasonable?



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 02:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
Sure, the images can be tampered with, but due to the multiplicity of images and the way they tend to cross verify each other, it is far easier to tamper with the server.

And Crowdstrike maintained possession of both and refused access to anyone else.


Only 1/2 true.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 02:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: tanstaafl


Do you think they planted data implicating the Russians?

Correct again, and another sign you are not a totally lost cause.


That's the thing. The "evidence" was so obvious it looked like a setup. If you wanted to implicate the Russians, those are all the things you would do. Are Russia the big bad guys again, or do they have the hacking skills of a 4th grader? They can't have it both ways.


So, you are saying that the Mueller report is untruthful? It went into great detail about the evidence.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
"originally posted by: [post=24374500]tanstaafl"
"And Crowdstrike maintained possession of both and refused access to anyone else."

Only 1/2 true.

No, actually it was 100% true - unless you can prove otherwise.
edit on 17-5-2019 by tanstaafl because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 07:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: tanstaafl


Do you think they planted data implicating the Russians?

Correct again, and another sign you are not a totally lost cause.


That's the thing. The "evidence" was so obvious it looked like a setup. If you wanted to implicate the Russians, those are all the things you would do. Are Russia the big bad guys again, or do they have the hacking skills of a 4th grader? They can't have it both ways.


So, you are saying that the Mueller report is untruthful? It went into great detail about the evidence.


I'm not saying one way or the other. I'm just pointing out that if the Russians are that amateurish, they're not much of a threat on the cyber front. The conclusion that they would make all these rookie mistakes and they're a serious threat don't jive.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 08:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: yuppa

I only partially backed you up. You can't prove that was the speed of the original transfer. So it's an interesting fact, but not conclusive.


True,but thanks.heard the speed was 12 times faster than a offsite dl.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 08:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: tanstaafl


Do you think they planted data implicating the Russians?

Correct again, and another sign you are not a totally lost cause.


That's the thing. The "evidence" was so obvious it looked like a setup. If you wanted to implicate the Russians, those are all the things you would do. Are Russia the big bad guys again, or do they have the hacking skills of a 4th grader? They can't have it both ways.


So, you are saying that the Mueller report is untruthful? It went into great detail about the evidence.


Ive read some very detailed fiction before.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Oh, who other than CS did the DNC give direct access to the DNC servers to?
edit on 17-5-2019 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

General guess plus a gut feeling is all, he has been in DC tied to numerous politicians that had some scandal type issues so all in all its just a guess that a life time in DC has lead to him violating the law since he was sort of a fixer in his early years.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: tanstaafl

General guess plus a gut feeling is all, he has been in DC tied to numerous politicians that had some scandal type issues so all in all its just a guess that a life time in DC has lead to him violating the law since he was sort of a fixer in his early years.

Oh, well, in that case, yeah, toss him in jail for life!

Sheesh. I'm glad you aren't in any position of Trust or power over others.



posted on May, 17 2019 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl




while I think stone is a slimy individual who probably deserves jail time..

bolded the important word for you to assist with your reading comprehension issues.



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 12:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: tanstaafl


Do you think they planted data implicating the Russians?

Correct again, and another sign you are not a totally lost cause.


That's the thing. The "evidence" was so obvious it looked like a setup. If you wanted to implicate the Russians, those are all the things you would do. Are Russia the big bad guys again, or do they have the hacking skills of a 4th grader? They can't have it both ways.


So, you are saying that the Mueller report is untruthful? It went into great detail about the evidence.


Ive read some very detailed fiction before.


If Mueller's report is fiction, then Barr's summary is fiction.



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: tanstaafl


Do you think they planted data implicating the Russians?

Correct again, and another sign you are not a totally lost cause.


That's the thing. The "evidence" was so obvious it looked like a setup. If you wanted to implicate the Russians, those are all the things you would do. Are Russia the big bad guys again, or do they have the hacking skills of a 4th grader? They can't have it both ways.


So, you are saying that the Mueller report is untruthful? It went into great detail about the evidence.


Ive read some very detailed fiction before.


If Mueller's report is fiction, then Barr's summary is fiction.


STILL not quite "getting it" yet eh ...
😆



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 01:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

Oh, who other than CS did the DNC give direct access to the DNC servers to?


I thought the DNC servers weren't hacked and they know the speed with which the files were transferred. How could you have that information if you didn't have the server. So the Republicans who want to prove that there was mishandling of the server by the DNC or the FBI, must, therefore, have illegally have possession of the server.


edit on 18/5/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: tanstaafl


Do you think they planted data implicating the Russians?

Correct again, and another sign you are not a totally lost cause.


That's the thing. The "evidence" was so obvious it looked like a setup. If you wanted to implicate the Russians, those are all the things you would do. Are Russia the big bad guys again, or do they have the hacking skills of a 4th grader? They can't have it both ways.


So, you are saying that the Mueller report is untruthful? It went into great detail about the evidence.


Ive read some very detailed fiction before.


If Mueller's report is fiction, then Barr's summary is fiction.


How's that? The media/Democrat (we need a word for this conglomerate, since they are pretty much the same these days) narrative now is that Barr's summary isn't representative of the report, so one can be fiction and the other can be accurate.

When all ya'll do is spin lies, it gets hard to keep track of what the current narrative is.
edit on 18 5 19 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join