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.

 

If you believe that the impeachment or Durham report will achieve anything

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2019 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Veryolduser
Many of those things which you listed as crimes in your OP have been fairly investigated and tried by jury. The accused were found not guilty.

It doesn't stop the same accusations being re-hashed by political opponents at every opportunity. That is the political spin and was part of the Russian trolling campaign prior to the 2016 elections. I know that many suggest that it didn't influence them, but the fact that these old canards are being re-hashed is an indicator that you have, in fact, and provably, been influenced.

Let's consider these FISA abuses, going back to the Obama administration, that the Horowitz report was going to reveal. The report has been completed for months and there are no indictments. It is about to be released publicly and Barr is now saying he disagrees with the Horowitz report. Why? Because Barr is in the President's pocket and the alleged FISA abuses were part of Trump's "everyone is picking on me" spin. But, they didn't happen, at least in any criminal sense.

The law cannot charge people unless they actually, provably committed crimes. You have made the assumption that the things you spoke of in your OP were actual crimes and that they were actually committed. But you have no basis for that assumption, as you haven't really evaluated the evidence. All you have heard is just hearsay. An often repeated lie doesn't become truth.

It has all been political posturing and continues to be part of the spin and propaganda (which comes from both sides). The court cases which have acquitted them, either aren't following proper legal procedure (they are), or the accusations were false in the first place. You are choosing to believe that what you have heard and is actually un-evidenced to you, is more credible than literally thousands of people who have dedicated their lives to the legal truth.


Canards! For future reference if your going to write in any and I mean any of my threads please refrain from using that word.

Normally you would be correct, however I will give you an example of a situation that I personally had a hand in. I should also note that I have a degree in information security “computer science”.

A while back during the Hillary Clinton email investigation a person on reddit linked stonetear “Hillary Clinton’s IT aid”to a post on reddit. The most damaging post is the one where Combetta “stonetear”solicits advice on how to alter email address headers that have been archived on the server. I just so happened to luck across the tread Early and helped investigate to confirm stonetear was actually Hillary’s IT aid. The IT aid used the same email address on social media accounts and through confirming his IP address we linked his account to his actual home address. We checked his social media accounts to link him to the company Hillary used. We used the time on the post to conclude this was after the FBI had asked Hillary not to delete any emails. Stonetear illegally deleted the emails using bleach bit.

It was brought up by congress after the post went viral and comey pretended he knew about it but hadn’t addressed anything on it in his report given to congress. So they pulled comey in to question him about it! Mr combetta knew he wasn’t allowed to delete anything and had already been given immunity under the assumption he didn’t delete anything. Which he did! Funny enough it was his post asking for the advice for a very important person “VIP” that drew the attention.

It was as clear as day he was guilty and who ever made him delete the emails was guilty as well!

I posted it on ATS at the time but that account it gone now


edit on 4-12-2019 by Veryolduser because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-12-2019 by Veryolduser because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 4 2019 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Veryolduser

Excellent rant.

The more attention we give to this political system, the stronger and more powerful it becomes. Doesn't matter which side holds majority at the time. All that matters is that we follow it and believe it is real. Our belief gives it power over us. Look at how we hang on their every word, at all of their theatrics. It is like baseball or football anymore. An american pastime.

I was listening to a podcast recently that stated our Bill of Rights was a masterful stroke in making us slaves. It took freedoms that every human is born with and put it in writing. It took something that every single one of us knows in our harts and codified it. Basically saying that by putting these inalienable rights in writing was the only thing making it real. It was conditioning us and it worked perfectly.



posted on Dec, 4 2019 @ 10:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Veryolduser

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Veryolduser
Many of those things which you listed as crimes in your OP have been fairly investigated and tried by jury. The accused were found not guilty.

It doesn't stop the same accusations being re-hashed by political opponents at every opportunity. That is the political spin and was part of the Russian trolling campaign prior to the 2016 elections. I know that many suggest that it didn't influence them, but the fact that these old canards are being re-hashed is an indicator that you have, in fact, and provably, been influenced.

Let's consider these FISA abuses, going back to the Obama administration, that the Horowitz report was going to reveal. The report has been completed for months and there are no indictments. It is about to be released publicly and Barr is now saying he disagrees with the Horowitz report. Why? Because Barr is in the President's pocket and the alleged FISA abuses were part of Trump's "everyone is picking on me" spin. But, they didn't happen, at least in any criminal sense.

The law cannot charge people unless they actually, provably committed crimes. You have made the assumption that the things you spoke of in your OP were actual crimes and that they were actually committed. But you have no basis for that assumption, as you haven't really evaluated the evidence. All you have heard is just hearsay. An often repeated lie doesn't become truth.

It has all been political posturing and continues to be part of the spin and propaganda (which comes from both sides). The court cases which have acquitted them, either aren't following proper legal procedure (they are), or the accusations were false in the first place. You are choosing to believe that what you have heard and is actually un-evidenced to you, is more credible than literally thousands of people who have dedicated their lives to the legal truth.


Canards! For future reference if your going to write in any and I mean any of my threads please refrain from using that word.

Normally you would be correct, however I will give you an example of a situation that I personally had a hand in. I should also note that I have a degree in information security “computer science”.

A while back during the Hillary Clinton email investigation a person on reddit linked stonetear “Hillary Clinton’s IT aid”to a post on reddit. The most damaging post is the one where Combetta “stonetear”solicits advice on how to alter email address headers that have been archived on the server. I just so happened to luck across the tread Early and helped investigate to confirm stonetear was actually Hillary’s IT aid. The IT aid used the same email address on social media accounts and through confirming his IP address we linked his account to his actual home address. We checked his social media accounts to link him to the company Hillary used. We used the time on the post to conclude this was after the FBI had asked Hillary not to delete any emails. Stonetear illegally deleted the emails using bleach bit.


I have had occasion to work as an IT systems architect/engineer and have been involved in the recovery of damaged Microsoft Exchange .edb file mail stores. I have intimate and hands on experience with this over numbers of years.

BleachBit is a file overwriting utility. It is incapable of selectively removing individual e-mail messages from an .edb mail store file. It would be an all-or-nothing case. Since e-mails were recovered afterwards, (the ones that were available on Wikileaks and also by the tech's at CrowdStrike and River Networks at the FBI's request), then the attempt to irrecoverably erase files using BleachBit would have been a fairly total failure.

But of course, that wasn't what Combetta was trying to do.

Even when marked as 'deleted' in the Exchange server, the Exchange mail store retains all messages. It is the constant issue for Exchange mail admins that the mail store only grows and is damn near impossible to shrink/compact. Although you can store the data with greater efficiency, you can't actually delete or remove the message data itself. The only official solution is to move the mail store to increasingly larger and larger storage volumes as it grows.

In fact, with the massively large sizes of .edb files, the hack was unlikely to have copied the whole e-mail store but the hack happened precisely because of the smaller size and lower security of .pst files, which were accessible and possible to download, in a reasonable time-frame, in the hack.

Combetta did the wrong thing by not deleting the insecure mail extracts off the system when he was first directed and this was well before the hack occurred. Because he didn't, it was possible for the hack to occur. If he had deleted the .pst files when told, the hack would not have recovered any e-mails.

Also, Combetta was never directed to not delete anything by the FBI or the DNC, nor was he particularly aware that the DNC servers had been compromised and that the FBI were analysing the images (the server was a VMWare ESX virtual machine and when the FBI took the server, they actually took a bitwise copy of the .VMDK file. The physical hardware was immaterial in the case).

Of course, you'd know all that, you have apparently a degree in Information Security.




It was brought up by congress after the post went viral and comey pretended he knew about it but hadn’t addressed anything on it in his report given to congress. So they pulled comey in to question him about it! Mr combetta knew he wasn’t allowed to delete anything and had already been given immunity under the assumption he didn’t delete anything. Which he did! Funny enough it was his post asking for the advice for a very important person “VIP” that drew the attention.

It was as clear as day he was guilty and who ever made him delete the emails was guilty as well!

I posted it on ATS at the time but that account it gone now


The deletion of the .pst mail extracts was part of Combetta's job. He stuffed up, forgetting to do it, and as a consequence, secure data was recovered in a hack. He tried to cover his tracks, unaware of the change to procedure as a result of the FBI investigation.

edit on 4/12/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2019 @ 11:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Veryolduser

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Veryolduser
Many of those things which you listed as crimes in your OP have been fairly investigated and tried by jury. The accused were found not guilty.

It doesn't stop the same accusations being re-hashed by political opponents at every opportunity. That is the political spin and was part of the Russian trolling campaign prior to the 2016 elections. I know that many suggest that it didn't influence them, but the fact that these old canards are being re-hashed is an indicator that you have, in fact, and provably, been influenced.

Let's consider these FISA abuses, going back to the Obama administration, that the Horowitz report was going to reveal. The report has been completed for months and there are no indictments. It is about to be released publicly and Barr is now saying he disagrees with the Horowitz report. Why? Because Barr is in the President's pocket and the alleged FISA abuses were part of Trump's "everyone is picking on me" spin. But, they didn't happen, at least in any criminal sense.

The law cannot charge people unless they actually, provably committed crimes. You have made the assumption that the things you spoke of in your OP were actual crimes and that they were actually committed. But you have no basis for that assumption, as you haven't really evaluated the evidence. All you have heard is just hearsay. An often repeated lie doesn't become truth.

It has all been political posturing and continues to be part of the spin and propaganda (which comes from both sides). The court cases which have acquitted them, either aren't following proper legal procedure (they are), or the accusations were false in the first place. You are choosing to believe that what you have heard and is actually un-evidenced to you, is more credible than literally thousands of people who have dedicated their lives to the legal truth.


Canards! For future reference if your going to write in any and I mean any of my threads please refrain from using that word.

Normally you would be correct, however I will give you an example of a situation that I personally had a hand in. I should also note that I have a degree in information security “computer science”.

A while back during the Hillary Clinton email investigation a person on reddit linked stonetear “Hillary Clinton’s IT aid”to a post on reddit. The most damaging post is the one where Combetta “stonetear”solicits advice on how to alter email address headers that have been archived on the server. I just so happened to luck across the tread Early and helped investigate to confirm stonetear was actually Hillary’s IT aid. The IT aid used the same email address on social media accounts and through confirming his IP address we linked his account to his actual home address. We checked his social media accounts to link him to the company Hillary used. We used the time on the post to conclude this was after the FBI had asked Hillary not to delete any emails. Stonetear illegally deleted the emails using bleach bit.


I have had occasion to work as an IT systems architect/engineer and have been involved in the recovery of damaged Microsoft Exchange .edb file mail stores. I have intimate and hands on experience with this over numbers of years.

BleachBit is a file overwriting utility. It is incapable of selectively removing individual e-mail messages from an .edb mail store file. It would be an all-or-nothing case. Since e-mails were recovered afterwards, (the ones that were available on Wikileaks), then the attempt to irrecoverably erase files using BleachBit would have been a fairly total failure.

But of course, that wasn't what Combetta was trying to do.

Even when marked as 'deleted' in the Exchange server, the Exchange mail store retains all messages. It is the constant issue for Exchange mail admins that the mail store only grows and is damn near impossible to shrink/compact. Although you can store the data with greater efficiency, you cant actually delete or remove the message data itself. The only official solution is to move the mail store to increasingly larger and larger storage volumes as it grows.

In fact, with the massively large sizes of .edb files, the hack was unlikely to have copied the whole e-mail store but happened precisely because of the smaller and lower security of .pst files, which were accessible and possible to download, in a reasonable time-frame, in the hack.

Combetta did the wrong thing by not deleting the insecure mail extracts off the system when he was first directed and this was well before the hack occurred. Because he didn't, the hack could occur.

Also, Combetta was never directed to not delete anything by the FBI, nor was he particularly aware that the DNC servers had been compromised and that the FBI were analysing the images (the server was a VMWare virtual machine and when the FBI took the server, they actually took a bitwise copy of the .VMDK file. The physical hardware is immaterial in the case).

Of course, you'd know all that, you have apparently a degree in Information Security.




It was brought up by congress after the post went viral and comey pretended he knew about it but hadn’t addressed anything on it in his report given to congress. So they pulled comey in to question him about it! Mr combetta knew he wasn’t allowed to delete anything and had already been given immunity under the assumption he didn’t delete anything. Which he did! Funny enough it was his post asking for the advice for a very important person “VIP” that drew the attention.

It was as clear as day he was guilty and who ever made him delete the emails was guilty as well!

I posted it on ATS at the time but that account it gone now


The deletion of the .pst mail extracts was part of Combetta's job. He stuffed up, forgetting to do it, and as a consequence, secure data was recovered in a hack. He tried to cover his tracks, unaware of the change to procedure as a result of the FBI investigation.



I like how you said this was based on saving memory while using a VMware server.


VMware provides the ability to create virtual machines (VMs) that are provisioned with more memory than physically exists on their host servers. This is possible because VMware memory management is able to recover memory that is no longer in use by the VM's guest operating system (OS).

So he was saving memory for what reason?

Heres a link www.google.com...

A computer specialist who deleted Hillary Clinton’s emails despite orders from Congress to preserve them was given immunity by the Justice Department during its investigation into her personal email account, according to a law enforcement official and others briefed on the investigation.

Must be one of them canards by an extremely right wing newyork times.

The hack of her email server had already happened he wasn’t securing sh!t.
Let’s say it was imaged anyway you still need the physical device to show nothing was tampered with. That’s why they take the physical hardware away and send the copy to data forensics.
edit on 5-12-2019 by Veryolduser because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2019 @ 12:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Veryolduser

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Veryolduser
Many of those things which you listed as crimes in your OP have been fairly investigated and tried by jury. The accused were found not guilty.

It doesn't stop the same accusations being re-hashed by political opponents at every opportunity. That is the political spin and was part of the Russian trolling campaign prior to the 2016 elections. I know that many suggest that it didn't influence them, but the fact that these old canards are being re-hashed is an indicator that you have, in fact, and provably, been influenced.

Let's consider these FISA abuses, going back to the Obama administration, that the Horowitz report was going to reveal. The report has been completed for months and there are no indictments. It is about to be released publicly and Barr is now saying he disagrees with the Horowitz report. Why? Because Barr is in the President's pocket and the alleged FISA abuses were part of Trump's "everyone is picking on me" spin. But, they didn't happen, at least in any criminal sense.

The law cannot charge people unless they actually, provably committed crimes. You have made the assumption that the things you spoke of in your OP were actual crimes and that they were actually committed. But you have no basis for that assumption, as you haven't really evaluated the evidence. All you have heard is just hearsay. An often repeated lie doesn't become truth.

It has all been political posturing and continues to be part of the spin and propaganda (which comes from both sides). The court cases which have acquitted them, either aren't following proper legal procedure (they are), or the accusations were false in the first place. You are choosing to believe that what you have heard and is actually un-evidenced to you, is more credible than literally thousands of people who have dedicated their lives to the legal truth.


Canards! For future reference if your going to write in any and I mean any of my threads please refrain from using that word.

Normally you would be correct, however I will give you an example of a situation that I personally had a hand in. I should also note that I have a degree in information security “computer science”.

A while back during the Hillary Clinton email investigation a person on reddit linked stonetear “Hillary Clinton’s IT aid”to a post on reddit. The most damaging post is the one where Combetta “stonetear”solicits advice on how to alter email address headers that have been archived on the server. I just so happened to luck across the tread Early and helped investigate to confirm stonetear was actually Hillary’s IT aid. The IT aid used the same email address on social media accounts and through confirming his IP address we linked his account to his actual home address. We checked his social media accounts to link him to the company Hillary used. We used the time on the post to conclude this was after the FBI had asked Hillary not to delete any emails. Stonetear illegally deleted the emails using bleach bit.


I have had occasion to work as an IT systems architect/engineer and have been involved in the recovery of damaged Microsoft Exchange .edb file mail stores. I have intimate and hands on experience with this over numbers of years.

BleachBit is a file overwriting utility. It is incapable of selectively removing individual e-mail messages from an .edb mail store file. It would be an all-or-nothing case. Since e-mails were recovered afterwards, (the ones that were available on Wikileaks), then the attempt to irrecoverably erase files using BleachBit would have been a fairly total failure.

But of course, that wasn't what Combetta was trying to do.

Even when marked as 'deleted' in the Exchange server, the Exchange mail store retains all messages. It is the constant issue for Exchange mail admins that the mail store only grows and is damn near impossible to shrink/compact. Although you can store the data with greater efficiency, you cant actually delete or remove the message data itself. The only official solution is to move the mail store to increasingly larger and larger storage volumes as it grows.

In fact, with the massively large sizes of .edb files, the hack was unlikely to have copied the whole e-mail store but happened precisely because of the smaller and lower security of .pst files, which were accessible and possible to download, in a reasonable time-frame, in the hack.

Combetta did the wrong thing by not deleting the insecure mail extracts off the system when he was first directed and this was well before the hack occurred. Because he didn't, the hack could occur.

Also, Combetta was never directed to not delete anything by the FBI, nor was he particularly aware that the DNC servers had been compromised and that the FBI were analysing the images (the server was a VMWare virtual machine and when the FBI took the server, they actually took a bitwise copy of the .VMDK file. The physical hardware is immaterial in the case).

Of course, you'd know all that, you have apparently a degree in Information Security.




It was brought up by congress after the post went viral and comey pretended he knew about it but hadn’t addressed anything on it in his report given to congress. So they pulled comey in to question him about it! Mr combetta knew he wasn’t allowed to delete anything and had already been given immunity under the assumption he didn’t delete anything. Which he did! Funny enough it was his post asking for the advice for a very important person “VIP” that drew the attention.

It was as clear as day he was guilty and who ever made him delete the emails was guilty as well!

I posted it on ATS at the time but that account it gone now


The deletion of the .pst mail extracts was part of Combetta's job. He stuffed up, forgetting to do it, and as a consequence, secure data was recovered in a hack. He tried to cover his tracks, unaware of the change to procedure as a result of the FBI investigation.


www.washingtonexaminer.com...

She was hacked way before combetta was told not to delete anything

Plus I want to drive this point home for you

Let’s say it was imaged anyway you still need the physical device to show nothing was tampered with. That’s why they take the physical hardware away and send the copy to data forensics. They lock up the hardware and show the details from both the image and the device in a court case.

Evidence Acquisition

Perhaps the most critical facet of successful computer forensic investigation is a rigorous, detailed plan for acquiring evidence. Extensive documentation is needed prior to, during, and after the acquisition process; detailed information must be recorded and preserved, including all hardware and software specifications, any systems used in the investigation process, and the systems being investigated. This step is where policies related to preserving the integrity of potential evidence are most applicable. General guidelines for preserving evidence include the physical removal of storage devices,



posted on Dec, 5 2019 @ 12:46 AM
link   
We all appreciate your professional objectivity.

Thanks for sharing that.


originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Veryolduser

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Veryolduser
Many of those things which you listed as crimes in your OP have been fairly investigated and tried by jury. The accused were found not guilty.

It doesn't stop the same accusations being re-hashed by political opponents at every opportunity. That is the political spin and was part of the Russian trolling campaign prior to the 2016 elections. I know that many suggest that it didn't influence them, but the fact that these old canards are being re-hashed is an indicator that you have, in fact, and provably, been influenced.

Let's consider these FISA abuses, going back to the Obama administration, that the Horowitz report was going to reveal. The report has been completed for months and there are no indictments. It is about to be released publicly and Barr is now saying he disagrees with the Horowitz report. Why? Because Barr is in the President's pocket and the alleged FISA abuses were part of Trump's "everyone is picking on me" spin. But, they didn't happen, at least in any criminal sense.

The law cannot charge people unless they actually, provably committed crimes. You have made the assumption that the things you spoke of in your OP were actual crimes and that they were actually committed. But you have no basis for that assumption, as you haven't really evaluated the evidence. All you have heard is just hearsay. An often repeated lie doesn't become truth.

It has all been political posturing and continues to be part of the spin and propaganda (which comes from both sides). The court cases which have acquitted them, either aren't following proper legal procedure (they are), or the accusations were false in the first place. You are choosing to believe that what you have heard and is actually un-evidenced to you, is more credible than literally thousands of people who have dedicated their lives to the legal truth.


Canards! For future reference if your going to write in any and I mean any of my threads please refrain from using that word.

Normally you would be correct, however I will give you an example of a situation that I personally had a hand in. I should also note that I have a degree in information security “computer science”.

A while back during the Hillary Clinton email investigation a person on reddit linked stonetear “Hillary Clinton’s IT aid”to a post on reddit. The most damaging post is the one where Combetta “stonetear”solicits advice on how to alter email address headers that have been archived on the server. I just so happened to luck across the tread Early and helped investigate to confirm stonetear was actually Hillary’s IT aid. The IT aid used the same email address on social media accounts and through confirming his IP address we linked his account to his actual home address. We checked his social media accounts to link him to the company Hillary used. We used the time on the post to conclude this was after the FBI had asked Hillary not to delete any emails. Stonetear illegally deleted the emails using bleach bit.


I have had occasion to work as an IT systems architect/engineer and have been involved in the recovery of damaged Microsoft Exchange .edb file mail stores. I have intimate and hands on experience with this over numbers of years.

BleachBit is a file overwriting utility. It is incapable of selectively removing individual e-mail messages from an .edb mail store file. It would be an all-or-nothing case. Since e-mails were recovered afterwards, (the ones that were available on Wikileaks and also by the tech's at CrowdStrike and River Networks at the FBI's request), then the attempt to irrecoverably erase files using BleachBit would have been a fairly total failure.

But of course, that wasn't what Combetta was trying to do.

Even when marked as 'deleted' in the Exchange server, the Exchange mail store retains all messages. It is the constant issue for Exchange mail admins that the mail store only grows and is damn near impossible to shrink/compact. Although you can store the data with greater efficiency, you can't actually delete or remove the message data itself. The only official solution is to move the mail store to increasingly larger and larger storage volumes as it grows.

In fact, with the massively large sizes of .edb files, the hack was unlikely to have copied the whole e-mail store but the hack happened precisely because of the smaller size and lower security of .pst files, which were accessible and possible to download, in a reasonable time-frame, in the hack.

Combetta did the wrong thing by not deleting the insecure mail extracts off the system when he was first directed and this was well before the hack occurred. Because he didn't, it was possible for the hack to occur. If he had deleted the .pst files when told, the hack would not have recovered any e-mails.

Also, Combetta was never directed to not delete anything by the FBI or the DNC, nor was he particularly aware that the DNC servers had been compromised and that the FBI were analysing the images (the server was a VMWare ESX virtual machine and when the FBI took the server, they actually took a bitwise copy of the .VMDK file. The physical hardware was immaterial in the case).

Of course, you'd know all that, you have apparently a degree in Information Security.




It was brought up by congress after the post went viral and comey pretended he knew about it but hadn’t addressed anything on it in his report given to congress. So they pulled comey in to question him about it! Mr combetta knew he wasn’t allowed to delete anything and had already been given immunity under the assumption he didn’t delete anything. Which he did! Funny enough it was his post asking for the advice for a very important person “VIP” that drew the attention.

It was as clear as day he was guilty and who ever made him delete the emails was guilty as well!

I posted it on ATS at the time but that account it gone now


The deletion of the .pst mail extracts was part of Combetta's job. He stuffed up, forgetting to do it, and as a consequence, secure data was recovered in a hack. He tried to cover his tracks, unaware of the change to procedure as a result of the FBI investigation.



posted on Dec, 5 2019 @ 12:56 AM
link   
I expect the "John Durham Report" to be significant.
edit on 5-12-2019 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2019 @ 01:50 AM
link   
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

Literally nothing this guy chr0naut wrote makes sense! The hack happened in 2009 way before the investigation . He’s right about imaging but you still need the hardware too. It’s like saying we have this persons fingerprints from the murder weapon but we lost the murder weapon let’s build a case? WTF? Only in an extreme case would that be allowed like if the hardware was boobytrapped. Derrrrr nobody told him not to delete the emails!

Interesting enough I don’t remember hearing it was VMware, a virtualization software that allows you to run OS’s through their software. Basically it’s a sandbox that I have used a bunch of time and Oracle box too to run OS’s on. We used ours for testing viruses in and learning new OS’s like windows server 2012 yes I’m old, Ubuntu, kali and older OS’s like XP and etc you get the idea.

Anyway let’s get back to this guy

Combetta worked for Platte River Networks, a technology company in Colorado that began managing Clinton’s email server when she decided to house it more professionally than the homemade server in her basement.


I get that I’m basically fighting agaisnt my own article here to prove a point that yes they do illegal stuff that is obviously illegal and get away with it. But trying to call me out as if I’m lying pissed me off

edit on 5-12-2019 by Veryolduser because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-12-2019 by Veryolduser because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-12-2019 by Veryolduser because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2019 @ 01:57 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Right..we're going to need to find out why Obama told his Intel Community to "stand down", in the face of Russians Hacking our 2016 election.



posted on Dec, 5 2019 @ 02:07 AM
link   
And hold Obama accountable to the statement he made in the rose garden just prior to the 2016 election...
Paraphrasing..."No-one thinks that Russia could ever influence our elections"


originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: dfnj2015

Right..we're going to need to find out why Obama told his Intel Community to "stand down", in the face of Russians Hacking our 2016 election.



posted on Dec, 5 2019 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Veryolduser

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Veryolduser

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Veryolduser


I have had occasion to work as an IT systems architect/engineer and have been involved in the recovery of damaged Microsoft Exchange .edb file mail stores. I have intimate and hands on experience with this over numbers of years.

BleachBit is a file overwriting utility. It is incapable of selectively removing individual e-mail messages from an .edb mail store file. It would be an all-or-nothing case. Since e-mails were recovered afterwards, (the ones that were available on Wikileaks), then the attempt to irrecoverably erase files using BleachBit would have been a fairly total failure.

But of course, that wasn't what Combetta was trying to do.

Even when marked as 'deleted' in the Exchange server, the Exchange mail store retains all messages. It is the constant issue for Exchange mail admins that the mail store only grows and is damn near impossible to shrink/compact. Although you can store the data with greater efficiency, you cant actually delete or remove the message data itself. The only official solution is to move the mail store to increasingly larger and larger storage volumes as it grows.

In fact, with the massively large sizes of .edb files, the hack was unlikely to have copied the whole e-mail store but happened precisely because of the smaller and lower security of .pst files, which were accessible and possible to download, in a reasonable time-frame, in the hack.

Combetta did the wrong thing by not deleting the insecure mail extracts off the system when he was first directed and this was well before the hack occurred. Because he didn't, the hack could occur.

Also, Combetta was never directed to not delete anything by the FBI, nor was he particularly aware that the DNC servers had been compromised and that the FBI were analysing the images (the server was a VMWare virtual machine and when the FBI took the server, they actually took a bitwise copy of the .VMDK file. The physical hardware is immaterial in the case).

Of course, you'd know all that, you have apparently a degree in Information Security.





The deletion of the .pst mail extracts was part of Combetta's job. He stuffed up, forgetting to do it, and as a consequence, secure data was recovered in a hack. He tried to cover his tracks, unaware of the change to procedure as a result of the FBI investigation.

I like how you said this was based on saving memory while using a VMware server.


I made no mention of saving memory. None.

Besides that, deleting files generally frees up storage but doesn't free up memory. An IT person would not confuse the two things.


VMware provides the ability to create virtual machines (VMs) that are provisioned with more memory than physically exists on their host servers. This is possible because VMware memory management is able to recover memory that is no longer in use by the VM's guest operating system (OS).


What has memory overprovision in VM design got to do with anything? Overprovisioned memory is very dynamic and temporary, overwritten as soon as a VM increases its call upon the pool. It is swapped out all the time and you can't recover data from it afterwards.


So he was saving memory for what reason?


The ESX hypervisor saves memory by allowing overprovision. This is where the total of all the memory sizes of all the virtual machines exceeds that of the physical memory in the machine. The hypervisor shares out the real memory to the VM's and swaps back and forward to fit the 'actually used memory' into the physical (and hard limited) memory.

Combetta wasn't saving memory. The design of the VM's and hypervisor do that. Again, it sounds like you don't know the difference between memory and storage.


Heres a link www.google.com...

A computer specialist who deleted Hillary Clinton’s emails despite orders from Congress to preserve them was given immunity by the Justice Department during its investigation into her personal email account, according to a law enforcement official and others briefed on the investigation.

Must be one of them canards by an extremely right wing newyork times.


Late December 2014 - The instruction to remove archives of Clinton emails from PRN server, as part of general information security process, was given to Combetta. This is well before any of the hacks, as far as anyone can tell.

March 4, 2015 – Hillary receives subpoena from House Select Committee on Benghazi instructing her to preserve and deliver all emails from her personal servers. This was not communicated to Combetta because no-one at the DNC was aware that he hadn't deleted the archived messages. Note that this had nothing to do with any hacking, it was about the events related to the attack on the Benghazi embassy.

March 25 – 31, 2015 – Combetta has “oh #” moment and realizes he forgot to wipe Hillary’s email archive from the PRN server back in December…which he promptly does using BleachBit. At the time, the DNC were unaware they had been hacked, so if someone had instructed Combetta to delete the archives, they would have been prescient.

April 2016 - DNC became aware they had been hacked. Note that this was after the archives had been deleted.

February 18, 2016 - Combetta meets with FBI and denies knowing about the existence of the subpoena from the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

May 3, 2016 - Combetta has follow-up meeting with the FBI and admits that he "was aware of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton's e-mail data on the PRN server."

Between the time of the supoena by Congress and the deletion of the archives, no one from the DNC instructed Combetta to delete anything and no-one at the DNC was aware they had been hacked.


The hack of her email server had already happened he wasn’t securing sh!t.
Let’s say it was imaged anyway you still need the physical device to show nothing was tampered with. That’s why they take the physical hardware away and send the copy to data forensics.


No, the DNC didn't suddenly cease to exist. They were still operating, and using the server, which would have been changed over time and not useful for forensics. What the FBI took were images. Backups that reflected the state of the DNC server at several times before, during and after the attack. BleachBit also can't delete files from historic backups and images, either.

The whole concept that a number of media and outspoken Republicans have portrayed of what occurred is absurd from an IT perspective. Perhaps that is why the courts, the FBI and Congress Special committees haven't charged anyone?

edit on 5/12/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2019 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Veryolduser

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Veryolduser

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Veryolduser


Canards! For future reference if your going to write in any and I mean any of my threads please refrain from using that word.

Normally you would be correct, however I will give you an example of a situation that I personally had a hand in. I should also note that I have a degree in information security “computer science”.

A while back during the Hillary Clinton email investigation a person on reddit linked stonetear “Hillary Clinton’s IT aid”to a post on reddit. The most damaging post is the one where Combetta “stonetear”solicits advice on how to alter email address headers that have been archived on the server. I just so happened to luck across the tread Early and helped investigate to confirm stonetear was actually Hillary’s IT aid. The IT aid used the same email address on social media accounts and through confirming his IP address we linked his account to his actual home address. We checked his social media accounts to link him to the company Hillary used. We used the time on the post to conclude this was after the FBI had asked Hillary not to delete any emails. Stonetear illegally deleted the emails using bleach bit.


It was brought up by congress after the post went viral and comey pretended he knew about it but hadn’t addressed anything on it in his report given to congress. So they pulled comey in to question him about it! Mr combetta knew he wasn’t allowed to delete anything and had already been given immunity under the assumption he didn’t delete anything. Which he did! Funny enough it was his post asking for the advice for a very important person “VIP” that drew the attention.

It was as clear as day he was guilty and who ever made him delete the emails was guilty as well!

I posted it on ATS at the time but that account it gone now



www.washingtonexaminer.com...

She was hacked way before combetta was told not to delete anything.


That is right.

1. Combetta was told to delete the e-mail archives, first, well before the hack.

2. Then they were hacked, but neither Combetta or the DNC knew at the time.

3. Then Combetta realized that he hadn't deleted the archives when requested and so he deleted them, months too late.

4. Then the DNC found out they had been hacked, after Combetta had deleted the archives.


Plus I want to drive this point home for you

Let’s say it was imaged anyway you still need the physical device to show nothing was tampered with. That’s why they take the physical hardware away and send the copy to data forensics. They lock up the hardware and show the details from both the image and the device in a court case.

Evidence Acquisition


Firstly, your idea of the evidential weight of 'the box the server came in' is somewhat misunderstood. Do you think that by looking at the box that anyone could know what data it had once stored (and was then securely deleted)? The evidence is the data that had once been stored there, not the physical machine and not after secure deletion.

You do understand what secure deletion means? No amount of data forensics can reliably recover information that has been securely deleted. If Combetta had securely overwritten the deleted file space, then there is nothing there for forensics to examine.

Secondly, have you heard of backups? If a server is maintained properly, it will have multiple archived backups for disaster recover purposes, and which represent a snapshot of the server at the times those backups were taken.

Again, BleachBit is incapable of removing individual files from out of a backup, just as it is incapable of removing individual e-mails from an Exchange mail store. BleachBit removes temporary files & etc (just like CCleaner) and as an option, can also securely overwrite deleted files.

The FBI recovered images of the virtual machines .vmdk disk image files (the backup files were made by Veeam backup software). Those images are compressed, encrypted and password protected by policy.

Not only that, but the Veeam images are mountable as drives in Windows. You don't even have to rebuild the VM and you can read the data that was on the drives of the VM, from multiple snapshots, taken at multiple times. Before, during and after. The drive images, because they contain the entire file-system, also retain the details of files marked as deleted (windows does not hard delete files, it marks them as deleted and the files remain on the file-system until overwritten).

As far as evidence of the content of the server, backups far outweigh what a later hardware snapshot might show. Forensics are carried out on the backups to look for specific data among the hundreds of millions of files usually stored.


Perhaps the most critical facet of successful computer forensic investigation is a rigorous, detailed plan for acquiring evidence. Extensive documentation is needed prior to, during, and after the acquisition process; detailed information must be recorded and preserved, including all hardware and software specifications, any systems used in the investigation process, and the systems being investigated. This step is where policies related to preserving the integrity of potential evidence are most applicable. General guidelines for preserving evidence include the physical removal of storage devices,


In this case, the FBI removed backup media, which contained the backup images, which they gave to CrowdStrike, who did some of the data forensics.

edit on 5/12/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2019 @ 03:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Veryolduser
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

Literally nothing this guy chr0naut wrote makes sense! The hack happened in 2009 way before the investigation . He’s right about imaging but you still need the hardware too. It’s like saying we have this persons fingerprints from the murder weapon but we lost the murder weapon let’s build a case? WTF? Only in an extreme case would that be allowed like if the hardware was boobytrapped. Derrrrr nobody told him not to delete the emails!


That last dated DNC e-mail released by Wikileaks was 25 May 2016. That particular hack must necessarily have occurred after that date.

Here's the Wikileaks link, but I don't know if ATS will allow linkage to that site. If it doesn't, you can search for it.

Here's a blog by Crowdstrike's Dmitri Alperovitch that explains some technical details and CrowdStrike's conclusions about the hacks.

According to page 4 of the Mueller Report, the overall Russian hacking against Clinton campaign volunteers and employees began in March 2016 and the specific hack of the DCCC and DNC servers started in April 2016.

Also, seven years to figure out they were being hacked? And during which time, none of the bad guys did anything with the hacked data? Really?


Interesting enough I don’t remember hearing it was VMware, a virtualization software that allows you to run OS’s through their software. Basically it’s a sandbox that I have used a bunch of time and Oracle box too to run OS’s on. We used ours for testing viruses in and learning new OS’s like windows server 2012 yes I’m old, Ubuntu, kali and older OS’s like XP and etc you get the idea.

Anyway let’s get back to this guy

Combetta worked for Platte River Networks, a technology company in Colorado that began managing Clinton’s email server when she decided to house it more professionally than the homemade server in her basement.

I get that I’m basically fighting agaisnt my own article here to prove a point that yes they do illegal stuff that is obviously illegal and get away with it. But trying to call me out as if I’m lying pissed me off


edit on 5/12/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join