Why would Fox News send digital data by courier?

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: incoserv

Nothing about this story makes sense.

Who would take a laptop with such illegal and sensitive information on it and just drop it off at a repair shop and just leave it there? I can't see how he could have just forgotten about it, and there are too many ways he could have retrieved the laptop.

Yes, but we are talking about a junkie. Never overestimate a junkie. They will get lazy, paranoid, have high social anxiety and procrastinate. When they are high, that laptop would be the last thing on their mind. When they are not, picking up that laptop would be the last thing they want to do.

originally posted by: frogs453
Maybe I'm just being obtuse, but couldn't they have digitally sent it, so it could be reviewed by Tucker, and then also mailed it?

If you found the digital copy had been manipulated once the original arrived, then you could investigate who was behind the hack and have even more evidence of nefarious behavior?

You don't even need to send a physical copy for tamper protection. If you "cryptographically sign" some piece of information, like a document or series of photos, and send the signature to your receiving party separately out of band, say via text message or even via phone/Zoom, then when the receiver receives the digital document (presumably also encrypted) via email, they can check your signature against the data and determine if anyone altered the data, or if it was otherwise corrupted.

I think what happened is that someone on the sending side encountered a momentary bout of paranoia ("OMG we can't email or digitally transfer this information, because hackers!"), but they didn't have the technical prowess to fully understand all of their options, so in gesture of panic, they slapped the material on a USB drive and tried to ship it. If this theory is true, the might not have thought to encrypt the drive either.

They might have outsmarted themselves on this one, ~OR~ this was a diabolical honey pot masquerading as an act of bumbling, but I'd feel safer betting on the former scenario.

a reply to: incoserv

Corporate News Agency and front, data transfer online can and has been hacked, intercepted at exchanges by governments not only there own and read and scanned for information, news agency's are also sometimes front's for intelligence services both national and corporate whom would then use courier instead of direct transfer so that what they did direct transfer and that was intercepted would then send there competitors/enemy's on a false path.


They have there reason's but yes it seems odd but not if you look at it this way.

Sting operation?

a reply to: Guiltyguitarist

That makes sense if there was nothing on it of value. He obviously valued it enough to want it repaired.

Junkie he may be, but he obviously was functioning on at least a minimal level, and it wasn't like he was homeless, in the street looking for his next score.

It would make more sense if they said he sold it to them to maintain his junkie needs.

a reply to: incoserv

Can you not see whats happening. This is a massive infromation war. They used this method to avoid the information being sniffed or hacked.

a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

Thanks, it just really doesn't make a lot of sense to mail it. I work for a corporation and I send and receive information that has legally binding information back and forth world wide daily. I do believe they could have easily done it, but if they were so adamant on mailing it, just do both. My nefarious comment was a bit facetious.

a reply to: incoserv

A. Protection. B. Insurance. C. Not chance transfer loss. D. NSA. Just off the top of my head.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: incoserv
I'd say they were trying to drum up some fake drama to try and legitimize it. Acting freaked out that it was lost but, whew (wipes sweat from brow), good thing it was recovered!!!

Like you said, if it was really that important why mail it and why no back-up?

Learn to read.

He did have a backup (what makes you think he/they didn't? Oh, you listen to MSM num-nuts, got it). He sent it to prove/test whether or not their texts were being monitored. They proved that quite nicely.

a reply to: incoserv

I don't know why. But we do it all the time when a prison asks us to download a certain inmate's telephone calls to a thumb drive and send it to them. They could do it themselves or have it emailed but prefer it to be done by us and sent to them.

I'm not saying this was the preferred action taken, but that's why we do it.

originally posted by: odzeandennz
Shockingly...Fox News don't own their own servers and would need to rely on Google Dropbox sharedrive and even better ups...

Let's all believe what we need to believe to boost our self-esteem, or at least keep the burgeoning partisanship and populist logic alive!
Maga2020 and beyond.
#newRome 🇺🇸😊😊😍

Believe your TV and news sources. And remember, the other side, whichever it is, is against you and trying to kill you.

What do you mean by "shockingly"? Does CNN or MSNBC or NBC or CBS or ABC have their own servers or something?

Almost like the whole thing was made up and now, days from the election, a story needs to be made up about 'losing' the critical evidence.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: incoserv
I'd say they were trying to drum up some fake drama to try and legitimize it. Acting freaked out that it was lost but, whew (wipes sweat from brow), good thing it was recovered!!!

Like you said, if it was really that important why mail it and why no back-up?

Learn to read.

He did have a backup (what makes you think he/they didn't? Oh, you listen to MSM num-nuts, got it). He sent it to prove/test whether or not their texts were being monitored. They proved that quite nicely.

It was a ploy to prove they were being monitored...

Because it’s all BS.

One of our tenants is a large news station (SEA BEE ESS), they’ve been in the process of expanding their suite and had to move their IT room from one floor to the other. They spent a RIDICULOUS amount of money making this happen flawlessly because without their IT up and running, they couldn’t communicate with the other branches. They’ve got their own servers and a team of people at each branch making sure it stays up and running. I’ve got alarms that go off on my phone the second the temperature in their IT rooms raises past 69 degrees. A large portion of our lease with them pertains to their IT rooms and what’s expected of us on our end as property management to ensure those rooms stay running flawlessly.

I would have to imagine Fox isn’t any different. A huge corporation like that, dealing with the content they deal with most definitely has their own servers and teams of people keeping it up and running. If they honestly believe that the general public is that f*cking stupid to think they’d be shipping USB flash drives across the US to relay information....well...apparently they do....and apparently they’re not wrong.

a reply to: tanstaafl
I must confess that I have not read or heard anything about it except for noticing there were some threads about it here.

That explanation sounds pretty hokey and it actually doesn't prove anything.

I'm not going to sit here and believe that those people monitoring their texts intercepted a thumb drive full of important info only to have it show up again a couple days later.

I will stick by what I said, minus the back-up part.

Also, Tucker is MSM, why would I automatically believe him?

Maybe the entire story is political B.S?
Ever think about that?

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

Thanks, it just really doesn't make a lot of sense to mail it. I work for a corporation and I send and receive information that has legally binding information back and forth world wide daily. I do believe they could have easily done it, but if they were so adamant on mailing it, just do both. My nefarious comment was a bit facetious.

I agree, my working theory is that the senders assumed they were 'being safe' avoiding uploading the documents to some storage provider.

They could've just signed & encrypted the material and then just send it as an email attachment, rather than physically mail anything. I think expertise in information security is lacking in many companies, even some that focus in tech/IT.

a reply to: Cygnis



www.google.com...


The media is run by the CIA . FOX can't be trusted

originally posted by: daskakik
I'm not going to sit here and believe that those people monitoring their texts intercepted a thumb drive full of important info only to have it show up again a couple days later.

Don't care what you believe, since much of what you believe is ridiculous nonsense.

They only wanted to copy the contents...

I will stick by what I said, minus the back-up part.

Well, so now your past is only 95% BS.

Also, Tucker is MSM, why would I automatically believe him?

Rotflmao!

It really must be awful being you.

a reply to: incoserv

if you dont want to put something out on a open net, ever this would be a way of doing that.

maybe the people receiving or requesting it may need it for forensic data off the actual drive.

there is a term called air gapping, and if you wanted to put data on an air gapped computer you would need a 'physical' copy of the data, like in the old days before everything was online.