Politico: NRCC Hacked During 2018 Midterms

a reply to: Cassi3l

It would actually explain a lot

originally posted by: Extorris



I am glad the FBI is involved.

Would it upset you if the rnc refused to allow the fbi to look at their servers?

a reply to: theantediluvian

Well..they could have ignored it......

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Extorris



I am glad the FBI is involved.

Would it upset you if the rnc refused to allow the fbi to look at their servers?

Has that happened?

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Extorris



I am glad the FBI is involved.

Would it upset you if the rnc refused to allow the fbi to look at their servers?

Has that happened?

The dnc were hacked by Russia we are told, yet they absolutely refused to allow the FBI to look at their actual server.

So yes, the inverse has happened.

why would the dnc not allow the FBI to look at their server?

So no, I dont believe them based on the fact the firm they hired reached the conclusion they wanted.

And no, I wouldnt believe the RNC if they do the same thing.

originally posted by: theantediluvian

So I assume that the RNCC contracting Crowdstrike invalidates the whole thing?

You're now running threads based on assumptions and wisheful thinking?

Man, things are really bad for you guys.

a reply to: Grambler

In their defense, I wouldn't trust the FBI to look at my servers either.

originally posted by: Metallicus
If anything underhanded or illegal comes to light I hope that they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. They probably will be since the Republicans don’t have the intel agencies in their pocket to cover things up for them like the Dems did when they were hacked.

Then why call the FBI and them investigate into it along side cloudstrike? If the RNC is trying to hide something thats not very wise is it?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Extorris



I am glad the FBI is involved.

Would it upset you if the rnc refused to allow the fbi to look at their servers?

Has that happened?

The dnc were hacked by Russia we are told, yet they absolutely refused to allow the FBI to look at their actual server.

I thought the OP topic was the National Republican Campaign Committee hack?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Extorris



I am glad the FBI is involved.

Would it upset you if the rnc refused to allow the fbi to look at their servers?

Has that happened?

The dnc were hacked by Russia we are told, yet they absolutely refused to allow the FBI to look at their actual server.

As a sidenote to the actual topic:
This post seems a mistaken belief premised on a faulty understanding of the technology stack involved.

The long answer is that there is no "server"—there are many different servers and pieces of internet infrastructure in question, and the United States intelligence community and independent security researchers have examined much of it and have all reached the same conclusion: Russia hacked the DNC.

...

However, in March 2017, former FBI Director James Comey told Congress that the FBI got an “appropriate substitute” from CrowdStrike, and Mueller’s indictment makes clear that the FBI has lots of information about the hack from both within the DNC and from other sources.

motherboard.vice.com...

The GRU team was able to obtain "snapshots" of the virtual machines with DNC data sets and then move them to an account that they had set up with the same hosting service. The indictment does not name the service.

arstechnica.com...

Both testimony by the FBI and the very detailed indictment documents from the Special Counsel's office explain there was never a physical server to be analyzed as it was a virtual network.

The FBI was given an "Image" of that network for analysis.

I can offer more links explaining the confusion if you like.

a reply to: Extorris

Nope I have gone through this many times in ats

Comey admitted he requested to have access to the physical servers but the dnc refused to allow him

He testified to this information of Congress I believe, so are you claiming he lied?

a reply to: Grambler

The dnc were hacked by Russia we are told, yet they absolutely refused to allow the FBI to look at their actual server.

There's an argument to be made for allowing the FBI access while the hack is ongoing but after the fact, it makes practically no difference whether the FBI was given forensic images or carted off the physical hardware.

The insinuation here is that giving them images would somehow facilitate manipulation. It would not. It would be exactly as easy to fabricate the forensic evidence of a hack and leave it in situ as it would be to fabricate it and make a forensic image of the disks.

And as we've discussed, in the case of virtualized servers, there's no "actual server" — there are virtualization hosts and shared storage. The hosts have a hypervisor that the VMs run on top of, sharing processor, RAM, network etc resources. The actual filesystem resides in a virtual disk (itself a disk image) in whatever format (VMDK/VHD/VHDX/etc) alongside other virtual disks on the shared storage.

For instance, in one of my Xen pools, I currently have 5 hosts along with two storage servers for the storage repos and a third which is used for continuous and nightly backups. There's maybe 15-16 different virtual machines running in that pool. I can move these VMs between hosts on the fly. It would make 0 sense to take any of them. The contents of the storage arrays are a couple dozen VHDs (the virtual disks) which are just big files containing all the data for the virtual disk. It would make no sense to hand those servers over either when I could just copy the VHDs over to something more portable.

Nothing about what was done would facilitate any sort of fakery.

So no, I dont believe them based on the fact the firm they hired reached the conclusion they wanted.

On what are you basing this opinion that Crowdstrike provided a conclusion that the DNC was seeking? Regardless, you don't have to believe anything that was put forth by Crowdstrike. Furthermore, I would say that even in a best case scenario, attribution made by Crowdstrike is more or less an educated guess based on comparative analysis and deduction.

I guess I'm going to take the time to write up an OP with the latest available information. I've been busy between work and vacation and when I've had the time, I haven't been able to muster the motivation to go over it all and compose something because I know there's literally nothing that will convince most Trump supporters.

Here's a link to a post with a taste of it here.

a reply to: theantediluvian

... there's literally nothing that will convince most Trump supporters...

This is the nub of anything to do with Trump related threads on ATS
It's not about 'convincing' Trump supporters (it's impossible)
As there is no 'discussion' between the 'Pro' Vs 'Anti' Trump supporters

Any valid thread is immediately high-jacked,
straight off the bat on page 1
by the accepted ATS 'cabal'

Sublimecraft
network dude
JinMI
vinifalou
Carewemust
Xuenchen

Just to name a few

Incapable of a coherent counter argument
they are all reduced to pejorative name calling and epithets
All of which means that to casual reader/observer
"ATS is another right wing echo chamber"

Motivation is hard to maintain, Anté
Many are with you
Keep it up !


Creeping Inertia is our biggest worry right now

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Extorris

Nope I have gone through this many times in ats

Comey admitted he requested to have access to the physical servers but the dnc refused to allow him

He testified to this information of Congress I believe, so are you claiming he lied?

It's helpful if you provide text and links when claiming something disputed.

Full Transcript
June 8th, 2017 Comey's Testimony to Congress:

BURR: And the FBI in this case, unlike other cases that you might investigate, did you ever have access to the actual hardware that was hacked, or did you have to rely on a third party to provide you the day that that they had collected?

COMEY: In the case of the DNC, and I believe the D triple C, but I'm sure the DNC, we did not have access to the devices themselves. We got relevant forensic information from a private party, a high class entity, that had done the work but we didn't get direct access.

www.politico.com...

He never says they requested and were denied access to a server.
He does refer to "devices" as in plural as in a virtual network.

March 2017
Comey's testimony to Congress:

HURD: Good copy. So director FBI notified the DNC early, before any information was put on Wikileaks and when -- you have still been -- never been given access to any of the technical or the physical machines that were -- that were hacked by the Russians.

COMEY: That's correct although we got the forensics from the pros that they hired which -- again, best practice is always to get access to the machines themselves, but this -- my folks tell me was an appropriate substitute.

www.washingtonpost.com... ction/

Again the plural "machines", not server.
Again the FBI (his folks - being adept in computing) were satisfied with what it received.

The Special Counsel indictment goes into further detail, confirming the virtual network and lack of a central server and Ars Technica does a solid job of summarizing it.

The GRU team was able to obtain "snapshots" of the virtual machines with DNC data sets and then move them to an account that they had set up with the same hosting service. The indictment does not name the service.

arstechnica.com...

a reply to: Cassi3l

Sublimecraft
network dude
JinMI
vinifalou
Carewemust
Xuenchen

Incapable of a coherent counter argument they are all reduced to pejorative name calling and epithets All of which means that to casual reader/observer "ATS is another right wing echo chamber"

Oh, I'm a part of something! When to I get my gold star?

Your designation and stance on where people are give credence to the allegation that you don't know what you are talking about and can not hold an argument.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I will happily read your thread and info, as usual I will enjoy it.

However

You know that Comey tetsofiesd that it is the FBI preference to get acess to the actual sevrer/servers/devies/ whatever you want to call it.

You know that the DNC refused access to that.

If what you are saying is true, and the copy is 100% an exact replica, why would the DNC refuse the FBI's preferred method?

There is literally no plausible reason for them to deny this request if the FBI would have ended up gettiingt 100% the same information.

Oh and for a refresher for us and anyone reading, here was a thread where me and you went through all of this.

Spolier alert, I think I won the argument



(Just kidding, we both made good points)

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Cassi3l

Sublimecraft
network dude
JinMI
vinifalou
Carewemust
Xuenchen

Incapable of a coherent counter argument they are all reduced to pejorative name calling and epithets All of which means that to casual reader/observer "ATS is another right wing echo chamber"

Oh, I'm a part of something! When to I get my gold star?

Your designation and stance on where people are give credence to the allegation that you don't know what you are talking about and can not hold an argument.

Ah crap!!!

I didnt make the list. Guess I will have to try harder!

a reply to: Grambler

Odd thing is, I consider myself just right of center, and that's only because of my financial/economic outlook.


I'm willing to guess you didn't make the list because of your ability to debate and susceptibility to logic. Shame on you.

a reply to: Extorris

Sure, after the fact the FBI claims to have been "satisfied"

But they wanted access to the physical machines and the dnc wouldnt let them, as your comey quote shows.

In a statement to WIRED, a senior FBI law enforcement official wrote in an email Thursday that "The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed until well after the initial compromise had been mitigated." This contrasts with what DNC deputy communications director Eric Walker told Buzzfeed in an email: “The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division and its Washington (DC) Field Office, the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers.”[/ex]

Why would the DNC not allow the FBI access?

www.wired.com...

And why would the DNC lie and say the FBI never asked?

If the copy is 100% identical, why did the FBI want access to the physocal machines, and why would the DNC not allow them that access?

edit on 6-12-2018 by Grambler because: (no reason given)