LogFAQs > #879866090

Vertania posted...

COVxy posted...

What's fundamentally unclear in this story, which everyone is alluding to, is how the DNC would have the ability to retroactively plant false Russian metadata after the leak had already happened.

Ok, I'll try to explain it as simply as possible:

1. The DNC announces on June 14 that they have been hacked. The information was stolen on or before the 14th. Someone has a copy of the data stored on a physical drive kept privately.

2. "Warren Flood" gathers the information that was hacked and, on June 15th, modifies the files to add a fake Russian footprint to their metadata. They release the data as "Guccifer 2.0," under the understanding that the original data thief is planning to leak to WikiLeaks. Crowdstrike releases a report suggesting the Russians were behind the attack.

3. By June 16, Vice publishes an article claiming Guccifer 2.0 is a front for Russian hackers who stole the DNC info. Other media sources follow their lead.

4. Somewhere between the person in Step 1 acquiring the data and July 22, someone sends their copy of the data to WikiLeaks. This is where WikiLeaks has claimed to have gotten the info.

OK, so lets get this world you've built correct. Someone has hacked into the DNC - that much is undeniable. The malware's actually on the machines, and the phishing emails were found; the malware was introduced through phishing emails with bit.ly links embedded. They've got the information before the 14th, they've likely had a considerable amount of time in the compromised system.

On the 14th, the DNC announce they have been hacked. At this point, we can assume they've shut down the compromise - they wouldn't announce the hack while it's ongoing, that's IR no-no 101. Their first instinct is to intentionally leak their own data, while editing it to make it look like the Russians did it - except even though they were smart enough to know about the metadata as a framing device, they haven't done any research into how it works and they fuck it up (note that every reputable authority on security in the world seems to have missed this blatant fuck up, or is in Hillary's pockets).

At this point, the hacker then... does what? shakes their fist at the sky and goes "I'll get you next time, DNC!"? Because we've got an entire DNC's worth of data stolen, the genuine stuff, that seems to have gone missing. If Seth Rich was actually a leaker, then there's an entire month's worth of time in which he's done nothing with the data he was so desperate to leak, even though the data is rapidly losing its value after the Guccifer 2.0 release, before he is finally killed, moments away from giving this silver bullet - a silver bullet that he has only stored on hard copy and has apparently deleted all trace of the original documents stolen other than this one physical drive.

As a security analyst at one of the companies who has investigated the group who perpetrated the DNC hack - investigated them from before the DNC hack, while they were breaking into TV5, it's not likely. All signs point to Russia, GRU specifically, and in a way that would make it illogical for it to be anyone else - it is too prolonged for a false flag. In fact, in the way that they use bit.ly, you can use the site's analytics to see some of the parties targeted. All are critical or harmful to Russia in some way. Garry Kasparov got targeted, and all he's done is play chess and say Putin's a tyrant, so what does that say? This group first came onto the scene in late 2014 when they attacked the German parliament, and have been pretty active ever since - are you saying that the DNC planned a false flag 2 years in advance to leak their own documents (helping them lose the election) in such a way to use it as a weapon against the new government? The ones they were originally in an election against?
---

Girls = Time x Money. Time = Money. Girls = Money x Money = Money sq.
Money = sqrt Evil: Girls = sqrt Evil sq. Girls = Evil