|
Post by Bevo on Jun 7, 2017 22:15:29 GMT
Bevo: Obama's assurance that there was no hacking came in December 2016. Bevo: The DNC's emals were hacked.... Which resulted in "meddling". Bevo: It's not a total reversal, it's a needed clarification. FHF: Ok. Lol. What I meant was "no hacking of the election"... By that, I meant "no attack on our vote counting apparatus". That's what Obama was saying. Thus, a "needed clarification"... Not a total reversal. Which, is what I meant when I said : this kind of "discussion is difficult".
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Jun 7, 2017 23:03:08 GMT
Bevo: Obama's assurance that there was no hacking came in December 2016. Bevo: The DNC's emals were hacked.... Which resulted in "meddling". Bevo: It's not a total reversal, it's a needed clarification. FHF: Ok. Lol. What I meant was "no hacking of the election"... By that, I meant "no attack on our vote counting apparatus". That's what Obama was saying. Thus, a "needed clarification"... Not a total reversal. Which, is what I meant when I said : this kind of "discussion is difficult". Fair enough. Lol. All is well, as long as you wind up in the right place, which is where you pretty much seem to be.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Jun 8, 2017 10:49:00 GMT
"the hack was done by expert level genius hackers with nation-state resources and we traced the IP to Russia"
Can you spot the obvious flaw in this statement?
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Jun 8, 2017 15:14:00 GMT
"the hack was done by expert level genius hackers with nation-state resources and we traced the IP to Russia" Can you spot the obvious flaw in this statement? Yes. It is obvious. The "t" in the first word of the sentence quoted isn't capitalized. Also, "expert level genius" and "nation-state" are redundancies, and there should be a comma after "resources" and a period after "Russia". Kidding.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Jun 8, 2017 16:05:36 GMT
"the hack was done by expert level genius hackers with nation-state resources and we traced the IP to Russia" Can you spot the obvious flaw in this statement? Yes. It is obvious. The "t" in the first word of the sentence quoted isn't capitalized. Also, "expert level genius" and "nation-state" are redundancies, and there should be a comma after "resources" and a period after "Russia". Kidding. :-)
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Jun 8, 2017 19:11:58 GMT
I have mentioned here before that I have a long time friend who is a true expert on all things related to the internet. He actually helped build the damn thing, back in the 80's, working with AOL. When we left them, he was their Sr. VP of Systems Infra-Structure and had more than 500 engineers reporting to him. If he tells me something about computers, software or hardware, I believe it.
I've been confused over the past years by conflicting statements regarding the certainty of identifying a source of a computer attack, or hack. Some sources say it can be definitive. Others say it cannot. I've grown tired of this discrepancy. So, I asked "Dave" the following question:
So my question is: Disregarding OTHER sources of intelligence (like, intercepted phone calls, or other communications) is it possible, just from the available forensic digital data to truly identify the source of an intrusion into a computer system or network? How difficult is this?
His answer was quite lengthy and detailed.... but, it boils down to this: Yes. REAL experts can be CERTAIN of the source, given enough time and resource. They can "triangulate" the source from multiple directions. And, can be 100% SURE about where it originated. .
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Jun 8, 2017 19:25:59 GMT
First, you are dead wrong about your friend. You should know that Al Gore invented the Internet.
Second, I will defer to your friend's judgment and expertise.
However, I expect that the Russians would go to considerable lengths to make it as difficult as possible to identify the specific location(s) of their nefarious hacking activities. And, even if the specific location(s) were identified, they most likely would make it a challenge to link it/them back to the Russian government.
Even so, I expect that the U.S. has among the best talent and resources for unraveling the tangled web.
|
|