My post talking about how to catch a hacker and only covering that technical information touched off a nerve. It of course inspired a couple of people to come at me defending the narrative of the government with regards to the "Russian" hacking.
It has of course resulted in deflection. I've been told by one of the people that I may have proven the technical side, but there are other factors. I never claimed to PROVE anything. I spoke of things in terms of probabilities and how unlikely something might be. I did not use absolutes, and I did not say I proved anything. No one can prove anything without access to the requisite information.
I did state that information from the DNC server alone would not be sufficient to prove Russian hacking. Hacking is a technical task. Therefore, I approached ONLY that aspect. That is what my article was about, how you could catch a hacker.
It was written mainly because most people have a view of hacking that is shaped by Television shows, and movies. It is actually not remotely like that. It would make for a very boring movie.
Source: hackersnewsbulletin.com
It is also nothing like tracing a call. Even that is not 100% accurate in the age of VOIP and the fact that so many carriers are switching to VOIP.
Source: Reverse Phone Lookup
First... I did not state I proved anything. Others stated that who replied to me. I didn't prove anything. I was not trying to prove anything or disprove anything. I was simply trying to INFORM people of the type of information you would need and steps you would need to take to definitively PROVE a certain person/entity hacked something.
Source: Daily Mail
Second... I did not endorse Trump or Hillary in that post. I did not post that for political reasons because I am on either side of that political issue. I posted it primarily because I could see that the narrative on the news was passing off "proof" of Russian hacking which is a technical issue when I know they couldn't have the PROOF for that.
If you still didn't get it from my post... they could prove that it SEEMED to be coming from Russia. They would then need to go there and see if someone was physically doing it from there.
In the internet world it is not difficult to appear to be coming from any country. In fact, that is what truly intelligent hackers will do. You don't hack and leave a trail back to yourself.
From the technical side of the things...
Here is an analogy in non-internet terms...
Let's say that the leaked documents were kept in a safe in a bank in Kansas.
The argument comes out that Russians broke into the bank and stole those documents.
The evidence available would be surveillance cameras, finger prints, audio recordings of speaking, travel plans, witness reports, etc.
Well the bank won't let the FBI go into the bank to investigate.
That means none of the internal surveillance, finger prints, and audio recordings are available to the FBI.
The information that was provided is told to them or provided on a communication from a Bank employee. This is NOT access to the information in question.
The FBI expands and finds out there were some Russians who traveled to Kansas. They even find some witnesses that claim to have seen the Russians in that town on the given day.
The FBI comes out to the public and says "The Russians did it".
Source: Embracing our differences
End of Analogy
From a technological point of view this essentially the case with the current hacking story. If there is indeed GOOD evidence that could change this it is currently hidden behind a "it is classified" wall which these days is used with impunity.
Source: giphy.com
THAT was the focus of my article. My article was not about whether the hacking/leaking swayed the election or not. I know with a certainty the leaks influenced the election, but so did many other things.
The video footage from Iraq war, and many other incidents showing CNN blatantly faking stories in parking lots, and in front of green screens severely damaged their credibility. This at a time they were trying to ram Hillary into everyones mind and call Trump the devil incarnate. Their questionable credibility likely made people question this narrative. So that is likely ANOTHER factor of why Hillary lost.
There were many factors. I actually thought she would win. I was surprised when she lost.
If that is indeed the case that Podesta's phishing was the leak then you can visit my previous article, because you have an email address (which I can create one right now in my house on a PC, or on many servers in various places around the country). If I hacked another server I could create one there. You need more than just the information from a server. That is but the starting place, and much of what is required after that requires active investigation to catch them in the act unless the hacker is VERY stupid.
Don't get me wrong. Russia does hack. They have great hackers. They have a policy in their country last I heard that citizens are free to hack, as long as their targets are not in Russia. There is even an episode of the Cyberwar documentary series dedicated to that topic and they travel to Russia and speak to Russian hackers.
Some of that type might be SLOPPY as they are learning, but they are not part of the government. If it was the government calling for hacking us, they wouldn't be even remotely close to that sloppy.
Did I claim to prove ANYTHING in this document, or the previous one? NO. Not that I saw.
Did others say I proved the "technical" side? YES in comments before coming at me with their BUT/HOWEVER. Though I do not agree that I proved anything. Proof is not possible without access to all of the information. Which is conveniently "classified", yet they still are willing to fire people up on the news about it. They are willing to talk about it openly and state it is the truth and expect us to fall for their Appeal to Authority.
On the NON-TECHNICAL side which was not what my post was about...
Do I have any doubts that Russia tried to influence our elections? No, every country that could likely tried to influence our elections in some way. We do it too, and sometimes we interfere to a large degree by even funding activists/rebels to undermine a government we do not like.
Source: giphy.com
Do I think Russia tried to influence our elections? Without a doubt. Putin press comments warning his people to prepare for possible Nuclear war if Hillary is elected is pretty influential PRESS.
Yet, many nations said many things to influence the elections. Nations were also saying anti-trump things. Were they trying to influence our elections?
The fact of the matter is Hillary LOST. I did not vote for either of them, so I have no horse in the race.
Then the hypocrisy began to fly...
Listen to Hillary here...
Or how about Obama?
I guess that is only the truth as long as THEY win. ;)
She lost. The popular vote does not matter, as there is no reason for states to be part of the union if California, New York, Florida, and Texas get to tell all the other states what they must do. That is why the electoral college exists...
She lost by A LOT in that regard. Did she win the popular vote? Yes. I went to bed about 1:30am MST (UTC -7) that night and she was a million popular votes behind. She had been awarded the electoral college votes for California, but those actual totals were not in yet. The next day she was ahead in popular vote.
I don't live in California.
Source: giphy.com
I will say as a disclaimer. I'm actually an anarcho-capitalist (not to be confused with the anarchists in the news that blow up shit, and perform vandalism, and acts of violence). Ideally I would like to see us not NEED a government. I do not expect that to happen in my life time, or perhaps even that of my children. It is a process that would require changing a lot of bad habits and teaching everyone how critical thinking and different types of logical fallacies occur from a VERY early age to make it a reality. Is it a Utopian idea? No, we're human. We can corrupt and mess up anything. :)
This post is MORE passionate than others. This is primarily due to getting tired of the words people keep putting into my mouth that I didn't say. They don't taste very good.
Edit: - It has been several days since I posted this blog entry. I did however, just come across an article today that is relevant to this discussion. http://www.returnofkings.com/112038/how-the-media-lies-through-omission-and-distortion
Steem On!
