Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Guys, Fox News has an exclusive interview with Guccifer, the guy who hacked Hillary's emails, and he says that it was definitely not the Russians who hacked the DNC. So, see? That's settled. Can we just move on now?   ( foxnews.com) divider line
    More: Unlikely, Bill Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Lazar, Marcel Lehel Lazar, United States Secretary of State, fox news, State Department, Barack Obama  
•       •       •

815 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Aug 2017 at 5:35 PM (17 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



101 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-08-11 01:46:46 PM  
"It wasn't me!"

 - OJ Simpson
 
2017-08-11 01:48:26 PM  
Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"
 
2017-08-11 03:04:37 PM  
Fox News believes the story told to them by a guy who pled guilty to hacking people associated with Clinton and the DNC who now doesn't want to come back to the US to serve his sentence after completing his sentences for cybercrimes in his native Romania? " Gullible 2.0" should be the new name for Fox News.

  His story is that it was the US government that is responsible for the hacking and distribution of data from those hacks to GOP candidates and wikileaks, that Clinton's server was hacked by others years before he tried to hack into it (and apparently failed since he was never charged with that) and his use of Russian servers in the process was just a matter of convenience and not at all related to any efforts by the Russian government.  This is the guy who acknowledged contacting Trump dirty tricks specialist Roger Stone about the hacking of the DNC.  He also sent hacked DNC voter data to a GOP blogger in Florida for GOP candidates to use in the 2016 election http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/05/gop-operative-russian-hacker-g​a​ve-him-2016-voter-data
 
2017-08-11 03:20:03 PM  
Yet the people who rightly scoff at this because of utter lack of evidence so desperately bei.ve in a pee tape that has never been seen.
 
2017-08-11 04:36:33 PM  

daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"


The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-a​b​out-last-years-dnc-hack/
 
2017-08-11 04:38:24 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-08-11 04:52:34 PM  
What did his wife, Morgan Fairchild, have to say?
 
2017-08-11 04:54:37 PM  

dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/


Hmmm, let's see what other articles Patrick Lawrence has written for them...

Are We Witnessing a Coup Operation Against the Trump White House?
Trump Takes a Running Whack at the Liberal Interventionists
The Liberal, Postwar 'Order' Is Dying-and That's a Good Thing
Trump, Russia, and the Return of Scapegoating, a Timeless American Tradition


Yea, this guy is hardly friendly to Trump...
 
2017-08-11 05:16:24 PM  

dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/


Site is pay-walled.   I'm going to call bullshiat on that forensic evidence bullshiat.  We already know Podesta was tricked into providing a password so why the f$ck would they need a thumb drive.  It wasn't a skillful hack - just a hack.
 
2017-08-11 05:37:26 PM  

gopher321: "It wasn't me!"

 - OJ Simpson


So should we expect a book from Guccifer titled "If I did back the DNC"?
 
2017-08-11 05:37:44 PM  

dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/


But they aren't traitors, so there is that.
 
2017-08-11 05:39:02 PM  

scottydoesntknow: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

Hmmm, let's see what other articles Patrick Lawrence has written for them...

Are We Witnessing a Coup Operation Against the Trump White House?
Trump Takes a Running Whack at the Liberal Interventionists
The Liberal, Postwar 'Order' Is Dying-and That's a Good Thing
Trump, Russia, and the Return of Scapegoating, a Timeless American Tradition

Yea, this guy is hardly friendly to Trump...


I wonder how much you have to be paid to write that shiat.
 
2017-08-11 05:40:10 PM  

dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/


No one gives a 💩 ditty.
 
2017-08-11 05:40:20 PM  

MAXIMUM DEFLECTION!

 
2017-08-11 05:40:38 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-08-11 05:42:29 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-08-11 05:42:53 PM  
Will 4chan be on the interview as well to offer his thoughts?
 
2017-08-11 05:43:02 PM  

dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/


You should let Mueller know so he can shut down his investigation.

adweek.comView Full Size
 
2017-08-11 05:45:08 PM  

bronyaur1: Yet the people who rightly scoff at this because of utter lack of evidence so desperately bei.ve in a pee tape that has never been seen.


No, we don't.  What we *do* believe in is the very real possibility that the President of the United States did quite a lot of OTHER things, though.

The pee tape would simply be a hilarious cherry on top of Trump's comeuppance, if it exists and came out.
 
2017-08-11 05:48:51 PM  
dittybopper: *smokescreen*

arm, not long enough, jerkoff motion, soul
 
2017-08-11 05:53:32 PM  
Great, I think in legal terms that's called a confession.  So, where's the PD on this?
 
2017-08-11 05:54:28 PM  
I like that.

We clouded with this random dude to commit a felony to get info on our opponent to use in the election but we can't get in trouble because he is NOT Russian and y'all thought wrong.
 
2017-08-11 05:55:00 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size


just dropping this off for those who might wanna use it on people who belong on ignore lists
 
2017-08-11 05:55:51 PM  

dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/


FTA:

Forensicator's first decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate-the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC's server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.
 
2017-08-11 05:56:01 PM  
9419
 
2017-08-11 05:56:14 PM  

mrshowrules: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

Site is pay-walled.   I'm going to call bullshiat on that forensic evidence bullshiat.  We already know Podesta was tricked into providing a password so why the f$ck would they need a thumb drive.  It wasn't a skillful hack - just a hack.


The article is near incomprehensible but the argument (which they have pushed for months before this article) is that the metadata implies that the files were downloaded at a speed of 22 mbps which is too fast for anyone to do over the internet. Yes, really.
 
2017-08-11 05:57:01 PM  
Man, I hope this Muller saga ends with FoxNews getting busted for working with the Trump team to Shill for Russia and they get taken down too.

Ain't gonna happen, but I need a happy dream before the nukes start falling
 
2017-08-11 05:58:34 PM  
And Hillary totally said let them burn during Benghazi.
 
2017-08-11 05:58:55 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-08-11 05:59:07 PM  
Yeah, and tomorrow they'll have that one guy the Internets calls "Anonymous" on there to explain how Trump is actually King of America, and he rules over the series of tubes.
 
2017-08-11 06:00:13 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-08-11 06:00:36 PM  

OceanVortex: Man, I hope this Muller saga ends with FoxNews getting busted for working with the Trump team to Shill for Russia and they get taken down too.

Ain't gonna happen, but I need a happy dream before the nukes start falling


Could easily be possible. They already got busted for working with the Trump Team to push the bullshiat Seth Rich story.
 
2017-08-11 06:02:07 PM  

koinbahd: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

FTA:

Forensicator's first decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate-the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC's server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.


Uh, I've seen those speeds on residential connections. We're about to install 1gb down at my office.

Sheesh.
 
2017-08-11 06:03:48 PM  

dittybopper: forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.


That story is ridiculous nonsense.  Stupid bullshiat story, not remotely plausible.

The guy claims that the file date/time stamps are absolute proof, as if files are a physical thing that can't be replicated or manipulated, and that he's looking at time stamps created at the moment they were copied off the mail server.

He might be looking at the first copy or the 100th. He might be looking at a file creation date or a file copy date.
 
2017-08-11 06:05:15 PM  

texanjeff: I like that.

We clouded with this random dude to commit a felony to get info on our opponent to use in the election but we can't get in trouble because he is NOT Russian and y'all thought wrong.


Also important is that there are two (possibly more) Guccifers, and the one they are interviewing is the dude who hacked George W. Bush's sister and Sidney Blumenthal's e-mails and was arrested back in 2014. He has since claimed he hacked Clinton's private server and that he didn't release anything from it because it was boring and too easy, but no evidence of that has come of that.

Guccifer 2.0 is the one who claimed he hacked the DNC, but investigators think it is just a front for Fancy Bear (one of two established Russian government hacking groups along with Cozy Bear).
 
2017-08-11 06:05:36 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-08-11 06:06:31 PM  

Grungehamster: the argument... is that the metadata implies that the files were downloaded at a speed of 22 mbps which is too fast for anyone to do over the internet. Yes, really.


They could have been downloaded at 22 Kbps, and then transferred to the USB drive at 22 mbps. Exact same result.

The guy is being deliberately deceitful and anyone who falls for it is a moron.
 
2017-08-11 06:07:02 PM  

NateAsbestos: koinbahd: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

FTA:

Forensicator's first decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate-the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC's server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

Uh, I've seen those speeds on residential connections. We're about to install 1gb down at my office.

Sheesh.


Yep. From my home:

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-08-11 06:13:59 PM  

scottydoesntknow: NateAsbestos: koinbahd: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

FTA:

Forensicator's first decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate-the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC's server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

Uh, I've seen those speeds on residential connections. We're about to install 1gb down at my office.

Sheesh.

Yep. From my home:

[img.fark.net image 544x290]


Those are megabits per second, not bytes

But the original claim of unpossible remains silly.
 
2017-08-11 06:15:16 PM  

Grungehamster: mrshowrules: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

Site is pay-walled.   I'm going to call bullshiat on that forensic evidence bullshiat.  We already know Podesta was tricked into providing a password so why the f$ck would they need a thumb drive.  It wasn't a skillful hack - just a hack.

The article is near incomprehensible but the argument (which they have pushed for months before this article) is that the metadata implies that the files were downloaded at a speed of 22 mbps which is too fast for anyone to do over the internet. Yes, really.


Then goes on to say that the files had to be downloaded from an East Coast location because the timestamps in the metadata are EST - which doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't they be server time regardless of the location of the downloader?
 
2017-08-11 06:16:32 PM  

dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/


I've seen this article posted before on Fark, and it was soundly refuted the last time too.

Ditty, there is something wrong with you.
 
2017-08-11 06:19:14 PM  
Thanks, Fox News, for always letting me know which shiat I should not bother paying attention to.
 
2017-08-11 06:19:49 PM  
What does a copy of a file that was downloaded from the internet look like?

What does a file that was copied from a memory stick look like?

What does the first copy of a file look like?

What does the 10th copy of a file look like?

Do the bits look different? Like pixels in a bad photoshop?
 
2017-08-11 06:20:35 PM  

scottydoesntknow: NateAsbestos: koinbahd: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

FTA:

Forensicator's first decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate-the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC's server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

Uh, I've seen those speeds on residential connections. We're about to install 1gb down at my office.

Sheesh.

Yep. From my home:

[img.fark.net image 544x290]


Playing Devil's advocate here.  Assuming the 22.7 Mbps number isn't complete bullshiat.  
Most residential internet services cap at 10 Mbps up (just like yours appears to be capped at about 5Mbps up).and 22.7 is about what I'd expect out of a USB 2.0 thumb drive.
 
2017-08-11 06:20:35 PM  

MurphyMurphy: scottydoesntknow: NateAsbestos: koinbahd: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

FTA:

Forensicator's first decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate-the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC's server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

Uh, I've seen those speeds on residential connections. We're about to install 1gb down at my office.

Sheesh.

Yep. From my home:

[img.fark.net image 544x290]

Those are megabits per second, not bytes

But the original claim of unpossible remains silly.


BUT!

are you currently humping a gun to within an inch of its oh-so-precious life?  in upstate New York?

Didnt think so.
 
2017-08-11 06:21:17 PM  

TFerWannaBe: Grungehamster: mrshowrules: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

Site is pay-walled.   I'm going to call bullshiat on that forensic evidence bullshiat.  We already know Podesta was tricked into providing a password so why the f$ck would they need a thumb drive.  It wasn't a skillful hack - just a hack.

The article is near incomprehensible but the argument (which they have pushed for months before this article) is that the metadata implies that the files were downloaded at a speed of 22 mbps which is too fast for anyone to do over the internet. Yes, really.

Then goes on to say that the files had to be downloaded from an East Coast location because the timestamps in the metadata are EST - which doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't they be server time regardless of the location of the downloader?


I'm no IT forensics specialist, but I'd wager that the ONLY time file timestamps mean anything is on their "original residence" so to speak, and then only if you know they haven't been screwed with.

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-08-11 06:27:05 PM  

scottydoesntknow: OceanVortex: Man, I hope this Muller saga ends with FoxNews getting busted for working with the Trump team to Shill for Russia and they get taken down too.

Ain't gonna happen, but I need a happy dream before the nukes start falling

Could easily be possible. They already got busted for working with the Trump Team to push the bullshiat Seth Rich story.


Plus the FBI looking at Breitbart. I think their media propaganda is controlled by Bannon, and still coordinating with Russian bots.
 
2017-08-11 06:28:19 PM  

Endrick: scottydoesntknow: NateAsbestos: koinbahd: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

FTA:

Forensicator's first decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate-the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC's server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

Uh, I've seen those speeds on residential connections. We're about to install 1gb down at my office.

Sheesh.

Yep. From my home:

[img.fark.net image 544x290]

Playing Devil's advocate here.  Assuming the 22.7 Mbps number isn't complete bullshiat.  
Most residential internet services cap at 10 Mbps up (just like yours appears to be capped at about 5Mbps up).and 22.7 is about what I'd expect out of a USB 2.0 thumb drive.


Most residential internet services in where, Montana?

Second: why are we comparing residential service? The DNC servers weren't hooked up to a cable modem in some dude's house in the suburbs in Ohio. The Russians aren't running their operations over a 56k modem.either.

On top of that.... bits vs bytes. He's saying it's impossible for the files to be downloaded at speeds which are not fast AT ALL. I download anime at home every week at speeds which absolutely crush that - and I AM on a residential connection, not a commercial one.

The whole thing is just ridiculous to take seriously as proof of what he's asserting.
 
2017-08-11 06:28:29 PM  

Endrick: scottydoesntknow: NateAsbestos: koinbahd: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

FTA:

Forensicator's first decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate-the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC's server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

Uh, I've seen those speeds on residential connections. We're about to install 1gb down at my office.

Sheesh.

Yep. From my home:

[img.fark.net image 544x290]

Playing Devil's advocate here.  Assuming the 22.7 Mbps number isn't complete bullshiat.  
Most residential internet services cap at 10 Mbps up (just like yours appears to be capped at about 5Mbps up).and 22.7 is about what I'd expect out of a USB 2.0 thumb drive.


Yeah, but the DNC server probably isn't using a commercial-grade modem housed in someone's residence with a standard internet package.
 
2017-08-11 06:30:40 PM  

koinbahd: dittybopper: daphne: Let me guess, they communicated via.....email.

Guccifer is a conglomeration of several hackers, IIRC.  Fox probably pulled some street hustler outside the studio with the promise of crack and weed if he tells "his story"

The Nation, hardly a publication friendly to Trump, is now reporting that the DNC e-mails that ended up on Wikileaks weren't accessed remotely, but forensic evidence proves that they had to be downloaded on to a thumb drive or other local storage device.  If true, that means it was an insider, not the Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-ab​out-last-years-dnc-hack/

FTA:

Forensicator's first decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called the transfer rate-the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC's server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.

These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.



Agreed. 22.7 megabytes per second is 181.6 megabits per second. Verizon FiOS offers 50, 150, 300 and 500 megabits per second service packages the last two of which are more than fast enough.
 
Displayed 50 of 101 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report