Election Hacking

Did the Russians actually do it Sup Forums?

Attached: IMG_20180310_132021267.jpg (3024x4032, 2.86M)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/iGfaVRfDJFI
cnbc.com/2018/02/07/russians-penetrated-us-voter-systems-nbc-citing-top-us-official.html
us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR_16-20296.pdf
stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html
voanews.com/a/cyber-firm-rewrites-part-disputed-russian-hacking-report/3781411.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoich
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections#U.S._intelligence_analysis
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Washtub_(Nicaragua)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

in a short, yes

Attached: snapshot_11.28.png234.png (1920x1080, 3.08M)

Yes.
They hacked hillary in, so trump would trump.

Yeh. They're still butthurt that they lost the cold war, for them it never ended.

CNN said they did, so it's probably true.

Proof?

>using the word 'agitprop' in tyool 2018

>bumping shit threads in 2018

lol

Attached: 93390.jpg (640x599, 147K)

Russia also hacked these steps in India:

youtu.be/iGfaVRfDJFI

There's also the fact that in the CIA tools that were leaked, they explicitly had tools that allowed them to compile code so it looked like someone else made it.

Because seriously, what kind of fucking state hacker would LEAVE REALTIMESTAMPS ON THINGS.

>did [state] try to influence [other state]?

Yes. Yes it did.

The CIA does it's best to influence foreign elections as often as possible, why would it be surprising that Russia meddled with it too?

>the election (as in rigging the vote count)
no

>the DNC
signs point to yes

>was the material legitimate
probably, but wikileaks is in bed with Russian intelligence, so it has to be taken with a grain of salt

That's the most insufferable thing about all of this. The US elections have the biggest impact of any elections on this planet. Why the fuck WOULDN'T every single state try to influence it in their favor?

>flawless record of journalism
>but also in bed with an authoritarian propaganda state

Yeah. That's exactly what Israel Shamir got caught doing, and has probably done in the past.

Plus that time Assange asked Russian intelligence personnel to guard him.

And his involvement with Snowden getting amnesty in Russia. (Protip: you don't just waltz into a Russian embassy and tell the guy working for their foreign service but who really works for the SVR that you're from an American intelligence agency and get into Russia in a few weeks without a previous relationship)

Plus the fake Macron emails, so their record isn't flawless by any means.

>Claims he committed tax fraud and launch investigation
>find he actually is owed money cause he paid too much
>start investigating him for colluding with russians to hack the system
>something pops up and puts hillary in the shit
You can't make this shit up. It's like 340D inter-dimensional Backgammon

Link the whole article

I said "hack" not just influence. The question stands did they compromise US information systems?


There's zero real proof.

>The question stands did they compromise US information systems?
cnbc.com/2018/02/07/russians-penetrated-us-voter-systems-nbc-citing-top-us-official.html

If you read the actual technical reports from such claims you will see there is no concrete evidence.

Do you have link to such technical reports?

Do you even know what a cold war is?

I have none. I just know it

They have almost no impact realistically speaking. All decisions are still done by congress

us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR_16-20296.pdf

This makes no sense. Hillary won the popular vote. Does that mean Russians were trying to elect Hilary?

If by hack you mean a social media campaign, then yes, they did.

And just to switch the the opposite side... Infosec '''''''experts'''''' believe the new Slingshot APT that targeted middle eastern and African countries was created by a member of five eyes. The only ''''''proof''''' they had was the development settings and that the malware had Lord of the Rings names.


Because I'm sure absolutely NO unlimitedly funded state actors would ever thing the change these settings to make it look like it came from somewhere else. And I'm sure China has hasent been heavily investing in Africa in the past few years so that have ABSOLUTELY no reason to gather political information.

>I said "hack" not just influence.

Then post elsewhere, hack doesn't just mean illegal intrusion of a computer system.

I'm not an amerifat, but wouldn't most people who voted for trump have also voted for republican candidates for senate and congress?

Fuck off retard. The term has changed.

Thanks

First of all, even if Hillary won the popular vote, there were still >60 million votes for Trump.

Secondly, I don't think the Russians had any preference in candidate. Their main goal essentially since the cold war has been to disrupt and weaken other superpowers, and lets face it if Hillary had won a lot of people would be upset too.

And this is why Russians are master chess players.

They've spent a few million (tops) on creating the *idea* that they hacked the elections. (Actually doing so would either be impossible, or impossibly costly).

In the meanwhile, the Americans are tearing each other apart, scared of ghosts in the cupboard, under the bed, in the attic, seeing phantoms and threats all around them. All because the Russians told them a spooky story. Confirmation bias and natural division did the rest.

stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html

No, it hasn't.

They at least said they were trying. "Blame it on Russians" thing started with Hilary screaming about nonperformance by people of (((Russian ethnicity))) hired for computerized hack and network nation-scale electoral-rigging operations immediately after loss. Everything since has rolled from there on improvisation without direction.

voanews.com/a/cyber-firm-rewrites-part-disputed-russian-hacking-report/3781411.html

These infosec companies shave absolutely no motive to strike fear into the politicians and general public.
They are our saviors after all! THANK YOU CROWDSTRIKE FOR SAVING US FROM THE RUSSIAN TERROR. HERE IS MORE MONEY FO DEM PROGRAMS.


These infosec companies have absolutely nothing to gain from warmongering huh?

Stallman is borderline autistic, and so are you if you refuse to acknowledge that the word mean something else. Just because the word meant something in the 70s, doesn't mean that the collective understanding of the word hacking isn't "breaking in to computer systems".

Can confirm, happened before.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoich

Not everything stallman says is 100% factual. He is a smart man but stop treating him like a god.

Gotta love morons like you, either the US shows it's hands in how it gathers russian intelligence (making future intelligence gathering harder, or impossible). And if the US doesn't release the highly classified information, you wont believe it?

What a joke. You can't just blanket release classified information because the american people want you to. It's classified for national security reasons, you wanting personal proof shown to you doesn't matter dick compared to national security.

The WHOLE reason we have intelligence agencies is to have AMERICANS who are trained and knowledge enough to handle the information and make policy suggestions and interpret how we should respond to countries with the intelligence we have received.


You can't just say "Show me the proof". You're a nobody, no one is going to prove shit to you, because you're nothing. If you care about the country, you know this and accept this. If you're a traitorous piece of sub-human garbage and still think you should be shown any and all proof, you're a fucking moron and deserve to be shot.

You've been huffing too much mainstream media there buddy, people still regularly use the original definition of hack around here

But he's completely right about this

>frog
How deep does the rabbit hole go?

If they had basic proof releasing the technical details of the proof would not compromise the integrity of their methods.

The CIA actually has proof that Russia did not hack the elections. If you don't believe that, you deserve to be shot.

and you fucks still wouldn't believe it, not to mention, yes basic information can 100% compromise intelligence gathering assets.

You have literally hundreds of decade+ professionals working on this, people who have no political affiliation or were even appointed by republicans and democrats alike are working diligently on it, and all signs are pointing towards at least SOME collusion, the question is how much, and if DJT was directly involved, or just a peripheral actor.


Kek, go back to Sup Forums, i'm sure there is some jew or nigger hating plot you can get embroiled in if you hurry up.

>You've been huffing too much mainstream media there buddy, people still regularly use the original definition of hack around here
Which is why context matters.

I would believe it. I'm in the industry. I'm not talking about some conspiracy here. I'm simply talking about the technical details of the attack and nothing released has shown that Russia is the culprit.

Nothing so far has been released that

You're asking for the technical details, the shit that will LITERALLY tell russia EXACTLY how we exfiltrated our information.

Just shut the fuck up, you don't even realize what you're asking for.

Hence confirmation bias.

You don't have to lie to people, just tell them a few (carefully chosen) facts (some of them true, some half-true, some neither true nor false), and they'll make up the story themselves. And people will defend any story they've cooked up themselves far more strongly than a story they've simply heard from someone else.

>Kek, go back to Sup Forums
I'm not from Sup Forums, m8. If there is no proof, why should people believe it happened? I know Americans are dumb, but surely, they can't be that dumb.

Because we have a dozen+ agencies who have told us there is classified proof?

Why the fuck would I suddenly not believe a consensus among intelligence agencies? If you're getting mixed messages from the agencies, sure, lets wait for some more solid proof, but when they all say, yep, there is proof, but it's classified. Then we are pretty damn sure they have the proof.

Releasing it publicly can ONLY damage our intelligence assets. Doing so would be dangerous and set a terrible precedent for the future.

Which agencies? Link me the source please.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections#U.S._intelligence_analysis

>Because we have a dozen+ agencies who have told us there is classified proof?
Beyond facebook advertising, what proof have they admitted to having?

Why would they admit to proof that would compromise their intelligence gathering?

Fuck off if you don't understand opsec

> when they all say, yep, there is proof, but it's classified. Then we are pretty damn sure they have the proof.

This has got to be bait. No one can be this delusional.

Anyone ignoring the growing mountain of evidence is actually mentally ill.

If in 5 years you snap out of it, I hope you remember this post and decide suicide is your best option at that point.

I encourage it even.

Attached: 1490422799259.jpg (580x426, 34K)

>who have told us there is classified proof?
Beyond facebook advertising, proof of what? How did they hack or influence the election?

You're basically asking them to tell us exactly how russia broke into our systems and how?

Are you actually fucking stupid?

Here, lets just explain exactly what we saw and what we didn't see, that way russia can fix their operation so next time we barely see anything at all.

Fuck off.

So... people with vested interest in claiming that Russia hacked the election are claiming that they have proof and can't show it, and anyone questioning that is "mentally ill"?

Just kill yourself already, retard.

>Hey we have evidence that a crime happened
>>ok, present the evidence
>No, we can't, but trust us, it totally happened. Would the government ever lie to you? :^)

My protein shake had a few bits of protein powder that clumped up and did not dissolve.

I blame the Russians for this, too.

>people with vested interest in claiming that Russia hacked the election
How the fuck are the intelligence agencies "people with vested interest in claiming that Russia hacked the election"

They're long term government employees with not partisan ties in most cases. Why the fuck would they give a fuck about who won the election...UNLESS ONE OF THEM LITERALLY FUCKING GOT HELP FROM RUSSIA.

Seriously, they have a vested interest in AMERICA. And because of that they feel it is their duty to investigate and go after russian interference. And to do so safely, which means not just blanket releasing everything because that makes future intelligence gathering more difficult, or impossible.


Nigger, do you WANT russia to be able to hack us without us even knowing next time?
Telling random people exactly what happened will do NOTHING but allow russia to see what information we did intercept, and what information we didn't. This would allow them in the future to craft their infiltrations to specifically avoid things they KNOW we are monitoring. Meaning NEXT time we might not even know what they're doing, or what information they're trying to influence.

Why would the Russians want Trump to win? What do they have to gain from that?

You literally just told me a dozen agencies admitted to having proof? What agencies? Proof of what? Did they hack voting machines? The only thing that has come out of this "election hack", is proof of Russians buying facebook advertising.

An incompetent buffoon who will make the american people fight amongst themselves for 4-8 years? Sounds perfect for Russia. Their modus operandi has always been to sew discord and mayhem.


Already shown, not my fault you can't read, or refuse to admit you're wrong.

>An incompetent buffoon who will make the american people fight amongst themselves for 4-8 years?
Ah, so they were trying to get Hillary in. Got it.

Attached: 1520777485642.png (888x592, 50K)

Tough titties then. Secret Courts and Secret Evidence and "believe the government, always!" are the methods of an authoritarian state. I'm sure you would be very willing and happy to get with your family on the special (cattle) train to a work camp in Poland, but I'll stick with never trusting any government unconditionally.

Yeah, surely not the guy who admits on twitter to obstruction of justice. Or the guy who petulantly fires people through press releases and tweets instead of like a man in-person.

Seriously, anyone actually defending the failure that is DJT is just a puppet without any actual thought going into their positions.

This. Friendly reminder these are the same shitter agencies who sold us on the Iraq War.

People who blindly trust these intelligence agencies like they're some sort of sacred lamb are retarded.

I have proof that you're a pedophile that likes to rape goats.
No, I don't have to show you the evidence or how I got it, that would ruin my evidence gathering process. You will just have to trust me.

You know the TRUE sign of an authoritarian state? When the president purges anyone who doesn't pass his "loyalty" tests.

The new arm of DHS that specifically is for "performance" reviews has been cracking down on anyone who isn't on trumps "team". That's blatantly more authoritarian than anything any US president has done in modern history.

Aww, did the ebul orange hitler hurt you feefees? Chin up, buttercup.

When did progressives become the party of sucking CIA dick?

You're not a collection of agencies that encompass billions of dollars of our taxes and hundreds of man hours of intelligence gathering and analysis.

Sorry, but NSA, CIA, FBI, etc hold more water than you do.

>do you WANT russia to be able to hack us without us even knowing next time?
Russia hacks the US all the fucking time. The US hacks Russia all the fucking time. Everyone hacks everyone.
>Telling random people exactly what happened will do NOTHING but allow russia to see what information we did intercept, and what information we didn't.
If Russia hacked the election, then they know exactly what they did, and the US would know exactly what they did.

>How the fuck are the intelligence agencies "people with vested interest in claiming that Russia hacked the election"
If they can claim that Russians DID interfere with election, at worst they look overly paranoid(which, in an intelligence agency, is not necessarily a bad thing), while if people buy that, they can use that to leverage more funding. If they claim that Russians DIDN'T interfere with the election, they risk looking incompetent or worse and even in the best case scenario they have nothing to gain from it.

And if you think government employees in general have the best of their nation in their interests, you too retarded to live.

When did the conservatives start choking on russian cum?

Wow, just a bunch of agencies that have a history of lying to the American people. I guess you just can't expect any better from a goat raping pedophile.

tl;dr
If you have no proof go away

Wew, an agency once lied, they can never provide accurate information ever again, especially when it's corroborated by literally dozens of other intelligence assets from other agencies both domestically, and abroad.

>Already shown, not my fault you can't read, or refuse to admit you're wrong.
There is nothing in there that concludes that russia hacked the election.

"Waiting for clear evidence before saber-rattling against a nuclear power" is apparently now a neocon position. Who would have thought.

tldr; you've never worked with classified information in your life and never will.

>once
Hahahaha

Literally creating secret back channels with russia that our intelligence assets can't monitor would have gotten ANY other president impeached. But right now it's just fine and dandy? Fuck off.

>once
The state of the Democratic Party, 2018.

Glad you agree that the Executive is not to be trusted. Now apply the same reasoning to the other branches of government (and the intelligence agencies/shadow government): who do they really serve?

Some light reading while you ponder:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Washtub_(Nicaragua)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra

(remember, these are just the ones we know of)

Here is just one of a half dozen quotes you probably ignored willfully.
>In a joint statement on October 7, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence expressed confidence that Russia had interfered in the presidential election by stealing emails from politicians and U.S. groups and publicizing the information.[5] On December 2, intelligence sources told CNN they had gained confidence that Russia's efforts were aimed at helping Trump win the election

>an agency once lied
>once
>trust me, just once
>I promise baby I'll be good to you know, no more lies, I won't cheat again, I promise :)

What can you expect of the party that put a record number of whistleblowers in jail.

We know Russia hacked the DNC and Podesta. Notice how they released a statement saying what happened? Where is no one that says how Russia hacked the election?

No.
1. Close victory. Some remaining sane americans voted well and that is it.
2. Russian hacking was just cover to hide clintors bs.
Bonus- look up new articles on where they were "we are going to recount votes!"... they did shut the hell up real fast.

Even if it were a thousand documented lies you could prove (Which you couldnt).

I'd still believe them. That's why we spend billions of our tax dollars. To thoroughly investigate intelligence that simply shouldn't be public.

If you choose not to believe them you as a country have already failed, and you're not an american in my opinion.

Do liberals still love the CIA unconditionally now that it will be lead by a literal torturer or is it just a minor moral sacrifice in the name of defeating Trump?

>On December 29, 2016, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released an unclassified Joint Analysis Report titled "GRIZZLY STEPPE – Russian Malicious Cyber Activity".[107] It gave new technical details regarding methods used by Russian intelligence services for affecting the U.S. election, government, political organizations and private sector.[132][133]

The report included malware samples and other technical details as evidence that the Russian government had hacked the Democratic National Committee.[134] Alongside the report, DHS published Internet Protocol addresses, malware, and files used by Russian hackers.[132] An article in the Süddeutsche Zeitung discussed the difficulty of proof in matters of cybersecurity. One analyst told the Süddeutsche Zeitung that U.S. intelligence services could be keeping some information secret to protect their sources and analysis methods.[135] Clapper later stated that the classified version contained "a lot of the substantiation that could not be put in the [public] report."[136]