"In the physical world of crime investigation, common sense dictates that the perpetrator of a crime may use any weapon and not just one made in the country of his birth, and that the developer or manufacturer of the weapon most likely isn’t the criminal.
And yet, those seemingly crazy assumptions are made every day by cybersecurity companies involved in incident response and threat intelligence.
The malware was written in Russian? It was a Russian who attacked you.
Chinese characters in the code? You’ve been hacked by the Peoples Liberation Army."
"The person or persons responsible are unknown, but let’s assume that CrowdStrike is correct and the responsible party are Russian hackers employed by one or more of Russia’s intelligence services. They used APT28 malware developed and maintained by a Russian lab."
Another out-of-context quote from the same article...this is fun ;-)
No informed person is claiming Russia did it merely because it was "written in Russian". They're all basing it on many pieces of circumstantial evidence.
Don't crime investigators also look at the criminal history, motivations, and opportunity of the suspect?
I'd say you're doing a disservice to that author by taking his quote out of context. He's very clearly not making the simplistic straw man argument that you are.
It sounds like he suspects the Russians did it, as is rational, but wants real proof -- and not just circumstantial evidence. That is a totally reasonable demand.
>It sounds like he suspects the Russians did it, as is rational, but wants real proof -- and not just circumstantial evidence. That is a totally reasonable demand.
That is all I ask as well. Considering we are accusing a nation with nuclear weapons of an act of war the evidence must be much more than circumstantial. The FBI wasn't even permitted to investigate the server personally yet, let's start there instead of relying on private contractors paid by the DNC.
They did, however, release personal information on donors as well as the dirt from American heros personal emails (Colin Powell and John McCain) who just happen to be anti-Putin.
The snopes article directly cites the NYTimes article. The entire ordeal is totally blown out of proportion (read: intentionally misread by the same people that think the DNC emails were damning), given Hillary had barely anything to do with it.
Secret meetings with Kremlin-linked individuals days before the DNC hacks were first released and lying about why they were set up - nothing to see here.
Emails talking about collaboration with Russian government during the campaign to obtain damning information about Hillary Clinton released by his own son - nothing to see here.
Firing the director of the FBI "because of the Russia investigation" according to the man himself - nothing to see here.
Repeatedly downplaying the influence of Russia in Ukraine and changing the GOP platform after hiring a pro-Russian political operative to be his campaign manager - nothing to see here.
Repeatedly disagreeing with the evidence provided by American intelligence agencies and dozens of cybersecurity firms while agreeing with the statements of Russian intelligence after being president - nothing to see here.
Having a national security advisor who sat at the same table as Vladimir Putin in December 2015 during a gala for the state propaganda network - nothing to see here.
Having the same national security advisor lie about meeting the Russian ambassador - nothing to see here.
Having a campaign operative in Roger Stone (who he still in contact with) openly allege that he has a backchannel with Julian Assange - nothing to see here.
Peter Smith coordinating with Russian hacker groups, only to kill himself a few weeks after telling the WSJ? Nothing to see here!
....but a highly regarded charity founded by one of the most popular presidents in recent history raising money...now, that's a scandal!
I'll be honest, if our enemies are this afraid of someone, I want that person on my side.
I'd like to see what the FBI can learn if given access to the server, currently they have not been permitted access and all reports have come from third parties paid by the DNC. Similar third party accounts not funded by the DNC make claims that directly contradict the narrative portrayed by those who have been funded by them: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-10/new-research-shows-...
"In the physical world of crime investigation, common sense dictates that the perpetrator of a crime may use any weapon and not just one made in the country of his birth, and that the developer or manufacturer of the weapon most likely isn’t the criminal.
And yet, those seemingly crazy assumptions are made every day by cybersecurity companies involved in incident response and threat intelligence.
The malware was written in Russian? It was a Russian who attacked you.
Chinese characters in the code? You’ve been hacked by the Peoples Liberation Army."
https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/the-dnc-breach-and-the-hijac...