Re: Schneier on Russian Hacking - deconstructed

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 07:25:59PM -0300, Juan wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 01:16:38 -0500
> Steve Kinney  wrote:
> 
> > On 01/17/2017 04:49 PM, Bruce Schneier wrote:
> > > 
> > > CRYPTO-GRAM
> > > 
> > >  January 15, 2017
> > > 
> > 
> > > The Obama administration has been more public about its evidence in
> > > the DNC case, but it has not been entirely public.
> > 
> > To date I have seen many assertions, but nothing resembling evidence,
> > in support of the allegation that Russia "hacked" the DNC and released
> > damaging (but never disclaimed) DNC documents in an effort to
> > influence the Presidential election.
> 
> 
>   But we can follow that line of evidence-free creative thought,
>   or crass  propaganda, and see where it takes us.
> 
>   Premise : stalin and putin 'influenced' the great USA
>   democratic elections...and got trump elected. 
> 
>   It must follow then  : trump is a russian spy on the russian
>   payroll. Since the russians virtually put him in charge, he
>   must owe them something.
> 
>   Now, it's quite OK for left wing fascists to parrot pentagon
>   propganda regarding 'russian hacking' or 'arab terrists'
>   blowing up the WTC, and denounce any 'truther' as a lunatic
>   conspiracy theorist,
> 
>   But what really sets those people apart is that they have the
>   divine right to treat their own evidence-free conspiracy
>   theories or war propaganda as True Enlightened Science. 

"It's a crazy world out there" :D

Re: Schneier on Russian Hacking - deconstructed

[oshwm]

On 18 January 2017 15:15:51 GMT+00:00, Razer  wrote:
>
>
>On 01/17/2017 10:36 PM, Mirimir wrote:
>>
>> It does seem that he's sold out. First, Tor Project. Now, this.
>>
>> Sad, indeed :(
>
>It's a paycheck...
>
>Also William Arkin, who wrote the rather cutting edge "Early Warning"
>('Codenames, Spooks 'n Spies') for the Washington Post a decade or so
>ago. Borged by 'the narrative' and the desire not to be sleeping in
>doorways and blogging from cofeeshops until chased off for lack of a
>purchase.
>
>Here' a little nostalgia from a July 2010 Cabale News Service post I
>found while searching my bloggings for "William Arkin".  Not sure if
>the
>links are functional, but Arkin, and certainly not Dana Priest, are NOT
>this brash anymore abut the totalitarian state apparatus
>.
>> *The Senate is also getting to work on* the nomination of General
>> Clapper
>>
>
>> for Director of National Intelligence even as the Washington Post
>goes
>> into great detail about the problems with privatized outsourcing of
>> intelligence... as reported on Monday
>> , "The Washington Post's
>> Dana Priest and William M. Arkin more than indirectly claim the US
>> created a huge increase in America's counter-intelligence budget and
>> it's data input since 9/11 and it seems much of it was outsourced to
>> private contractors who don't 'play well' with others, leading to a
>> situation where no one knows what's going on due to lack of
>> cross-company communication, etc. Associated Press on the WaPo
>> revelations
>>
>.
>> The US government IS NOT happy
>>
>
>> I repeat IS NOT happy
>>
>,
>> about the journalistic intrusion into their privatized 'spookworld'
>> (Wapo reporter William Arkin's specialty)."
>http://razedbywolves.blogspot.com/search?q=william+arkin
>
>Rr

Everyone has been bought, by the time you realise that your favourite anti-hero 
has turned then you are already several years too late.

Re: Schneier on Russian Hacking - deconstructed

[Razer]

On 01/17/2017 10:36 PM, Mirimir wrote:
>
> It does seem that he's sold out. First, Tor Project. Now, this.
>
> Sad, indeed :(

It's a paycheck...

Also William Arkin, who wrote the rather cutting edge "Early Warning"
('Codenames, Spooks 'n Spies') for the Washington Post a decade or so
ago. Borged by 'the narrative' and the desire not to be sleeping in
doorways and blogging from cofeeshops until chased off for lack of a
purchase.

Here' a little nostalgia from a July 2010 Cabale News Service post I
found while searching my bloggings for "William Arkin".  Not sure if the
links are functional, but Arkin, and certainly not Dana Priest, are NOT
this brash anymore abut the totalitarian state apparatus
.
> *The Senate is also getting to work on* the nomination of General
> Clapper
> 
> for Director of National Intelligence even as the Washington Post goes
> into great detail about the problems with privatized outsourcing of
> intelligence... as reported on Monday
> , "The Washington Post's
> Dana Priest and William M. Arkin more than indirectly claim the US
> created a huge increase in America's counter-intelligence budget and
> it's data input since 9/11 and it seems much of it was outsourced to
> private contractors who don't 'play well' with others, leading to a
> situation where no one knows what's going on due to lack of
> cross-company communication, etc. Associated Press on the WaPo
> revelations
> .
> The US government IS NOT happy
> 
> I repeat IS NOT happy
> ,
> about the journalistic intrusion into their privatized 'spookworld'
> (Wapo reporter William Arkin's specialty)."
http://razedbywolves.blogspot.com/search?q=william+arkin

Rr

Re: Schneier on Russian Hacking - deconstructed

[John Newman]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 01:16:38AM -0500, Steve Kinney wrote:
> On 01/17/2017 04:49 PM, Bruce Schneier wrote:
> > 
> > CRYPTO-GRAM
> > 
> >  January 15, 2017
> > 
> 
> > The Obama administration has been more public about its evidence in the
> > DNC case, but it has not been entirely public.
> 
> To date I have seen many assertions, but nothing resembling evidence, in
> support of the allegation that Russia "hacked" the DNC and released
> damaging (but never disclaimed) DNC documents in an effort to influence
> the Presidential election.

There has been some speculation, as I'm sure you know, that the NSA
was involved, e.g. using XKeyscore or something similar, to track
the attribution. See -

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/heres-the-public-evidence-russia-hacked-the-dnc-its-not-enough/

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/top-secret-snowden-document-reveals-what-the-nsa-knew-about-previous-russian-hacking/


I agree the whole thing stinks of a big lie propaganda move. But it's a
fucking crazy world out there.


> 
> > The constellation of evidence attributing the attacks against the DNC,
> > and subsequent release of information, is comprehensive. 
> 
> I believe the Bruce must have meant to say something to the effect that
> "The constellation of evidence attributing the attacks against the DNC,
> if any, has not been disclosed to the public."
> 
> Or was he asserting that he has been read into the programs that
> developed this evidence, and shown relevant documentation?
> 
> > Obama decided not to make the accusation public before the election so
> > as not to be seen as influencing the election. 
> 
> Excuse me?  Obama decided to make the accusation public in a press
> release, a.k.a. propaganda placement dated October 7, 2016. Its content
> was attributed to the "USIC" by the Department of Homeland Security.
> This press release was distributed with clear intent to influence the
> election.  Read it here:
> 
> https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07/joint-statement-department-homeland-security-and-office-director-national
> 
> The key allegation:
> 
> "The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks
> .com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent
> with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These
> thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election
> process."
> 
> In keeping with propaganda best practices, this statement does not
> actually accuse Russia of anything - not if you read it closely and
> interpret it according to strict rules of grammar.  The source of the
> statement is not identified:  There is no such agency as the United
> States Intelligence Community (USIC per the press release), so it can
> not be attributed to any responsible authority or formal reporting
> process.  This is the safest way to tell a Big Lie.  The preceding
> sentence is not a statement by me that it WAS a Big Lie - so if I get
> dragged into Court for saying so, my hands are clean.
> 
> The inflammatory pre-election press release from the Obama
> Administration's Department of Homeland Security was followed up by
> numerous placements in the U.S. press, a constellation of assertions
> consistent this template:
> 
> A reporter says an anonymous source claimed an unnamed senior
> intelligence official told them that unspecified secret information
> confirms Russian involvement in releasing incriminating DNC e-mails to
> Wikileaks.
> 
> The timing, context and follow-on promotion of the DHS press release
> blaming the leak on Russia indicate it was a component of a larger
> campaign by the DNC on behalf of the Clinton campaign, intended to
> demonize Trump by depicting his stated willingness to negotiate with
> Russia as proof of collaboration with a foreign enemy.
> 
> Post-election, the DHS press release became the rarely-cited but always
> referenced cornerstone of a separate campaign asserting that the
> election was stolen by Russia and Trump.  This was the keynote of an
> apparent attempt to persuade the Electors to install Hillary Clinton as
> President.
> 
> > Now, afterward, there are
> > political implications in accepting that Russia hacked the DNC in an
> > attempt to influence the US presidential election. But no amount of
> > evidence can convince the unconvinceable.
> 
> To the best of my knowledge - and I have been following this story
> closely - no evidence of "Russian Hacking" has been presented to date.
> We have been treated to a few code names of "hacking groups" allegedly
> involved, and a couple of textbook diagrams of how hostile parties
> penetrate network servers.  That is all.
> 
> If no evidence can be released due to legitimate concerns for protecting
> sources and methods, and no substantial national security mission is
> advanced by partisan accusations, it would be nice if the "USIC" would
> stop exposing their super-secret capabilities to the world by asserting
> what they 

Re: Schneier on Russian Hacking - deconstructed

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:36:52PM -0700, Mirimir wrote:
> On 01/17/2017 11:16 PM, Steve Kinney wrote:
> > On 01/17/2017 04:49 PM, Bruce Schneier wrote:
> >>
> >> CRYPTO-GRAM
> >>
> >>  January 15, 2017
> 
> 
> 
> >> This essay previously appeared on CNN.com.
> >> http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/opinions/proving-source-of-dnc-hacks
> >> -difficult-opinion-schneier/index.html
> > 
> > CNN?  I will not here repeat the propaganda slogan presently saturating
> > U.S. media, two words that malign the veracity of certain press outlets.
> >  But the shoe fits and Mr. Schneier will have a hard time taking it back
> > off.  That makes me sad.
> > 
> > :o/
> 
> It does seem that he's sold out. First, Tor Project. Now, this.
> 
> Sad, indeed :(

Sad that someone sells out.

Very good that they are exposed.

Re: Schneier on Russian Hacking - deconstructed

[Mirimir]

On 01/17/2017 11:16 PM, Steve Kinney wrote:
> On 01/17/2017 04:49 PM, Bruce Schneier wrote:
>>
>> CRYPTO-GRAM
>>
>>  January 15, 2017



>> This essay previously appeared on CNN.com.
>> http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/opinions/proving-source-of-dnc-hacks
>> -difficult-opinion-schneier/index.html
> 
> CNN?  I will not here repeat the propaganda slogan presently saturating
> U.S. media, two words that malign the veracity of certain press outlets.
>  But the shoe fits and Mr. Schneier will have a hard time taking it back
> off.  That makes me sad.
> 
> :o/

It does seem that he's sold out. First, Tor Project. Now, this.

Sad, indeed :(