Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
295,023
edits
Changes
→2016 presidential election
==2016 presidential election==
==2016 presidential election==
:{{See also|United States Presidential Election, 2016|Trump-Russia collusion hoax|Ukrainian collusion}}
:{{See also|United States Presidential Election, 2016|Trump-Russia collusion hoax|Ukrainian collusion}}
'George Eliason, ''Washingtonsblog:'' Why Crowdstrike’s Russian Hacking Story Fell Apart- Say Hello to Fancy Bear.'''<ref>https://washingtonsblog.com/2017/01/crowdstrikes-russian-hacking-story-fell-apart-say-hello-fancy-bear-2.html</ref>
:*In the wake of the JAR-16-20296 dated December 29, 2016 about hacking and influencing the 2016 election, the need for real evidence is clear. The joint report adds nothing substantial to the October 7th report. It relies on proofs provided by the cyber security firm '''[[Crowdstrike]]''' that is clearly not on par with intelligence findings or evidence. At the top of the report is an “as is” statement showing this.
:*The difference between Dmitri Alperovitch’s claims which are reflected in JAR-1620296 and this article is that enough evidence is provided to warrant an investigation of specific parties for the DNC hacks. The real story involves specific anti-American actors that need to be investigated for real crimes. For instance, the malware used was an out-dated version just waiting to be found. The one other interesting point is that the Russian malware called Grizzly Steppe is from Ukraine. How did Crowdstrike miss this when it is their business to know?
:*The bar for identification set by Crowdstrike has never been able to get beyond words like probably, maybe, could be, or should be, in their attribution. The bar Dimitri Alperovitch set for identifying the hackers involved is that low. Other than asking America to trust them, how many solid facts has Alperovitch provided to back his claim of Russian involvement?
:*information from outside intelligence agencies has the value of rumor or unsubstantiated information at best according to policy. Usable intelligence needs to be free from partisan politics and verifiable. Intel agencies noted back in the early 90’s that every private actor in the information game was radically political.
:*Alperovitch first gained notice when he was the VP in charge of threat research with McAfee. Asked to comment on Alperovitch’s discovery of Russian hacks on Larry King, John McAfee had this to say. “Based on all of his experience, McAfee does not believe that Russians were behind the hacks on the Democratic National Committee (DNC), John Podesta’s emails, and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. As he told RT, “if it looks like the Russians did it, then I can guarantee you it was not the Russians.”
:*How does Crowdstrike’s story part with reality? First is the admission that it is probably, maybe, could be Russia hacking the DNC. “Intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin ‘directing’ the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to Wiki Leaks.” The public evidence never goes beyond the word possibility. While never going beyond that or using facts, Crowdstrike insists that it’s Russia behind both Clinton’s and the Ukrainian losses.
:*NBC carried the story because one of the partners in Crowdstrike is also a consultant for NBC. According to NBC the story reads like this.”The company, Crowdstrike, was hired by the DNC to investigate the hack and issued a report publicly attributing it to Russian intelligence. One of Crowdstrike’s senior executives is Shawn Henry, a former senior FBI official who consults for NBC News.
:*In June, Crowdstrike went public with its findings that two separate Russian intelligence agencies had hacked the DNC. One, which Crowdstrike and other researchers call Cozy Bear, is believed to be linked to Russia’s CIA, known as the FSB. The other, known as Fancy Bear, is believed to be tied to the military intelligence agency, called the GRU.” The information is so certain the level of proof never rises above “believed to be.” According to the December 12th ''Intercept'' article “Most importantly, the Post adds that “intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin ‘directing’ the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks.”
:*The SBU, Olexander Turchinov, and the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense all agree that Crowdstrike is dead wrong in this assessment. Although subtitles aren’t on it, the former Commandant of Ukrainian Army Headquarters thanks God Russia never invaded or Ukraine would have been in deep trouble. How could Dimitri Alperovitch and Crowdstrike be this wrong on easily checked detail and still get this much media attention?
:*Crowdstrike CEO Dmitri Alperovitch story about Russian hacks that cost Hillary Clinton the election was broadsided by the SBU (Ukrainian Intelligence and Security) in Ukraine. If Dimitri Alperovitch is working for Ukrainian Intelligence and is providing intelligence to 17 US Intelligence Agencies is it a conflict of interest?
===CrowdStrike===
===CrowdStrike===
[[CrowdStrike]] is an Irvine, [[California]] cyber security company founded in 2011. Crowdstrike was founded by [[Dimitry Alperovitch]], a [[Ukrainian]] [[oligarch]] and senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. Another owner and senior manager of Crowdstrike is a former senior [[FBI]] man Shawn Henry, who was promoted by [[Robert Mueller]] to be the FBI's Head of Cyber Security in the 2000s.
[[CrowdStrike]] is an Irvine, [[California]] cyber security company founded in 2011. Crowdstrike was founded by [[Dimitry Alperovitch]], a [[Ukrainian]] [[oligarch]] and senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. Another owner and senior manager of Crowdstrike is a former senior [[FBI]] man Shawn Henry, who was promoted by [[Robert Mueller]] to be the FBI's Head of Cyber Security in the 2000s.