Starkiller

Why didn’t the DNC turn over their server!?!?

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, OzTitan said:

I have basically no comment on most of that, as I'm not interested in what the DNC did or didn't do. I don't recall commenting on any of that. I'm pretty sure I even said who actually has the images is unclear, but that there is a very strong likelihood images were taken (and I have no reason to assume they weren't done so in a forensic manner). If the FBI has them, then as far as investigations on software level hacking goes, that is the same as having the server.

 

My point simply is, images are fine for investigations, and the reason they are more useful is because you can then really easily make more copies, spread the copies out infinitely across your team of analysts to speed up analysis, not worry about doing something that could ruin it as evidence, virtualize the contents so you can chop and play around with things, simulate actions that cause the same results you're seeing etc.

 

Furthermore, it's better than the real thing, because the image and dumps you take are point in time, to when you took them. You don't want to touch the actual system more than absolutely necessary because you can't just undo things and get it back to how it was. This has all been covered in the OP but I'm assuming you didn't read it.

Poor simple jake. Clearly doesn't know shit about technology. I doubt he has the slightest idea what a point in time copy is and why it would be way more relevant to an investigation.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Btowner said:

Accessing the server or handing over the server is a simple minded talking point. Because Trump doesn’t know what he’s talking about, he gives the image  of the FBI coming into an office and physically taking a server. Similar to taking a laptop or desktop computer.

 

In actuality, based on their IT provider or setup, you take one physical server and using VMWare, it becomes multiple servers. The FBI doesn’t need to take a physical server. All they need is a copy of the image.

 

A couple of years ago, my company was moving our 200+ servers to an external cloud provider.  Not one physical server moved from one location to another. They were virtual servers, so everything was a VM copy. After the migration, besides the IP address changing, the majority of users didn’t even know the data center was not even in the same state.

 

Before you talk about taking servers or accessing servers, you really need to understand what a server is in today’s networking environment. 

 

Its very likely the actual mail or transport server was already virtualized. I haven't seen physical mail servers in 8+ years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JakePA_Titan said:

You can sit here and pretend to its the same all you want but its carries risk.

 

Let me ask you, what invesitgator allows ppl to do anything to a piece of evidence before it is examined?

 

Why couldn't they hand it over a d have them do a forensic image and give it back? 

 

And how exactly could it be more useful than the server itself? Come on. Does that really male sense? You believing that?

 

https://chernoff.law/what-can-forensic-imaging-of-hard-drives-reveal/

 

So tell me what makes you think its ok that a hired hand by the DNC should have any right to do ANTYHING with that server if it was subpoenaed?

 

We all know had this shoe been on the other foot, "they're hiding something, they're guilty!"

 

But of course not with the DNC and Clinton. Always on the up and up. They can be trusted. Ok.

 

#BELIEVEIT

 

 

This whole thing stinks of desperation.  If Simple Jake was saying all this, his voice would be quivering.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, MadMax said:

This whole thing stinks of desperation.  If Simple Jake was saying all this, his voice would be quivering.

 

 

In a world full of nuances and gray areas, he always takes the most basic concept and builds a narrative to fit his Trump defense, worldview or to fuel his “y’all  hypocrites” rants.

 

He can’t understand in a virtualized environment, resources like memory and hard disk space are shared  between virtual servers.  Based on your environment, you can’t just remove a drive and not have it impact multiple servers.

 

Reading his remove the D drive comment, he still thinks of servers as a simple desktop or laptop and nothing posted will make him realized it’s more complex and an image is as good as the physical server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Btowner said:

In a world full of nuances and gray areas he's always on station to defend his Trump idol with his trusty “y’all  hypocrites” rants. Coming to a theater near you!  WATER FETCHER 2, featuring too many to list

Summer movie announcer voice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another supporting article of working from images vs the SERVER!!

 

,...

Three days earlier, special counsel Robert Mueller published an indictment of 12 officers from the GRU, the Russian military intelligence service, for interfering in the 2016 U.S. election, including by hacking into the DNC. The indictment is historically unprecedented in scope and detail. The FBI named-and-shamed two specific GRU units, their commanding officers and 10 subordinate officers while revealing stunning details of Russia’s hacking tradecraft. And a close read of it all shows why Trump’s “DNC didn’t give the server to the FBI” conspiracy theory makes no sense.

 

First off, CrowdStrike, the company the DNC brought in to initially investigate and remediate the hack, actually shared images of the DNC servers with the FBI. For the purposes of an investigation of this type, images are much more useful than handing over metal and hardware, because they are bit-by-bit copies of a crime scene taken while the crime was going on. Live hard drive and memory snapshots of blinking, powered-on machines in a network reveal significantly more forensic data than some powered-off server removed from a network. It’s the difference between watching a house over time, carefully noting down who comes and goes and when and how, versus handing over a key to a lonely boarded-up building. By physically handing over a server to the FBI as Trump suggested, the DNC would in fact have destroyed evidence. (Besides, there wasn’t just one server, but 140.)

,...

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/17/dnc-server-hack-russia-trump-2016-219017

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

It certainly does appear the Russians were caught red handed which makes it baffling why Trump waffled on calling them out when he had all this evidence.  He should have taken the time to get some what knowledgeable about some of the fine points of the investigation to throw back into Putin's face. 

Good post. Unfortunately, Trump doesn't believe it's in his best interest to "get knowledgeable" on this whole Russia issue. As far as he's concerned, the Russian attack can't be acknowledged because if it is HE believes it challenges the legitimacy of HIS presidency. Never mind the fact that this doesn't necessarily have to be the case, as long as HE believes this, nothing will be done. All he needs to know is that it's all phony because Putin says so. That's what must be frustrating to his non-conspiracy theory supporters; that Trump may have been completely ignorant of all of this and thus innocent but his personal insecurities and lack of maturity make him act guilty. Honestly, his personality is the only doubt I have in my mind of his guilt. Trump is the only person I've ever observed who can be completely innocent and yet act so insanely guilty. If it was anyone else I'd have no problem saying 100% they were guilty. The irony is not lost on me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

It certainly does appear the Russians were caught red handed which makes it baffling why Trump waffled on calling them out when he had all this evidence.  He should have taken the time to get some what knowledgeable about some of the fine points of the investigation to throw back into Putin's face. 

Why should Trump bother when his apologists will run interference for him and his base will never hold him accountable?  What's going on here is beyond Congress checking out, it's a good portion of the American electorate abdicating their responsibility of holding what looks like a corrupt individual and his staff accountable.  That's the history that will be written -- politicians ultimately work for us and how anyone (conservative, repub, whatever) can continue to support Trump is unconscionable.  He is not working on their behalf.

 

Bad comparison but wtf -- In our real lives, we've all been part of a hiring process that brought on bad people (based on interviews, family/friend connection, whatever).  There is no shame in that unless you pull a Jeff Fisher / LenDale, don't admit it, and worse enable/embolden the poor performer.  Back to Trump, I'm not saying impeach the guy.  I am saying the public needs to support Mueller's thorough investigation through to its conclusion rather than seeing that investigation get attacked for all the wrong (and transparently lame) reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

It certainly does appear the Russians were caught red handed which makes it baffling why Trump waffled on calling them out when he had all this evidence.  He should have taken the time to get some what knowledgeable about some of the fine points of the investigation to throw back into Putin's face. 

The saving grace on all this is that U.S. intelligence showed Putin we are able to trace their work back to Russia and in particular to the GRU. Not only that, but traced to individual members of 2 crack units. Its a message. Won't surprise me if some of the 12 go missing in the next few days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Soxcat said:

It certainly does appear the Russians were caught red handed which makes it baffling why Trump waffled on calling them out when he had all this evidence.  He should have taken the time to get some what knowledgeable about some of the fine points of the investigation to throw back into Putin's face. 

Right-o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Soxcat said:

It certainly does appear the Russians were caught red handed which makes it baffling why Trump waffled on calling them out when he had all this evidence.  He should have taken the time to get some what knowledgeable about some of the fine points of the investigation to throw back into Putin's face. 

He didn’t even have to be a dick about it. When the original question was asked he could have said something along the lines of ‘I have been briefed by intelligence on exactly what happened in the 2016 election. We covered this in our meeting. I want to let everyone know there will be repercussions for interfering in our elections. Next question’. Then if the reporters continue on and he wants to be diplomatic he could say that’s already been answered. It was easy as hitting a softball, and it would have at least allowed me to continue on thinking something shady happened, but that it didn’t likely reach the president. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Legaltitan said:

Does it matter to this conspiracy theory that the "server" (actually many servers) are all available for inspection at any time, and have been since day 1?

Who has those servers???

 

By the way listening to your responses are hilarious...

Edited by thor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(plagiarized)

All this stuff we have been bringing up must be frigging conspiracy talk... After all, it would require a technically proficient contractor with access to the FBI/NSA servers as well as the same contractor having access to the DNC/DCCC/Clinton servers... No company like that could exist...

Edited by thor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Soxcat said:

It certainly does appear the Russians were caught red handed which makes it baffling why Trump waffled on calling them out when he had all this evidence.  He should have taken the time to get some what knowledgeable about some of the fine points of the investigation to throw back into Putin's face. 

It’s not baffling at all. It’s the whole Trump modus operandi from the start. It’s FUD and he is Putin's puppet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.