Hillary presidential campaign chairwoman Donna Brazile’s book Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House can be retold in one sentence:
The Russians have hacked the elections and poisoned my dog Chip.
Nevertheless, the book reveals some information concealed by Hillary and the DNC loyalists in FBI.
- In August, seeing CrowdStrike’s helplessness, the DNC invited real cyber security people to form a competent network security team that the book calls the Hacker House, or HH. This contradicts the DNC official story that CrowdStrike was doing a fabulous job.
- HH found out that the DNC network was unprotected, and that anybody could have hacked into it
- HH informed DNC and Hillary’s campaign leadership of this fact and spent most of its time training DNC networking administrators
- HH was asked, but refused to support allegations that the DNC network had been penetrated by “Russians.” HH also had run-ins with CrowdStrike.
- The DNC, Hillary, and the Obama administration disregarded and suppressed this information. They continued their electoral campaign strategy: worsening relations with Russia, accusing Trump of collusion with Putin, and using the FBI, CIA, DHS, and ODNI to sabotage Trump’s campaign. During the transition period, John Brennan and other Obama/Clinton loyalists used false allegations of the “Russian hacking” to attempt something like a coup d’état. The coup was not a complete failure – the angry Democrats have nearly wrestled control of the DOJ away from the elected president.
Continue reading CrowdStrike, MIS Department, and the DNC
2018-09-18. It’s possible that the DNC and/or Hillary campaign started preparing the “Russian collusion” story immediately after the initial attribution of the DNC network breach to Russia by CrowdStrike on May 6 (rather than on June 12, as assumed in the article.) That better explains the hiring of Christopher Steele in early June, the issuing of a visa to Natalia Veselnitskaya on June 1, the strange text of the email introducing Veselnitskaya to Trump Jr., and the meetings between Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS with her immediately before and after her meeting with Trump Jr. Continue reading Origin of Operation “Crossfire Hurricane”
Jeffrey Carr is a cybersecurity expert, and one of few open skeptics of the narrative that the leaked DNC and/or DCCC internal documents came from hacking by Russia. Few remarkable quotes from his posts, mostly from 2016-2017.
Why aren’t there more skeptics in InfoSec?
“There’s a cost to being too critical. One infosec company threatened to sue a researcher if he didn’t make substantive changes to a published paper that was critical of their report. Many employers don’t allow their employees to express controversial opinions that could hurt the company’s business or reputation. And if the company or organization that you’re critical of has influential connections in Washington D.C., your professional reputation may suffer as well.” Continue reading Jeffrey Carr, the “Russian Hacking” Skeptic
APT [Advanced Persistent Threat] is a term to refer to Chinese espionage
without saying Chinese espionage. Full stop.
Scott J Roberts, APT is a Who not a What …
The full quote:
“This classified intelligence was a problem. … These DoD/IC teams wanted to help, but couldn’t disclose classified information. They came up with a compromise: sharing indicators and information without disclosing the actual actor behind it. Specifically APT, supposedly coined by Colonel Greg Rattray, was a couple groups of actors primarily operating out of mainland China and believed to be members of the People’s Liberation Army. We now know these groups today as APT1, Anchor Panda, and Elderwood, as well as other private designations.
APT is a term to refer to Chinese espionage without saying Chinese espionage. Full stop.”
Continue reading What is the ‘Advanced Persistent Threat’?
The “assessment” that the Russian government hacked the DNC and leaked its emails was wrong. It’s almost impossible to attribute a network breach to a sophisticated hackers group.
When #CrowdStrike and FireEye started making the fraudulent attribution on cyber security events, many other companies followed. The Obama regime has corrupted and dumbed down the DHS, DNI, and FBI. They bought this fraud, and then added some.
In 2016, Hillary and the DNC were deceived by CrowdStrike into believing that Russia was behind the leaks of their emails that shouldn’t have been written in the first place. Together with Obama they forced that deception on the FBI and intelligence. Then they blamed Russia for their election defeat!
Most successful network security breaches are conducted by criminal hackers, many of whom are based or originate from Russia and Eastern Europe. Most unsuccessful attempts are conducted by amateurs. Organizations should protect their networks, rather than blame nation states.
Read Jeffrey Carr, FBI/DHS Joint Analysis Report: A Fatally Flawed Effort or Robert Graham, Dear Obama, From Infosec – both are (or were) anti-Trump.
Since the misattribution of a suspected breach into the DNC network in early 2016 to Russia, CrowdStrike has been boosted by:
- DNC loyalists in the FBI, CIA, DHS, and DNI
- the fawning coverage by mainstream media
- NBC News employing Shawn Henry, a CrowdStrike top officer and former executive assistant to FBI Director Robert Mueller, as a cyber security consultant
- $300M investments by Google and Silicon Valley VCs
Today, that creates an impression that CrowdStrike is a respectable entity. But when it was invited by the DNC to take care of a suspected breach in 2016, it could not be mistaken for one. CrowdStrike was a four year old upstart hardly noticeable in the crowded market for cyber-security products and services of the kind it provided. The weakness of its product could not be compensated by its excellent PR, but strong ties to Obama’s FBI helped.
Low Ranking by Gartner
In 2016, CrowdStrike wasn’t even in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for the Endpoint Continue reading CrowdStrike: Crooked, Shrill, Unashamed
Update, 2018-08-28: four days ago, the NY Times published an article “Kremlin Sources Go Quiet, Leaving C.I.A. in the Dark …“ If this is true, Mueller might have burnt those sources by publishing his throwaway indictment, as described in the original post. Only one or two names of the “indicted” GRU officers were publicly known before Mueller’s indictment. This said, the NY Times became a worthless tabloid. It seems to consider non-existent sources of Christopher Steele as”informants close to President Vladimir V. Putin and in the Kremlin who provided crucial details.”
Robert Mueller has multiple conflicts of interest stemming from his relationships with James Comey and from him being a Democrat partisan. Here, I show two other conflicts of interest, a disclosed and an undisclosed one. Each of them is sufficient to terminate him.
Conflict #101: Robert Mueller represented Facebook
In February 2018, Robert Mueller made a ridiculous indictment of Russian citizens and corporations in Russia for Facebook posts intended to sow division and interfere with the 2016 elections (USA v. Internet Research Agency et al). The IRA paid Facebook and entered posts into its database. Facebook received money from the indicted and non-indicted foreign persons, selected recipients and shown them those posts. Facebook is the only entity that can be held accountable for the alleged misconduct. Why didn’t he indict, or, at least, investigate Facebook as a possible co-conspirator, accessory, or enabler? A hint: Facebook was one of Mueller’s clients in the Wilmer-Hale law firm, as he disclosed when he accepted an appointment as a special counsel. Robert Mueller was making about $3.5M a year by representing Facebook, Apple, Intel, etc. Robert Mueller also holds a small investment in Facebook according to the same disclosure.
Conflict #102: Robert Mueller is Connected to CrowdStrike
Continue reading Robert Mueller – More Conflicts of Interest