Intelligence Officials: Russians may have Compromising Information on Trump - Polidicks

[URL="https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/"]https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/[/URL] [QUOTE]The IP addresses that DHS provided may have been used for an attack by a state actor like Russia. But they don’t appear to provide any association with Russia. They are probably used by a wide range of other malicious actors, especially the 15% of IP addresses that are Tor exit nodes. The malware sample is old, widely used and appears to be Ukrainian. It has no apparent relationship with Russian intelligence and it would be an indicator of compromise for any website.[/QUOTE] [URL="https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2017/01/election-hack-faq/"]https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2017/01/election-hack-faq/[/URL] [QUOTE]Does the report prove that Russia Hacked the 2016 US Election? No it does not. What Wordfence revealed on Friday is that the PHP malware sample that the US government provided is: An old version of malware. The sample was version 3.1.0 and the current version is 3.1.7 with 4.1.1 beta also available. Freely available to anyone who wants it. The authors claim they are Ukrainian, not Russian. The malware is an administrative tool used by hackers to upload files, view files on a hacked website, download database contents and so on. It is used as one step in a series of steps that would occur during an attack. Wordfence also analyzed the IP addresses available and demonstrated that they are in 61 countries, belong to over 380 organizations and many of those organizations are well known website hosting providers from where many attacks originate. There is nothing in the IP data that points to Russia specifically.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=TheNukeNL;51654543][URL="https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/"]https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/[/URL] [URL="https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2017/01/election-hack-faq/"]https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2017/01/election-hack-faq/[/URL][/QUOTE] They've explicitly mentioned having confirmation beyond IP addresses. The nature of the internet means that an IP address does not unequivocally identify one particular user, particularly if they're using Tor.

[QUOTE=TheNukeNL;51654543][URL="https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/"]https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/[/URL] [URL="https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2017/01/election-hack-faq/"]https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2017/01/election-hack-faq/[/URL][/QUOTE] This is a great summary, thank you! Hope more people would read this through. [editline]11th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Big Bang;51654554]They've explicitly mentioned having confirmation beyond IP addresses. The nature of the internet means that an IP address does not unequivocally identify one particular user, particularly if they're using Tor.[/QUOTE] They can mention as much as they want wont make it more trustworthy. Somehow 2 pages of intelligence report that was handled to president directly get to make news but "classified" part of report that apparently around a hundred people claim to have saw never ever get even a hint of it's nature out of bullshit reasoning.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51654451]Bernie has already said he's prepared to work with Trump to implement some of his campaign promises, provided he was serious about them.[/QUOTE] Such as removing obamacare and providing no replacement for it? All the news on this front, as well as the information we have, suggests that the GOP would rather remove it and not bother to replace it at all unless they have to.

[QUOTE=Occlusion;51654469]He gets his twitter taken way on the 20th right? RIGHT?[/QUOTE] Nah, he just moves to @POTUS

[QUOTE=Big Bang;51654554]They've explicitly mentioned having confirmation beyond IP addresses. The nature of the internet means that an IP address does not unequivocally identify one particular user, particularly if they're using Tor.[/QUOTE] Yes but there conclusion also take into account other things as well such as the malware. Which in this case is a interesting chose because its Ukrainian and freely available to anyone. If the Russian government wanted to hack the DNC you would expect them to use a special in house developed piece of malware. So unless the CIA and DHS come up with some concrete proof i am going to keep being skeptical of there claims. Because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. [QUOTE=karimatrix;51654574]This is a great summary, thank you! Hope more people would read this through. [editline]11th January 2017[/editline] They can mention as much as they want wont make it more trustworthy. Somehow 2 pages of intelligence report that was handled to president directly get to make news but "classified" part of report that apparently around a hundred people claim to have saw never ever get even a hint of it's nature out of bullshit reasoning.[/QUOTE] Your welcome the more people who read it the better.

This is kind of interesting now that you have some journalists publicaly announcing if they will pick this up or not. Not even Huffington Post wants to push it. [t]https://i.sli.mg/B4fk2U.png[/t] Also abit more on the troll front with this guy now being hailed as the creator. Take it as you will. [url]https://mobile.twitter.com/trsprudence[/url]

[QUOTE=TheNukeNL;51654653]Which in this case is a interesting chose because its Ukrainian and freely available to anyone. If the Russian government wanted to hack the DNC you would expect them to use a special in house developed piece of malware. [/QUOTE] Not necessarily. Using throwaway common malware provides, among other advantages like, well, not wasting money on a one-shot weapon, some amount of plausible deniability.

It's comedy [i]gold[/i] to see Trump supporters complaining about people "not caring if news is true so long as it hurts their opponents". Yeah guys, too bad this wasn't a story about Hillary Clinton sending a copy of Obama's Kenyan birth certificate via email, then it would be fucking hilarious huh?.

Did Trump really try to compare this situation to Nazi Germany? Does he even know history? This is nothing like what happened in Naxi Germany. He literally said that as a distraction.

Does everyone agree the BuzzFeed story is BS?

[QUOTE=TheKritter71;51654729]Does everyone agree the BuzzFeed story is BS?[/QUOTE] It might be BS. It might not be BS.

[QUOTE=TheKritter71;51654729]Does everyone agree the BuzzFeed story is BS?[/QUOTE] might be or might not be, the info hasn't been substantiated yet, nor has it been conclusively disproven.

Imagine these same tweets, but under POTUS account. haha oh boy wooow

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51654710]Did Trump really try to compare this situation to Nazi Germany? Does he even know history? This is nothing like what happened in Naxi Germany. He literally said that as a distraction.[/QUOTE] Nothing new on the Trump front, he says it like he thinks, and news even came to light that sometimes even he doesn't believe whatever he says.

What I don't get is that intelligence officials apparently have mounting evidence of a Trump-Russia connection, and then this document comes out of nowhere and mentions that and a ton of other outlandish things. The document has supposedly been circulating between news agencies for a while, but it comes out the day it's revealed that Russia might have something embarrassing on Trump? So did this document contain information that the general public couldn't have known about? I've probably got my timeline mixed up, but this whole mess is confusing.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;51654737]It might be BS. It might not be BS.[/QUOTE] That's not quite how it works. Things are generally bs until shown otherwise.

Honestly, I believe the articles are BS. The content itself is bound to make Trump pop as well (if you had false information that can damage your reputation, you'd do the same). The lack of evidence or confirmation these 'leaks' are real is pretty clear. And the bigger fact that it comes from BuzzFeed and pops out of nowhere when intelligence gives their findings is pretty shady.

I am going to continue to believe this despite overwhelming evidence. If you can't beat them, become them. :)

[QUOTE=TheKritter71;51654785]And the bigger fact that it comes from BuzzFeed and pops out of nowhere when intelligence gives their findings is pretty shady.[/QUOTE] Yeah this is the biggest thing that makes the whole thing kind of... not so believable to me. There's just too much leakage under the US intelligence services, way more than there should be. I don't think it all comes from them, they can't possibly be that incompetent and/or corrupt.

[QUOTE=gudman;51654897]Yeah this is the biggest thing that makes the whole thing kind of... not so believable to me. There's just too much leakage under the US intelligence services, way more than there should be. I don't think it all comes from them, they can't possibly be that incompetent and/or corrupt.[/QUOTE] They're doing their job. They potentially have a spy at the highest position of government and they must do all they can to ensure it is prevented. They're protecting the US from foreign threats.

[QUOTE=gudman;51654662]Not necessarily. Using throwaway common malware provides, among other advantages like, well, not wasting money on a one-shot weapon, some amount of plausible deniability.[/QUOTE] I do agree with that, but why use a Ukrainian malware i mean you got the entire world and you settled with one from a neighboring country which happens to be one of the few Russian speaking countries. This would make it very easy to narrow it down back to Russia if you ask me. You would think that the Russian Intelligence would be more competent then that. [QUOTE=TheKritter71;51654785]Honestly, I believe the articles are BS. The content itself is bound to make Trump pop as well (if you had false information that can damage your reputation, you'd do the same). The lack of evidence or confirmation these 'leaks' are real is pretty clear. And the bigger fact that it comes from BuzzFeed and pops out of nowhere when intelligence gives their findings is pretty shady.[/QUOTE] Well that is what you get when journalists don't do there work and are blinded by political views. I would not have problems with this news story if it had some solid proof. For example they would able to confirm that Trump staying in the Ritz-Carlton in Moscow at the time they said in the document and having some form of proof like footage or invoices from the hotel with his name on it. But no instead we get this garbage.

Just curious, how many of you have actually read the entire 35-page memo versus are just speculating on its legitimacy? If you haven't read it, you probably shouldn't be crying fake news [I]or[/I] calling for Trump's impeachment just yet. Having read the whole thing, it's my understanding that some of the claims are either unprovable or would put lives in danger if proved. Certain specifics like Cohen's Prague trip have been ostensibly disproved, but the memo originally cited the Czech Republic as the [I]most likely[/I] destination, being an EU country that was "operationally soft." What [I]is[/I] known with certainty is that lots of Trump's associates (Manafort, Cohen, Tillerson) have close business ties with Russia. And I've yet to read a more compelling explanation for Trump's affinity for Russia. The memo will be proven/disproven in time by credible sources. In the meantime, the question is whether Trump behaves toward Russia in the way the memo predicts - i.e. overturning sanctions on Ukraine etc.

[QUOTE=Kecske;51654449][media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/819164172781060096[/media] oh boy[/QUOTE] This is pretty fucking ironic coming from someone who wants to limit the freedom of the press.

[QUOTE=Shadow801;51654910]They're doing their job. They potentially have a spy at the highest position of government and they must do all they can to ensure it is prevented. They're protecting the US from foreign threats.[/QUOTE] By leaking sensitive stuff to the press so that everyone involved can take all the measures they can while undermining people's trust to media?.. Sure they're intelligence agencies and know better, but seems kinda like a stretch. I'm more willing to believe that these 'leaks' are either fakes or overblown to fuck and back.

[QUOTE=mcharest;51654924]Just curious, how many of you have actually read the entire 35-page memo versus are just speculating on its legitimacy? If you haven't read it, you probably shouldn't be crying fake news [I]or[/I] calling for Trump's impeachment just yet. Having read the whole thing, it's my understanding that some of the claims are either unprovable or would put lives in danger if proved. Certain specifics like Cohen's Prague trip have been ostensibly disproved, but the memo originally cited the Czech Republic as the [I]most likely[/I] destination, being an EU country that was "operationally soft." What [I]is[/I] known with certainty is that lots of Trump's associates (Manafort, Cohen, Tillerson) have close business ties with Russia. And I've yet to read a more compelling explanation for Trump's affinity for Russia. The memo will be proven/disproven in time by credible sources. In the meantime, the question is whether Trump behaves toward Russia in the way the memo predicts - i.e. overturning sanctions on Ukraine etc.[/QUOTE] The Prague visit hasn't actually been [I]disproved[/I]. We have some evidence to suggest that Cohen wasn't there on the 29th, but we do know that Cohen was in another Schengen state (Italy). What's actually stopping him from flying in to Italy and then driving the 12 hours from Rome to Prague? His passport wouldn't show shit that way. Right now everything is total speculation. Cohen has what is in my opinion a weak alibi, but an alibi nonetheless. It's best to wait until someone reputable comments on the situation before making judgments on what has been [I]proved[/I] or [I]disproved[/I]. Right now it's probably only safe to say Cohen [I]probably[/I] wasn't in Prague.

[QUOTE=1legmidget;51654989]The Prague visit hasn't actually been [I]disproved[/I]. We have some evidence to suggest that Cohen wasn't there on the 29th, but we do know that Cohen was in another Schengen state (Italy). What's actually stopping him from flying in to Italy and then driving the 12 hours from Rome to Prague? His passport wouldn't show shit that way. Right now everything is total speculation. Cohen has what is in my opinion a weak alibi, but an alibi nonetheless. It's best to wait until someone reputable comments on the situation before making judgments on what has been [I]proved[/I] or [I]disproved[/I]. Right now it's probably only safe to say Cohen [I]probably[/I] wasn't in Prague.[/QUOTE] I think I read via one of the main media outlet's Twitter accounts that there was [I]another[/I] Cohen with the same first and last name there at the same time, but [I]not[/I] the Cohen we think. I'm guessing that it was included as an insinuation that was put in there as one of the unverified claims.

8+ hours since the leak came out, and still no statement from the FBI or the CIA about the two reports. If the press conference goes 'smoothly', and if the sources are [I]still[/I] not collaborated , Trump may or may not become invincible in terms of future media accusations.

[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;51655021]I think I read via one of the main media outlet's Twitter accounts that there was [I]another[/I] Cohen with the same first and last name there at the same time, but [I]not[/I] the Cohen we think. I'm guessing that it was included as an insinuation that was put in there as one of the unverified claims.[/QUOTE] It's probably bullshit. It would take something like video or photographic evidence of Cohen in Prague to convince me otherwise. I think Trump is dumb but not dumb enough to send Cohen to coordinate with Russian intelligence officers. Their handling of the allegations though is comical.

[QUOTE=1legmidget;51654989]The Prague visit hasn't actually been [I]disproved[/I]. We have some evidence to suggest that Cohen wasn't there on the 29th, but we do know that Cohen was in another Schengen state (Italy). What's actually stopping him from flying in to Italy and then driving the 12 hours from Rome to Prague? His passport wouldn't show shit that way. Right now everything is total speculation. Cohen has what is in my opinion a weak alibi, but an alibi nonetheless. It's best to wait until someone reputable comments on the situation before making judgments on what has been [I]proved[/I] or [I]disproved[/I]. Right now it's probably only safe to say Cohen [I]probably[/I] wasn't in Prague.[/QUOTE] FYI you can enter european zone in italy and then fly to prague with a domestic flight, which does not leave extra stamps in your passport