Crowdstrike

[jc456]

there is no whistleblower. it was a leaker. and that was schitt's. we know it or he would have had the person if they existed come in. hahahahhaha

And everything that The whistleblower said has been proven correct by the documents handed over by the White House with nobody asking yet.so there is no reason to put them on the stand where the Republicans would immediately put his life in danger.

the leaker is schitt's and he doesn't know shitt's and the transcript is out and available and nothing in it.

Dumbfuck. Trump's transcript confirmed the whistleblower's complaint. Both of which have been confirmed by witness testimony. Trump may be able to elude a Senate conviction because Republicans are willing and eager to ignore his crimes, but Trump's getting impeached. He'll either end up being the 3rd president impeached of the 2nd one to resign to avoid impeachment.

Pussy bitch, you're confused. The transcript shows the second-hand information from the whistleblower was a lie.

Except of course that the transcript shows that over 80% of what the whistleblower said was confirmed by the Transcript.

Except of course that you are a liar.

schitt's didn't know shitts

 

[Syriusly]

"Coupe Attempt' is not a crime.

You read it for yourselves folks.

I can't top that one!

Yeah- you Trumpettes can't come up with a real crime so you just repeat what your Orange Messiah tells you to repeat.

 

[The Original Tree]

Mueller issued 2,500 subpoenas. The Trump Administration turned over 1 Million Documents. Clinton deleted 33,000 emails
On a illegal Secret Server and destroyed 17 Electronic Devices. And it was proven that she lied, proven that she intentionally was trying to conceal her actions, and proven she was trying to circumvent FOIA.

Never once did a single Government Agency still Ran by Obama Holdovers issue even one Subpoena on Thr DNC server, not even with it being known Pakistani Hackers were Prying in to congressional files did they bother To look at It.

THAT is the one word that set the democrats hair on fire..."CROWDSTRIKE".

It was in the TRANSCRIPT!

When the democrat server was "hacked"...by the "russians"...the FBI never saw that server...debbie wasserman schultz wouldn't allow the FBI anywhere near the server.

So how did the FBI know that the "russians" "Hacked" the server?

CROWDSTRIKE told them so.

This is the very origin of the russia-collusion coup attempt & MANY democrats know this will get them the death penalty!

How would you act if you knew you were going to be executed for your crimes? A little bit CRAZY perhaps?

Would you start doing desperate & illogical things?

Would you try to take out the president before he takes you out and exposes your crimes?

Would your eyeballs start bugging out of your head?

Hey democrats...CROWDSTRIKE!!!

It's all over but the

 

[Syriusly]

And everything that The whistleblower said has been proven correct by the documents handed over by the White House with nobody asking yet.so there is no reason to put them on the stand where the Republicans would immediately put his life in danger.

the leaker is schitt's and he doesn't know shitt's and the transcript is out and available and nothing in it.

Dumbfuck. Trump's transcript confirmed the whistleblower's complaint. Both of which have been confirmed by witness testimony. Trump may be able to elude a Senate conviction because Republicans are willing and eager to ignore his crimes, but Trump's getting impeached. He'll either end up being the 3rd president impeached of the 2nd one to resign to avoid impeachment.

Pussy bitch, you're confused. The transcript shows the second-hand information from the whistleblower was a lie.

Except of course that the transcript shows that over 80% of what the whistleblower said was confirmed by the Transcript.

Except of course that you are a liar.

schitt's didn't know shitts

Which is pretty much an admission from you about how damning the phone call was, and how much shit Trump is in.

 

[Faun]

Thank God for whistleblowers oh, he didn't leak a thing to the press that was much later. You brainwashed functional moron. He went through the exact channels he's supposed to, and his identity is supposed to be a secret forever. For good reason. God bless our American government, you sniveling conspiracy Nut Job Russian asset. Wake up and smell the coffee. You too are a Russian asset causing confusion and disrespect for our excellent institutions. Why, because of emails of course you f****** moron. LOL aaarrrggghhh h h h h h h you goddamn moron...

there is no whistleblower. it was a leaker. and that was schitt's. we know it or he would have had the person if they existed come in. hahahahhaha

Too bad I can't charge you for using images I post.

You don't own copyrights to anything lol

I didn't say I owned a copyright on the images I post, PussyBitch. Dayum, you're fucking rightarded.

Stop insinuating you own something that you don't

LOL

Poor, deranged, PussyBitch. I never insinuated it either. In fact, I insinuated the opposite of what your retarded brain thinks by pointing out I can't charge.

 

[jc456]

it's not what I expect from the intelligence agency. they do an investigation. Why are we doing another investigation after Mueller? investigation was completed. nothing found. so what? the server was not seen by our FBI. The cloud one or the DNC one. I fking give two shits. we were told, BTW, it was the DNC Server, so this whole cloud thing is made up. Seth Rich and the thumb drive, the only way it happened. physics doesn't lie.

Physics don't lie.

But Trump and his supporters sure do- your post is another great example.

You posted this lie way to soon
I am a Trump supporter and I DON'T LIE
SO THAT MAKES YOU A LYING SACK OF SHIT.

LOL

You don't lie, PussyBitch??

You lied in this thread. You claimed CrowdStrike altered the disk image they provided to the FBI but you can't prove that.

A lot of claims have been made and anything crowdstrike gave to the FBI is worthless and can never be used in a court of law.

Odd then that it was used in the indictments of the Russian nationals charged

There’s a final bit of evidence that the FBI got what it wanted from the DNC, and it was filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. last Friday: 29-pages of inside details showing exactly how and when the GRU’s hackers moved through the DNC’s network on their mission to help Trump.

that's not court. see you have to bring them in and then try them. that didn't happen. I can't wait for some one of you schmucks to understand america's laws.

 

[Thunk]

Do you see how hard they try to derail this thread?

They are scared to DEATH over the word "CROWDSTRIKE".

That's why I titled this thread "CROWDSTRIKE"

There ain't no getting away from the word CROWDSTRIKE

 

[jc456]

the leaker is schitt's and he doesn't know shitt's and the transcript is out and available and nothing in it.

Dumbfuck. Trump's transcript confirmed the whistleblower's complaint. Both of which have been confirmed by witness testimony. Trump may be able to elude a Senate conviction because Republicans are willing and eager to ignore his crimes, but Trump's getting impeached. He'll either end up being the 3rd president impeached of the 2nd one to resign to avoid impeachment.

Pussy bitch, you're confused. The transcript shows the second-hand information from the whistleblower was a lie.

Except of course that the transcript shows that over 80% of what the whistleblower said was confirmed by the Transcript.

Except of course that you are a liar.

schitt's didn't know shitts

Which is pretty much an admission from you about how damning the phone call was, and how much shit Trump is in.

 

[BlindBoo]

Do you see how hard they try to derail this thread?

They are scared to DEATH over the word "CROWDSTRIKE".

That's why I titled this thread "CROWDSTRIKE"

There ain't no getting away from the word CROWDSTRIKE

Truth be told, you got beat like a dog with that word.

 

[jc456]

Crowdstrike gave the FBI and others a copy of the server.... to verify it themselves.... And the FBI did just that..... And more....

A copy doesn't tell you squat!

You can't track the download speeds from a copy...Which could say the download speed was faster than any comm lines in existence...which would mean it would have to be a device that is physically attached to the server (thumb drive)...Which would mean it was not a "hack" but a "leak" (inside job).Which would mean it wasn't the russians...unless the democrats hired russians (which is plausible).

You can't tell any of that from a "copy".

i've given up trying to explain this. a copy can be anything and certainly no guarantee it's of the original unmodified server. i can also get zero reasonable explanations why a copy vs. the original is necessary.

if trump were to pull ANY OF THIS they would scream unholy hell at the party foul, and rightfully so - it would be. yet if "their side" does it, they protect to the death what they would want to "kill" others for doing.

go figure these people. may as well flush a broken turd as it would be more productive than talking with these people.

'Pull any of this'?

Tell us more about this mythical server you believe is hidden away in Ukraine......

Meanwhile in the real world....

The “server” Trump is obsessed with is actually 140 servers, most of them cloud-based, which the DNC was forced to decommission in June 2016 while trying to rid its network of the Russian GRU officers working to help Trump win the election, according to the figures in the DNC’s civil lawsuit against Russia and the Trump campaign. Another 180 desktop and laptop computers were also swapped out as the DNC raced to get the organization back on its feet and free of Putin’s surveillance.

But despite Trump’s repeated feverish claims to the contrary, no machines are actually missing.

It’s true that the FBI doesn’t have the DNC’s computer hardware. Agents didn’t sweep into DNC headquarters, load up all the equipment and leave Democrats standing stunned beside empty desks and dangling cables. There’s a reason for that, and it has nothing to do with a deep state conspiracy to frame Putin.

Trump and his allies are capitalizing on a basic misapprehension of how computer intrusion investigations work. Investigating a virtual crime isn’t a like investigating a murder. The Russians didn’t leave DNA evidence on the server racks and fingerprints on the keyboards. All the evidence of their comings and goings was on the computer hard drives, and in memory, and in the ephemeral network transmissions to and from the GRU’s command-and-control servers.

When cyber investigators respond to an incident, they capture that evidence in a process called “imaging.” They make an exact byte-for-byte copy of the hard drives. They do the same for the machine’s memory, capturing evidence that would otherwise be lost at the next reboot, and they monitor and store the traffic passing through the victim’s network. This has been standard procedure in computer intrusion investigations for decades. The images, not the computer’s hardware, provide the evidence.

Both the DNC and the security firm Crowdstrike, hired to respond to the breach, have said repeatedly over the years that they gave the FBI a copy of all the DNC images back in 2016. The DNC reiterated that Monday in a statement to the Daily Beast.

“The FBI was given images of servers, forensic copies, as well as a host of other forensic information we collected from our systems,” said Adrienne Watson, the DNC’s deputy communications director. “We were in close contact and worked cooperatively with the FBI and were always responsive to their requests. Any suggestion that they were denied access to what they wanted for their investigation is completely incorrect.”

It’s also consistent with the Department of Justice’s electronic evidence manual, which recommends capturing images when practical even when the FBI is executing a search warrant against a uncooperative suspect. When the computers belong to a cooperating victim, seizing the machines is pretty much out of the question, said James Harris, a former FBI cybercrime agent who worked on a 2009 breach at Google that’s been linked to the Chinese government.

“In most cases you don’t even ask, you just assume you’re going to make forensic copies,” said Harris, now vice president of engineering at PFP Cyber. “For example when the Google breach happened back in 2009, agents were sent out with express instructions that you image what they allow you to image, because they’re the victim, you don’t have a search warrant, and you don’t want to disrupt their business.”

There’s a final bit of evidence that the FBI got what it wanted from the DNC, and it was filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. last Friday: 29-pages of inside details showing exactly how and when the GRU’s hackers moved through the DNC’s network on their mission to help Trump.

Trump’s ‘Missing DNC Server’ Is Neither Missing Nor a Server

great - now give me 1 good reason why they couldn't examine the actual server itself. lobbing daily beast at me is, at best, that broken turd i was flushing.

Just one? There was no actual server itself.

where was the data held, in space? too fking funny. nope the file was in limbo and not on any physical device. hey, it's why nothing was hacked, there was nothing to hack. you just admitted it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

When is the trial date? What do you mean give you a citation?
What the DNC did would be me going to a private security firm to investigate a crime and any evidence they choose to turn it over to the police. It would never fly in a court of law the judge would kick it out

Go ahead and give us that citation. Right now it is just your opinion as an anonymous uneducated poster.

I asked you first
WHEN'S THE COURT DATE for those indicted Russians?

The court date can't be until those fugitives are caught.

Looking for that citation now.

They were indicted for that very reason knowing they would not be brought before a judge
Anyway
Inadmissible Evidence
Primary tabs
Evidence that can not be presented to the jury or decision maker for any of a variety of reasons: it was improperly obtained, it is prejudicial (the prejudicial value outweighs the probative value), it is hearsay, it is not relevant to the case, etc.

wex:
THE LEGAL PROCESS
courts
evidence
subject
courts and procedure
wex definitions
Keywords:
evidence

And......still waiting for you to show us the part that makes this copy of the server inadmissible.

You'll never know until those Russians are brought before a judge and since that will never.......
And again
What the DNC did would be me going to a private security firm to investigate a crime and any evidence they choose to turn it over to the police. It would never fly in a court of law the judge would kick it out

 

[iceberg]

then why the concern for the AG investigating the russia stuff? sphincter getting tight?

He may well be a brainwashed functional moron to. It's the only people Trump trusts LOL. Unbelievable the crap they say and it won't go anywhere no I am not worried.the people they are having sham investigations about could be worried because it cost money to get lawyers. A favorite GOP propaganda trick to shut people up....

so what do you call it when no one can give a single good reason why the physical server couldn't be examined?

lord you people are a bucketfull of broken krako radios.

Already answered

It’s also consistent with the Department of Justice’s electronic evidence manual, which recommends capturing images when practical even when the FBI is executing a search warrant against a uncooperative suspect. When the computers belong to a cooperating victim, seizing the machines is pretty much out of the question, said James Harris, a former FBI cybercrime agent who worked on a 2009 breach at Google that’s been linked to the Chinese government.

“In most cases you don’t even ask, you just assume you’re going to make forensic copies,” said Harris, now vice president of engineering at PFP Cyber. “For example when the Google breach happened back in 2009, agents were sent out with express instructions that you image what they allow you to image, because they’re the victim, you don’t have a search warrant, and you don’t want to disrupt their business.”

so which is it? seizing the computers is out of the question, or there wasn't a server to examine?

y'all should plan your bullshit better.

Hmmm correction- I am refuting your Trump bullshit- which is laughably easy.


It’s also consistent with the Department of Justice’s electronic evidence manual, which recommends capturing images when practical even when the FBI is executing a search warrant against a uncooperative suspect. When the computers belong to a cooperating victim, seizing the machines is pretty much out of the question, said James Harris, a former FBI cybercrime agent who worked on a 2009 breach at Google that’s been linked to the Chinese government.

“In most cases you don’t even ask, you just assume you’re going to make forensic copies,” said Harris, now vice president of engineering at PFP Cyber. “For example when the Google breach happened back in 2009, agents were sent out with express instructions that you image what they allow you to image, because they’re the victim, you don’t have a search warrant, and you don’t want to disrupt their business.”
If you can't read- well you are just another Trumpette

Got nothing to do w Trump. If he did this I'd be pissed at him.

But hey deflect from issue.

One
Good
Reason

And nothing.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

B) "Coupe Attempt' is not a crime. Nor by any stretch of the definition of 'coupe' is what is happening a coupe- except of course your Orange Messiah has told you to keep repeating 'its a coupe!"
.

After you wrote this you need to walk away from this discussion you dumbass

 

[Faun]

Well when you pull everybody into your conspiracy, they're def. all out to get you and the Dirty Don.

it's not what I expect from the intelligence agency. they do an investigation. Why are we doing another investigation after Mueller? investigation was completed. nothing found. so what? the server was not seen by our FBI. The cloud one or the DNC one. I fking give two shits. we were told, BTW, it was the DNC Server, so this whole cloud thing is made up. Seth Rich and the thumb drive, the only way it happened. physics doesn't lie.

Physics don't lie.

But Trump and his supporters sure do- your post is another great example.

You posted this lie way to soon
I am a Trump supporter and I DON'T LIE
SO THAT MAKES YOU A LYING SACK OF SHIT.

LOL

You don't lie, PussyBitch??

You lied in this thread. You claimed CrowdStrike altered the disk image they provided to the FBI but you can't prove that.

A lot of claims have been made and anything crowdstrike gave to the FBI is worthless and can never be used in a court of law.

LOL

Forget a court of law, PussyBitch, you can't prove your claim in an Internet forum.

You claimed CrowdStrike altered the copy of the DNC servers before providing them to the FBI when the truth is, you have zero evidence to back that shit up.

 

[Faun]

Crowdstrike gave the FBI and others a copy of the server.... to verify it themselves.... And the FBI did just that..... And more....

A copy doesn't tell you squat!

You can't track the download speeds from a copy...Which could say the download speed was faster than any comm lines in existence...which would mean it would have to be a device that is physically attached to the server (thumb drive)...Which would mean it was not a "hack" but a "leak" (inside job).Which would mean it wasn't the russians...unless the democrats hired russians (which is plausible).

You can't tell any of that from a "copy".

i've given up trying to explain this. a copy can be anything and certainly no guarantee it's of the original unmodified server. i can also get zero reasonable explanations why a copy vs. the original is necessary.

if trump were to pull ANY OF THIS they would scream unholy hell at the party foul, and rightfully so - it would be. yet if "their side" does it, they protect to the death what they would want to "kill" others for doing.

go figure these people. may as well flush a broken turd as it would be more productive than talking with these people.

'Pull any of this'?

Tell us more about this mythical server you believe is hidden away in Ukraine......

Meanwhile in the real world....

The “server” Trump is obsessed with is actually 140 servers, most of them cloud-based, which the DNC was forced to decommission in June 2016 while trying to rid its network of the Russian GRU officers working to help Trump win the election, according to the figures in the DNC’s civil lawsuit against Russia and the Trump campaign. Another 180 desktop and laptop computers were also swapped out as the DNC raced to get the organization back on its feet and free of Putin’s surveillance.

But despite Trump’s repeated feverish claims to the contrary, no machines are actually missing.

It’s true that the FBI doesn’t have the DNC’s computer hardware. Agents didn’t sweep into DNC headquarters, load up all the equipment and leave Democrats standing stunned beside empty desks and dangling cables. There’s a reason for that, and it has nothing to do with a deep state conspiracy to frame Putin.

Trump and his allies are capitalizing on a basic misapprehension of how computer intrusion investigations work. Investigating a virtual crime isn’t a like investigating a murder. The Russians didn’t leave DNA evidence on the server racks and fingerprints on the keyboards. All the evidence of their comings and goings was on the computer hard drives, and in memory, and in the ephemeral network transmissions to and from the GRU’s command-and-control servers.

When cyber investigators respond to an incident, they capture that evidence in a process called “imaging.” They make an exact byte-for-byte copy of the hard drives. They do the same for the machine’s memory, capturing evidence that would otherwise be lost at the next reboot, and they monitor and store the traffic passing through the victim’s network. This has been standard procedure in computer intrusion investigations for decades. The images, not the computer’s hardware, provide the evidence.

Both the DNC and the security firm Crowdstrike, hired to respond to the breach, have said repeatedly over the years that they gave the FBI a copy of all the DNC images back in 2016. The DNC reiterated that Monday in a statement to the Daily Beast.

“The FBI was given images of servers, forensic copies, as well as a host of other forensic information we collected from our systems,” said Adrienne Watson, the DNC’s deputy communications director. “We were in close contact and worked cooperatively with the FBI and were always responsive to their requests. Any suggestion that they were denied access to what they wanted for their investigation is completely incorrect.”

It’s also consistent with the Department of Justice’s electronic evidence manual, which recommends capturing images when practical even when the FBI is executing a search warrant against a uncooperative suspect. When the computers belong to a cooperating victim, seizing the machines is pretty much out of the question, said James Harris, a former FBI cybercrime agent who worked on a 2009 breach at Google that’s been linked to the Chinese government.

“In most cases you don’t even ask, you just assume you’re going to make forensic copies,” said Harris, now vice president of engineering at PFP Cyber. “For example when the Google breach happened back in 2009, agents were sent out with express instructions that you image what they allow you to image, because they’re the victim, you don’t have a search warrant, and you don’t want to disrupt their business.”

There’s a final bit of evidence that the FBI got what it wanted from the DNC, and it was filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. last Friday: 29-pages of inside details showing exactly how and when the GRU’s hackers moved through the DNC’s network on their mission to help Trump.

Trump’s ‘Missing DNC Server’ Is Neither Missing Nor a Server

You realize there isn't a rightard in this establishment who can understand any of that, right?

 

[Thunk]

CrowdStrike was able to provide the FBI a copy and they found that acceptable. Comey testified under oath that his agency deemed a copy was an "appropriate substitute."

They gave them a floppy with AUTOEXEC.BAT as the only file on it & comey found that acceptable?

You don't say?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Crowdstrike gave the FBI and others a copy of the server.... to verify it themselves.... And the FBI did just that..... And more....

A copy doesn't tell you squat!

You can't track the download speeds from a copy...Which could say the download speed was faster than any comm lines in existence...which would mean it would have to be a device that is physically attached to the server (thumb drive)...Which would mean it was not a "hack" but a "leak" (inside job).Which would mean it wasn't the russians...unless the democrats hired russians (which is plausible).

You can't tell any of that from a "copy".

i've given up trying to explain this. a copy can be anything and certainly no guarantee it's of the original unmodified server. i can also get zero reasonable explanations why a copy vs. the original is necessary.

if trump were to pull ANY OF THIS they would scream unholy hell at the party foul, and rightfully so - it would be. yet if "their side" does it, they protect to the death what they would want to "kill" others for doing.

go figure these people. may as well flush a broken turd as it would be more productive than talking with these people.

'Pull any of this'?

Tell us more about this mythical server you believe is hidden away in Ukraine......

Meanwhile in the real world....

The “server” Trump is obsessed with is actually 140 servers, most of them cloud-based, which the DNC was forced to decommission in June 2016 while trying to rid its network of the Russian GRU officers working to help Trump win the election, according to the figures in the DNC’s civil lawsuit against Russia and the Trump campaign. Another 180 desktop and laptop computers were also swapped out as the DNC raced to get the organization back on its feet and free of Putin’s surveillance.

But despite Trump’s repeated feverish claims to the contrary, no machines are actually missing.

It’s true that the FBI doesn’t have the DNC’s computer hardware. Agents didn’t sweep into DNC headquarters, load up all the equipment and leave Democrats standing stunned beside empty desks and dangling cables. There’s a reason for that, and it has nothing to do with a deep state conspiracy to frame Putin.

Trump and his allies are capitalizing on a basic misapprehension of how computer intrusion investigations work. Investigating a virtual crime isn’t a like investigating a murder. The Russians didn’t leave DNA evidence on the server racks and fingerprints on the keyboards. All the evidence of their comings and goings was on the computer hard drives, and in memory, and in the ephemeral network transmissions to and from the GRU’s command-and-control servers.

When cyber investigators respond to an incident, they capture that evidence in a process called “imaging.” They make an exact byte-for-byte copy of the hard drives. They do the same for the machine’s memory, capturing evidence that would otherwise be lost at the next reboot, and they monitor and store the traffic passing through the victim’s network. This has been standard procedure in computer intrusion investigations for decades. The images, not the computer’s hardware, provide the evidence.

Both the DNC and the security firm Crowdstrike, hired to respond to the breach, have said repeatedly over the years that they gave the FBI a copy of all the DNC images back in 2016. The DNC reiterated that Monday in a statement to the Daily Beast.

“The FBI was given images of servers, forensic copies, as well as a host of other forensic information we collected from our systems,” said Adrienne Watson, the DNC’s deputy communications director. “We were in close contact and worked cooperatively with the FBI and were always responsive to their requests. Any suggestion that they were denied access to what they wanted for their investigation is completely incorrect.”

It’s also consistent with the Department of Justice’s electronic evidence manual, which recommends capturing images when practical even when the FBI is executing a search warrant against a uncooperative suspect. When the computers belong to a cooperating victim, seizing the machines is pretty much out of the question, said James Harris, a former FBI cybercrime agent who worked on a 2009 breach at Google that’s been linked to the Chinese government.

“In most cases you don’t even ask, you just assume you’re going to make forensic copies,” said Harris, now vice president of engineering at PFP Cyber. “For example when the Google breach happened back in 2009, agents were sent out with express instructions that you image what they allow you to image, because they’re the victim, you don’t have a search warrant, and you don’t want to disrupt their business.”

There’s a final bit of evidence that the FBI got what it wanted from the DNC, and it was filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. last Friday: 29-pages of inside details showing exactly how and when the GRU’s hackers moved through the DNC’s network on their mission to help Trump.

Trump’s ‘Missing DNC Server’ Is Neither Missing Nor a Server

You realize there isn't a rightard in this establishment who can understand any of that, right?

Dumb ass that idiot thinks a coupe is not a crime lol

 

[Syriusly]

He may well be a brainwashed functional moron to. It's the only people Trump trusts LOL. Unbelievable the crap they say and it won't go anywhere no I am not worried.the people they are having sham investigations about could be worried because it cost money to get lawyers. A favorite GOP propaganda trick to shut people up....

so what do you call it when no one can give a single good reason why the physical server couldn't be examined?

lord you people are a bucketfull of broken krako radios.

Already answered

It’s also consistent with the Department of Justice’s electronic evidence manual, which recommends capturing images when practical even when the FBI is executing a search warrant against a uncooperative suspect. When the computers belong to a cooperating victim, seizing the machines is pretty much out of the question, said James Harris, a former FBI cybercrime agent who worked on a 2009 breach at Google that’s been linked to the Chinese government.

“In most cases you don’t even ask, you just assume you’re going to make forensic copies,” said Harris, now vice president of engineering at PFP Cyber. “For example when the Google breach happened back in 2009, agents were sent out with express instructions that you image what they allow you to image, because they’re the victim, you don’t have a search warrant, and you don’t want to disrupt their business.”

so which is it? seizing the computers is out of the question, or there wasn't a server to examine?

y'all should plan your bullshit better.

Hmmm correction- I am refuting your Trump bullshit- which is laughably easy.


It’s also consistent with the Department of Justice’s electronic evidence manual, which recommends capturing images when practical even when the FBI is executing a search warrant against a uncooperative suspect. When the computers belong to a cooperating victim, seizing the machines is pretty much out of the question, said James Harris, a former FBI cybercrime agent who worked on a 2009 breach at Google that’s been linked to the Chinese government.

“In most cases you don’t even ask, you just assume you’re going to make forensic copies,” said Harris, now vice president of engineering at PFP Cyber. “For example when the Google breach happened back in 2009, agents were sent out with express instructions that you image what they allow you to image, because they’re the victim, you don’t have a search warrant, and you don’t want to disrupt their business.”
If you can't read- well you are just another Trumpette

Got nothing to do w Trump. If he did this I'd be pissed at him.

But hey deflect from issue.

One
Good
Reason

And nothing.

I gave you good reasons- you just can't handle good reasons.


It’s also consistent with the Department of Justice’s electronic evidence manual, which recommends capturing images when practical even when the FBI is executing a search warrant against a uncooperative suspect. When the computers belong to a cooperating victim, seizing the machines is pretty much out of the question, said James Harris, a former FBI cybercrime agent who worked on a 2009 breach at Google that’s been linked to the Chinese government.

“In most cases you don’t even ask, you just assume you’re going to make forensic copies,” said Harris, now vice president of engineering at PFP Cyber. “For example when the Google breach happened back in 2009, agents were sent out with express instructions that you image what they allow you to image, because they’re the victim, you don’t have a search warrant, and you don’t want to disrupt their business.”

 

[Syriusly]

Crowdstrike gave the FBI and others a copy of the server.... to verify it themselves.... And the FBI did just that..... And more....

A copy doesn't tell you squat!

You can't track the download speeds from a copy...Which could say the download speed was faster than any comm lines in existence...which would mean it would have to be a device that is physically attached to the server (thumb drive)...Which would mean it was not a "hack" but a "leak" (inside job).Which would mean it wasn't the russians...unless the democrats hired russians (which is plausible).

You can't tell any of that from a "copy".

i've given up trying to explain this. a copy can be anything and certainly no guarantee it's of the original unmodified server. i can also get zero reasonable explanations why a copy vs. the original is necessary.

if trump were to pull ANY OF THIS they would scream unholy hell at the party foul, and rightfully so - it would be. yet if "their side" does it, they protect to the death what they would want to "kill" others for doing.

go figure these people. may as well flush a broken turd as it would be more productive than talking with these people.

'Pull any of this'?

Tell us more about this mythical server you believe is hidden away in Ukraine......

Meanwhile in the real world....

The “server” Trump is obsessed with is actually 140 servers, most of them cloud-based, which the DNC was forced to decommission in June 2016 while trying to rid its network of the Russian GRU officers working to help Trump win the election, according to the figures in the DNC’s civil lawsuit against Russia and the Trump campaign. Another 180 desktop and laptop computers were also swapped out as the DNC raced to get the organization back on its feet and free of Putin’s surveillance.

But despite Trump’s repeated feverish claims to the contrary, no machines are actually missing.

It’s true that the FBI doesn’t have the DNC’s computer hardware. Agents didn’t sweep into DNC headquarters, load up all the equipment and leave Democrats standing stunned beside empty desks and dangling cables. There’s a reason for that, and it has nothing to do with a deep state conspiracy to frame Putin.

Trump and his allies are capitalizing on a basic misapprehension of how computer intrusion investigations work. Investigating a virtual crime isn’t a like investigating a murder. The Russians didn’t leave DNA evidence on the server racks and fingerprints on the keyboards. All the evidence of their comings and goings was on the computer hard drives, and in memory, and in the ephemeral network transmissions to and from the GRU’s command-and-control servers.

When cyber investigators respond to an incident, they capture that evidence in a process called “imaging.” They make an exact byte-for-byte copy of the hard drives. They do the same for the machine’s memory, capturing evidence that would otherwise be lost at the next reboot, and they monitor and store the traffic passing through the victim’s network. This has been standard procedure in computer intrusion investigations for decades. The images, not the computer’s hardware, provide the evidence.

Both the DNC and the security firm Crowdstrike, hired to respond to the breach, have said repeatedly over the years that they gave the FBI a copy of all the DNC images back in 2016. The DNC reiterated that Monday in a statement to the Daily Beast.

“The FBI was given images of servers, forensic copies, as well as a host of other forensic information we collected from our systems,” said Adrienne Watson, the DNC’s deputy communications director. “We were in close contact and worked cooperatively with the FBI and were always responsive to their requests. Any suggestion that they were denied access to what they wanted for their investigation is completely incorrect.”

It’s also consistent with the Department of Justice’s electronic evidence manual, which recommends capturing images when practical even when the FBI is executing a search warrant against a uncooperative suspect. When the computers belong to a cooperating victim, seizing the machines is pretty much out of the question, said James Harris, a former FBI cybercrime agent who worked on a 2009 breach at Google that’s been linked to the Chinese government.

“In most cases you don’t even ask, you just assume you’re going to make forensic copies,” said Harris, now vice president of engineering at PFP Cyber. “For example when the Google breach happened back in 2009, agents were sent out with express instructions that you image what they allow you to image, because they’re the victim, you don’t have a search warrant, and you don’t want to disrupt their business.”

There’s a final bit of evidence that the FBI got what it wanted from the DNC, and it was filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. last Friday: 29-pages of inside details showing exactly how and when the GRU’s hackers moved through the DNC’s network on their mission to help Trump.

Trump’s ‘Missing DNC Server’ Is Neither Missing Nor a Server

You realize there isn't a rightard in this establishment who can understand any of that, right?

Dumb ass that idiot thinks a coupe is not a crime lol

Feel free to name the actual criminal code. Or just keep pulling this out of Trump's ass.

Either way it will be amusing.

 

[Faun]

Crowdstrike gave the FBI and others a copy of the server.... to verify it themselves.... And the FBI did just that..... And more....

A copy doesn't tell you squat!

You can't track the download speeds from a copy...Which could say the download speed was faster than any comm lines in existence...which would mean it would have to be a device that is physically attached to the server (thumb drive)...Which would mean it was not a "hack" but a "leak" (inside job).Which would mean it wasn't the russians...unless the democrats hired russians (which is plausible).

You can't tell any of that from a "copy".

i've given up trying to explain this. a copy can be anything and certainly no guarantee it's of the original unmodified server. i can also get zero reasonable explanations why a copy vs. the original is necessary.

if trump were to pull ANY OF THIS they would scream unholy hell at the party foul, and rightfully so - it would be. yet if "their side" does it, they protect to the death what they would want to "kill" others for doing.

go figure these people. may as well flush a broken turd as it would be more productive than talking with these people.

Thank you
Also if the FBI didn't retrieve the evidence it's worthless.

Bullshit. You don't b'lieve the FBI either. Truth is, even had the FBI taken physical possession of the DNC servers, you still call it a conspiracy. You'd simply just have to change a few of the parameters. The reality is you're being led by a conspiracy nut who's got his hand so far up your ass, he can tickle your uvula. So when Trump says this is a conspiracy, you obediently fall in line like a good puppet.