j-mac
Nuthin' but the truth
That is completely untrue. Crowdstrike did exactly what any other security firm would do, make a forensic copy. What do you think they would learn from examining the physical hardware that they couldn’t from the forensic copy?For your conclusions to stand up in a court of law, you are damned right you need to physically examine the hard drives and retain custody of them, so they may also be examined by adversarial experts.
So, back to the question you dodged, why did the DNC refuse to let the FBI examine the hard drives? Why did the DNC act in such a manner that we only have a Hillary Campaign Vendors word for it?
FBI Says the Democratic Party Wouldn't Let Agents See the Hacked Email Servers.
If it was unnecessary to see the servers, why did the FBI ask to?
If it was unnecessary to physically examine the servers, why did Crowd Strike examine them
Hard Drives Talk, BS Walks!
The DNC was in the middle of a huge campaign. They didn’t want the FBI to slow down their operation. This is pretty standard in the industry. People have work to do.
Oh, so they've turned it over since the campaign was over?
No. They reformatted them and wiped the malware off.
That’s why you make a forensic copy to analyze.
This is pretty much standard throughout industry. Do you think people have time to shut down their operation so the FBI can tell you what you already know?
I think some hired company is NOT the FBI...Why is the DNC so scared to turn over the servers and the hard drives?
I already answered your question. They were in the middle of a huge campaign. They didn’t have time to shut down their operation so the FBI can tear apart their server for no reason.
You make a forensic copy which is even more valuable than the hardware itself.
This is the way every major operation that is hacked handles it.
No you haven't...You've danced plenty...So they made a copy of the hard drive...Why won't they turn that over?