“Lone Hacker” Guccifer 2.0 Goofs, Accidentally Reveals Himself to Be a Russian Intelligence Officer

As I wrote, nothing more to discuss.

It appears you believe the President is guilty, just because.

That's not how this country works.

Think about that while embracing a bias that convicts based on an emotional conclusion.

 

There's only 1 Guccifer. The V2 is an IP address belonging to person(s) unknown. Many speculate V2 = CIA. Crowdstrike prvided that IP. Why US intel would have doggedly investigated a "phishing" scheme, not a hack, of a private, non financial sector server is suspicious in itself. Especially since the private entity declined requests for forensics, and indicated it would investigate "in house". The CIA wants to take down Assange, this is a vehicle. Congress / DOJ actually want to create a crime by inventing a new criminal category. "Non state hostile intelligence service". In retaliation for Vault 7, which contains the CIA's IP spoofing program. IP spoofing program. V2 = CIA alibi.

 

Seriously?

 

Yeah and IP's are so hard to spoof.

The tools the US intel agency admitted they "lost" included software that could make a hack appear that it was coming from a different country.

Makes you squint sometimes talking to them, doesn't it?

 

Waiting for the canned response ... "17 separate intel" ... A 17 (cough) relying on the same Crowdstrike report (cough). Crowdstrike probably used a highlighter on that IP address to make sure it grabbed Clapper / Brennans attention.

 

As usual alt right conspiracy theories never have a single shred of credible evidence to support them.

 

Yes and you know they're different because you asked him and he told you. Genius.

Maybe you should ask Putin if he interfered in the election. That would nail him to the wall for sure.

 

So in your bizarre conspiracy the original Guccifer somehow has all of the equipment as well as unfettered and unlimited access to the internet from within his prison cell with no monitoring whatsoever?



It never occurred to you that the use of "2.0" would refer to someone imitating the original Guccifer because that NEVER happens on the internet!



There are no other hackers capable of doing what Guccifer did according to the alt right brainiacs who came up with this conspiracy that you are gullible enough to swallow?

 

Not a theory. Crowdstrike provided the IP address to "17 separate intel agencies". That FACT ain't never gonna change. Assange published the CIA "spoofing tool" and that FACT ain't never gonna change. The CIA pressed congress / DOJ into labelling Wiki / Assange as a "non state hostile foreign intelligence service" an that FACT ain't never gonna change. Are the "17 separate intel agencies" investigating Imran Awan? Has the CIA retrieved the Pakistani IP address(es) that Awan transfered TERABYTES of GOVERNMENT secure server contents too? "Phishing" of Podestas emails was a national security issue ... but not congressional intelligence committee emails, files, and docs? The CIA got 702 re-authorized, but they still want Assange. No one cared who "phished" Podesta ... not even the DNC.

 

Guccifer has access to a telephone, and has visitors. He can pass on computer codes, and reveal back doors he's installed or found to anyone on the planet. The IP address for V2 is whatever the CIA "says" it is. Assange becomes that "non state adversary" and Russians are behind it all ... just like the DNC and Crowdstrike has claimed all along. Too convenient.

 

Repeating the same alt right conspiracy fallacy does not make it any less of a conspiracy fallacy.

 

Your knowledge of how hacking actually works is woefully lacking.

 

Point out which assertion is false.

 

My knowledge is excellent. I for instance understand that "Phishing" isn't hacking at all. A 4th grader could have fooled Podesta into giving up his password.

 

All of them.

 

You could not be more wrong if you tried! Phishing is just a different form of hacking since BOTH are used to obtain data that the individual doing the phishing/hacking would otherwise not have access to because it is protected by passwords and/or firewalls.

To put it layman's turns if you had a personal diary in your house someone duping you into given them your front door key would be phishing while another person picking the lock on your front door would be hacking but in BOTH instances they get hold of your diary.

 

They only got Podesta. Stupid, naive Podesta. No intelligence service broke the servers incryption, or breached a system firewall. Podesta wasn't targeted by a Russian computer wizard, he received a "spoofed" email. "Spoofed" just like the Guccifer 2 IP address that was "recovered". https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...cia-director-and-other-high-ranking-officials

 

Your lack of knowledge on this subject has already been exposed. No amount of triggered whataboutism on your part is going to erase that post.

 

My knowledge is flawless. Unless you can post a source that confirms Podesta was targeted, and victimized by a sophisticated state sponsored cyber attack. You have a "spoofed" IP address provided by Crowdstrike as the source of the phony email. You have "17 separate intel agencies" who blindly accepted Crowdstrikes claim. You have a 15 yr old in the UK accessing CIA networks more easily than ordering a Dominos pizza.

 

You knowledge is severely lacking when it comes to hacking as was proven in the threads above.

 

Not really. Podesta was "phished" period. A "spoofed" email was sent from a "spoofed" address. You're free to post any source who disputes that assessment. Subsequent hacking, allegedly conducted by the same unknown person(s) based solely on an IP address that was "spoofed" before, proves nothing. Then there's this. http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/07/m...n-written-until-after-dnc-knew-it-was-hacked/ Incompetence and stupidity abounded. A 4th grader could have "phished" Podesta. This is the 2nd link I've posted, and I have a 3rd that details the simplistic "spoofed" email sent to Podesta. Nothing related to the DNC hack suggests any degree of sophistication.

 

No amount of semantic squirming is going to alter the fact that your knowledge of hacking is virtually nonexistent.

 

There's no semantics ... "phished" period. There's also no citation that suggests otherwise in any of your replies, or anywhere on this thread. The IP address that was attached to the "phished" email was traced to www. Bit.ly .com ... a service that modifies (abreviates) actual web addresses. Do you have a link that indicates www Bit.ly .com confirmed Guccifer 2 sent the "phished" email from a Russian facility? See, if only a "partial" IP was recovered it's almost worthless. Did our intel services conclude the IP's were "similar" or "identical"? "High degree of certainty" isn't really very high at all is it? Billions of IP's ... 1 digit disparity means a lot.

 

The smart move would be to quit while you are only this far behind.