http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/346468-why-the-lates...
Your point two is is based on an embarrassingly incorrect assumption.
Your point two is is based on an embarrassingly incorrect assumption.
I agree it makes it less likely because the files could have been copied multiple times which could change the metadata, but that doesn’t prove definitively that they were.
Only saying that if they were dumb enough to do that they may have been dumb enough to go directly too.
Show me where in the indictment it talks about that? I only saw a reference to a much smaller number of emails.
Right, because you can't prove a negative.