Hacker News Reader

Comment by busterarm | Hacker News Reader

I mean, CrowdStrike are supposedly experts and their "proof" of Russian involvement in the DNC hack was complete bullshit[1], except "trust us, guys, we promise." Their president even had to testify in Congress to that effect admitting so.

If they could get away with that, might as well anyone should try to.

[1]: Some spurious web request logs probing for PHP vulnerabilities leading back to Russian IPs that literally everyone also would have in their logs (as I do for every website I've operated ever).

View on HN

That is a tiny fraction of the stated evidence. Notably, there was specific known malware installed on DNC computers communicating with IP addresses in Russia.

I don't think the evidence released is overwhelming, but it's much more than you've suggested.

[1] https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democ...

Their evidence was completely inconclusive of anything and they stated so in front of Congress.

Calvinball. That wasn't your argument; it was that the evidence was "Some spurious web request logs probing for PHP vulnerabilities leading back to Russian IPs that literally everyone also would have in their logs". Turns out, no.

Their evidence consisted of more than web server logs. I personally don't think their claims matched their evidence but they did provide details about the exploits found, corroborated by the FBI. The primary implant found on the DNC network had been linked by multiple other security companies to other hacks that were almost definitely carried out by Russia-affiliated hackers. These links have been well-documented and have supporting links in the Wikipedia article.

I'm much more in-the-know and connected to real world whitehats and blackhats than not just your average person but also your average infosec person. It's complete bullshit.

You blame CrowdStrike for saying "trust us, we're experts", and then when someone argues with you, you say "trust me, I'm an expert".

No not at all. Unlike CrowdStrike, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. You can believe me or not and I don't care.

I've got my bonafides and I have no intention of doxxing myself. There's a lot of very clued in people on this board in lots of areas and nobody really owes you anything or needs to explain themselves. You can listen or not, it's up to you.

This would be more credible if you hadn't tried to present a technical argument about Crowdstrike's analysis that was trivially refuted in a 2-line reply.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com