Slashdot Mirror
Computer Scientists Believe a Trump Server Was Communicating With a Russian Bank (slate.com)
In light of the Democratic National Committee hack by the Russians earlier this year, a "tightly knit community of computer scientists" working in a variety of fields came up with the hypothesis, "which they set out to rigorously test: If the Russians were worming their way into the DNC, they might very well be attacking other entities central to the presidential campaign, including Donald Trump's many servers." In late July, one of the scientists who asked to be referred to as Tea Leaves discovered possible malware emanating from Russia, with the destination domain having Trump in its name. What the researcher saw "was a bank in Moscow that kept irregularly pinging a server registered to the Trump Organization on Fifth Avenue": Slate Magazine reports: More data was needed, so he began carefully keeping logs of the Trump server's DNS activity. As he collected the logs, he would circulate them in periodic batches to colleagues in the cybersecurity world. Six of them began scrutinizing them for clues. The researchers quickly dismissed their initial fear that the logs represented a malware attack. The communication wasn't the work of bots. The irregular pattern of server lookups actually resembled the pattern of human conversation -- conversations that began during office hours in New York and continued during office hours in Moscow. It dawned on the researchers that this wasn't an attack, but a sustained relationship between a server registered to the Trump Organization and two servers registered to an entity called Alfa Bank. The server was first registered to Trump's business in 2009 and was set up to run consumer marketing campaigns. It had a history of sending mass emails on behalf of Trump-branded properties and products. Researchers were ultimately convinced that the server indeed belonged to Trump. But now this capacious server handled a strangely small load of traffic, such a small load that it would be hard for a company to justify the expense and trouble it would take to maintain it. That wasn't the only oddity. When the researchers pinged the server, they received error messages. They concluded that the server was set to accept only incoming communication from a very small handful of IP addresses. A small portion of the logs showed communication with a server belonging to Michigan-based Spectrum Health.
Hardly. The libs are expecting a massive, ground-shifting victory. It's just that Trump is always good copy. Even people who hate him love to read about him, and pass stuff along.
It's like I said to my sister the other day; I can't wait for November 9 so I can stop obsessing about Trump and start obsessing about the new Harry Potter movie.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I have customers with nearly-abandoned dedicated servers on their own IPs and with some project-related whitelist rules that act very much like what's described in the summary. Those servers do things like wasting their time checking for updates from some custom module authors (some overseas), and some try to connect to long-gone services that have had their domains scooped up by (ready?) Russian typo-squatters and the like, but with IPs that resolve somewhere else entirely because they've been re-assigned to entirely different companies. And no, nobody dares to approve changing the configuration on these legacy servers ... and they keep paying to keep them online, despite the crickets chirping instead of activity on whatever legacy task they once did.
There are all sorts of reasons this sort of behavior might materialize. You know, sort of like there might be all sorts of reasons that Huma Abedin's trove of email - in the hundreds of thousands - might bey on her creepy, estranged husband's laptop. I'm sorry, did I use her name? Woopsie! Hillary Clinton now calls her "a staffer."
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
FTA: "Put differently, the logs suggested that Trump and Alfa had configured something like a digital hotline connecting the two entities, shutting out the rest of the world, and designed to obscure its own existence." Oh, you mean like the SSH setup I have for all my servers to only listen to known IPs for shell access? Uh, yeah, no kidding. Geez, politics can make people so stupid.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
I heard Trump used Internet Explorer once, too.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Turns out it was Huma using Yahoo, and Podesta getting phished... No Russians involved, just plain old incompetence.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
What a great source. /s
It's been part of their modus operandi from day one. Whenever they're caught lying or committing crimes, they try to deflect the blame to someone else or change the topic into an attack on Trump or their accusers. The Russia boogeyman is a favorite for them.
It's so tired by now, and they've been caught lying so many times (pretty much every time they open their mouths, they're lying) that nobody believes a thing they say. The DNC could say the sun rose this morning and I'd still check out my window to verify.
I trust Russia MORE than I trust the DNC. If Trump is in good with them, then good for him.
To hell with Hillary and her cronies.
Pure, unadulterated idiocy. ^^^^^
What if they have dirt on Trump?
I've been blown away how far the republican party has flipped on the russians so far.
It would explain why they put so many resources into hacking, modifying* and leaking DNC emails.
*The first leaks had cyrrilic usernames from editing and russian address hyperlinks. So everything from wikileaks after those is suspect. We shouldn't have told them we could identify the documents as fake so quickly. But we are americans and not crafty like the british during world war 2.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Are you as knowledgeable about the Clinton foundation dealings with Russia? Or are you just very selective in your outrage?
Hey, Slashdot gets visited by Russian IP addresses too! Maybe Slashdot is working with Putin to leak Clinton's E-mails as well?
Seriously, this bullshit coming from Clinton and her minions only shows how desperate they are.
You guys nominated someone under criminal investigation by the FBI. The only people on earth who can't talk about how shitty Trump is are Clinton supporters.
While this is certainly interesting and deserves attention (I voted it up in the firehose), it's unlikely to be of any use during the campaign.
For one, the server was registered in 2009 and is unlikely to be anything related to the elections. Trump's business is pretty big, and he has contacts all over the world.
(For comparison, the Podesta group is registered with the U.S. government as a lobbyist for Sberbank. Google "Podesta Russia" for lots of links and info.)
For another, if it's nefarious it's more likely to be some sort of mole or agent within Trump's organization. Again, Trump's business is huge, and there are probably one or more foreign government agents working for him (also in Google, Facebook, and a hundred other big organizations).
Also, there might be a perfectly reasonable explanation. We should wait for the Trump campaign explanation, then see if their explanation seems reasonable. God only knows how many times we've done that for the Clintons!
And finally, it might be too little too late. Word on the street is that Clinton will be stepping down on Tuesday (tomorrow), Veritas is planning a "blockbuster" drop this week, Wikieaks is about to start phase three of its election coverage, and internal leaks from the campaign indicate that Hillary is coming apart at the seams: binge drinking, uncontrolled anger, and poor judgement in general.
As the saying goes, it's not over until its over.
Let's just wait for the election.
It's like I said to my sister the other day; I can't wait for November 9 so I can stop obsessing about Trump and start obsessing about the new Harry Potter movie.
Problem is Trump won't go away post-election. If he wins it will be worse than this, and if he loses he starts Trump media and doubles down on the loose talk and continual lies.
You're either a Russian or an idiot.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The evidence we're given is this:
"What the researcher saw "was a bank in Moscow that kept irregularly pinging a server registered to the Trump Organization on Fifth Avenue": "
A ping is an ICMP echo request. They can have data, but it's the same both ways and it's generally nothing meaningful. I get random pings and crap from everywhere, including Russia, China, etc. along with port scans and everything else. Frankly this is utter BS without more evidence than a random server responding to some pings and not others.
It's also not clear how they were able to spy on this traffic without working at an ISP (where spying on your customers is generally frowned upon). But if they were in the middle of this, they could simply have inserted their own pings by spoofing the source address of some traffic. The article was a sad waste of time. There are lots of allegations that are based on nothing at all.
Lol. Lets have the names of these fellows so we can validate their illeaglally gathered insubstantial evidence.
Nah, it's worse than that, looks like they were sniffing traffic at either the ISP of one of the two endpoints or a backbone.
If there were something here, you'd expect them to talk about finding data in the ICMP echo requests. You'd expect them to communicate over something normal like SSH. You'd expect some evidence that there was something illegal or improper going on here (other than, y'know, spying on other people's network traffic....).
Their audience is apparently morons who don't know what a ping is.
It really is silly season. The bottom line is that Trump is the "fuck you, oligarchy" candidate. We know he's the last chance for a long, long time, if ever, to fuck with the oligarchs. That is why he is being supported. Hillary is the tool of the oligarchy.
Russia is no threat because they aren't suicidal, and do you really think Trump is in their pocket? Get real.
Putin is a good contrast to the feckless current occupant of the White House. That's why he keeps coming up. More a testament to how shitty a leader Obama is than any positive qualities of Putin. Putin has gotten the better of him in every exchange during the last 8 years.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
You have to be totally insane to think Russians possibly having malware in some bank that tried to protect itself to begin with, is anything even CLOSE to the seriousness of the Secretary of State ignoring multiple warnings about how insecure a personal email server was when inevitably she'd be sending top secret material over email...
Hillary brought all of her ills on herself and the blowback from it is not yet a hundredth of what it should be. Every single person who knows anything about computer security should be utterly ashamed at ever supporting her actions, and the fact that so many still support her makes me think there is no real hope ever for comprehensive computer security. The system is rotten to the core, many computer "professionals" willing to compromise a systems integrity at the drop of a hat.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Problem is Trump won't go away post-election. If he wins it will be worse than this, and if he loses he starts Trump media and doubles down on the loose talk and continual lies.
Of course Trump won't go away, just like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi won't go away even if we take away all of ISIS's territory unless we kill him (al-Baghdadi, I mean). But he'll become a lot less important.
What fuels the fire of interest in Trump, even among people who aren't particularly interested in reality TV, is the possibility he might become president. Take that off the table, and becomes a lot less interesting except to a small core of true believers. I guess a lot depends on how decisively he loses. That'll determine whether his wing of the Republican party is a force to be reckoned with, or just another fringe group.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
How the fuck did these guys get between the Trump server and the DNS server making the queries? (Yes, I RTFA.) Did these guys have a MITM between Trump's server and the bank? Have they compromised Trump's server? Have they breached the NSA's Internet archive? Consider the possibility that Trump, as a billionaire, might have business and/or accounts somewhere other than within the USA. The scariest thing about this post is the innuendo and the assumptions made, and the lack of an explanation of how this data was collected.
Ahem ...
Federal Judge Allows Suit Against Trump University to Proceed
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/03/us/politics/trump-university-case.html
Reminder: Donald Trump due in court after Election Day on child rape and racketeering charges
https://www.rawstory.com/2016/10/reminder-donald-trump-due-in-court-after-election-day-on-child-rape-and-racketeering-charges/
A Veteran Spy Has Given the FBI Information Alleging a Russian Operation to Cultivate Donald Trump
"It started off as a fairly general inquiry," says the former spook, who asks not to be identified. But when he dug into Trump, he notes, he came across troubling information indicating connections between Trump and the Russian government. According to his sources, he says, "there was an established exchange of information between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin of mutual benefit."
It maintained that Trump "and his inner circle have accepted a regular flow of intelligence from the Kremlin, including on his Democratic and other political rivals." It claimed that Russian intelligence had "compromised" Trump during his visits to Moscow and could "blackmail him."
Here's an extensive timeline of Trump's connections to the Kremlin: https://grabby.me/timeline?uui...
Is it Sberbank, Russia’s biggest financial institution, and the one that The Podesta Group is a registered lobbyist for?
You know, the "Hillary Clinton inner circle" Podestas? Of Wikileaks fame?
Oh, it seems to be a different bank.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
Do you see anyone on the ticket that isn't a scoundrel? Has there been any presidential candidate in decades who wasnt a scoundrel?
What some want in a candidate comes along maybe once or twice in a nation's history, and if that was what someone was looking for, they sure wouldn't find it in a real estate huckster, and let's not even get started on the third party candidates.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
the story at slate that i read says nothing about icmp, it talks exclusively about DNS lookups, incuding after the trump server admin team changed the authoratative host name of the server in question.
unless somebody in Russia is clairvoyant, or the thousands of recorded transactions were somehow faked, it means somebody in the trump server admin team contacted Alfa bank's admin team, and gave them the new resolution host data. It was not up long enough for normal record proliferaton to be accounable for allfa getting the updated record.
again, "ping" used by the journalist just means "contacted", not an actual ICMP connectivity test stream.
They were supposedly looking at DNS query data only, and noticed the activity, after looking to see if russian hackers were infiltating GOP servers like they had purportedly infiltrated DNC servers.
Well we know you're not on Trump's, because his campaign doesn't have enough money.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
HRC is corrupt as fuck, the only thing is she considers business as usual what we plebes see as corrupt.
Trump is corrupt as fuck, but he hasn't been investigated for 30 years. Not to mention Trump is a 100% asshole who shouldn't even be a choice. Dafuq R-tarded, you can't beat this asshole in a primary? Methinks you need to rethink some fundamental principals. Hint: Neither Ted Cruz nor Marco Rubio are your white knights on white horses running in to save the day.
I finally voted today, went for Johnson. Yeah, he's a pothead who doesn't know what Aleppo is. But IMHO he's our best chance of not impeaching a president in the next 4 years.
This shouldn't be surprising. The only foreign country Trump praises is Russia, every traditional US ally he alienates in one form or another while Russia has shown itself directly antagonistic to Western interests and yet he still heaps praise on them. The only foreign political leader Trump ever praises is Putin. Members of his campaign staff have ties to Putin. Now we have the possibility of sketchy communications between Russia and Trump's campaign.
I loath conspiracy theories but if there was ever the case to made for one it would be a Trump / Russia one.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
A ping is an ICMP echo request.
Thanks for the 411 Rain Man. :-)
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Hillary's emails have been covered ad nauseum on this site. Not sure what you're on about.
The NY Times investigation referred to in the Slate article has now been released. I'm guessing Slate pushed them out a bit quicker than they'd hoped.
Lots of interesting things in the article, but they feel there's insufficient evidence to claim a link between the Trump server and Alfa.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html
You're right that they talk about DNS queries, but I'm pretty sure this is an actual ICMP echo:
It can also be pretty easily explained by having a bunch of normal people on PCs behind a corporate firewall that doesn't accept traffic. Which makes sense because when they talk to the people, we find this:
So, I'm still saying this looks like BS to me. Don't get me wrong, it's entirely possible that some Russian hacked something somewhere. I just don't buy there being a story here without more evidence than a few stray DNS queries.
BTW, I will say that you may be right inasmuch as your arguing that nobody here MITM'd them.
Has there been any presidential candidate in decades who wasnt a scoundrel?
I know I'm going to get modded down for this, but yes: Barack Hussein Obama.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
FUCK YOU dugancent
https://slashdot.org/~dugancent
Yeah... a real estate developer and entrepenuer is a communist.
That's as stupid as painting Putin as a communist.
I wonder if you were still alive when the Russians were still communist.
Who's next? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet?
Billionaire blacklist?
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Either this is a very confabulated story or someone at an NSA-level agency is talking.
Nah. Much of the world's DNS traffic is passively monitored by ISPs, IXPs, ccTLD operators, etc. to be compiled and analyzed for research purposes. DNSDB is one such effort, there are others.
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
Without having read TFA, often even as a network engineer, I'll use the term "ping" even when not referring to ICMP. For example, I'll refer to an SNMP walk (of any kind) as a "ping".
Still though, this doesn't come off as suspicious to me at all. Since when is it odd or otherwise unusual that a server belonging to a billionaire talks to a server belonging to a bank in a foreign country? That's like saying that it's odd that there's dog piss on a fire hydrant.
Aleppo is someone else's civil war. You seem to want to cry crocodile tears over it. Are you willing to shed your own blood over it?
Ukraine was a dick move but it was still largely a regional thing.
So far, the biggest threat to western security seems to be from the idiot that wants to impose a no fly zone where the Russians are already entrenched and have SAMs.
Those horses are out of the barn already. That pooch has already been screwed.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Yes, love him or hate him he was a nice break from sex scandals.
The DNC were morons for letting Clinton anywhere near the nomination. It's like they and she thinks she's entitled. Forget about all of the people that haven't stopped hating her since she was first lady.
She's going to bring people together? You have to be a partisan dope to believe that.
Whatever happens election day, I won't stop ridiculing whoever wins. =P
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
But you really should check facts. Obama's main mentors were Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright. He was a community organizer going into politics modeling his career after Saul Alinsky. He was elected to the Senate after smearing a person raising his family, including an autistic child, alone after his ex-wife dumped them and ran back to Hollywood (Jerri Ryan). He was useless as a Senator except to act as the standard Democratic yes-man. He repeats all the same talking points as Hillary and is on the same plan. The plan is "Fuck the USA and bring in the communism".
You being ignorant does not make Obama good, it makes you ignorant.
There's also some stuff about DNS queries, but when they actually talk to the bank, someone was spamming something about a Trump property. So the easiest explanation here is a corporate firewall that rejects their pings and scans and a few people on the inside clicking spam.
So I will take part of that back, I don't like spammers and Trump should fire whatever marketing group was doing that to promote his place.
Yeah... the "Abe Lincoln defence" was a classic. It's a shame that no one was there to declare "I knew Abe, and you're no Abe."
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Maybe you should bring up the email server again... or perhaps Benghazi... ironic that you equate the birther movement with ignorance btw.
After all these years of visiting this site, I'm pretty much ready to go away and get my news from other sites. Slashdot has become a garbage propaganda site. It's really sad what happened to it. First, Timothy started his SJW crusade and propaganda push and now others have picked the same tack. There's really no point to come on here.
There's no real evidence of Hillary's lies,
You don't think Congressional testimony counts as evidence?
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Without having read TFA, often even as a network engineer, I'll use the term "ping" even when not referring to ICMP. For example, I'll refer to an SNMP walk (of any kind) as a "ping".
Exactly. The term 'ping' may appear unfortunate to those of us who know what the ICMP protocol actually is, but it'll be suitably edgy to a tech-ignorant audience who need to feel that the writer actually knows what he's talking about.
Still though, this doesn't come off as suspicious to me at all. Since when is it odd or otherwise unusual that a server belonging to a billionaire talks to a server belonging to a bank in a foreign country?
When the bank is one of only a very few addresses the server communicates with.
Look, it's circumstantial at best, no more of a smoking gun than any number of other things. But if I were a US-based journalist, I'd consider it worth digging into. I don't know that I'd publish something based on the logs alone, but I would certainly be willing to follow wherever they lead. Even if the conclusion is that Trump has investments in Russian companies, that's a notable fact, given his constant and explicit denial that he has any financial ties to Russia.
That's like saying that it's odd that there's dog piss on a fire hydrant.
Kind of. It's more like saying it's odd that this dog doesn't seem to want to piss anywhere except at this particular fire hydrant, which he insists he would never piss on if you gave him a thousand years and a fire hose.
So yeah, the circumstances are curious, but there's nothing here that would make me jump out of my chair and shout, 'Aha!!!' And trust me, I'd be the first to do that if it took Trump down a notch.
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
The story also says that they couldn't ping the server but a particular server in Russia and a few elsewhere in the US could. ICMP traffic isn't broadcasted nor 'passively monitored'.
DNS is cached aggressively at most if not all gateway routers, sure you can aggregate some (anonymous) data about DNS requests but this talks about an internal machine frequently requesting a particular DNS address with specific time periods. At best, you can say a particular NETWORK requested a DNS address a few times per day (whenever the TTL expires). They are pinpointing it to minutes of the day.
They knew this particular server handled a 'small load of traffic'. Again, you can't "see" how much traffic a server handles without either controlling it or control ALL points it traverses outside of it.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Hilary Clinton is pretty obviously the target if a multi-billion dollar character assassination program. You might argue that she deserves it, but if the best that 30 years of non-stop attacks could come up with is an email server and an error of judgement in Benghazi of the sort Bush Jr made repeatably then I say bring her on. I don't think Jesus Christ could survive the onslaught she has.
Put another way: Somebody with a lot of money and power _really_ doesn't want her to be president. Put that in your corn cob and smoke it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
@Aleppo is someone else's civil war.
No it's how Putin got his Mediterranean base, by propping up Assad's regime. Which gives him control of the east-west routes across which middle Asian oil pipelines travel. (He go control of the Baku pipeline when he invaded Georgia).
@Ukraine was a dick move but it was still largely a regional thing.
No, it gave him Crimea which gives him Azov sea, and dominance in the Black sea, and an threat surface to Turkey's eastern provinces.
Either you're a astroturfer or just plain ignorant, I suspect Trump to be a dummy with a bromance for Putin, and a traitor to his country.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
What next? Physicists weighing in on Hillary's email server?
Yeah... the "Abe Lincoln defence" was a classic. It's a shame that no one was there to declare "I knew Abe, and you're no Abe."
The Abe Lincoln comment was purely about having a private opinion about something and having a public position that more aligns with the group that you are talking to. The point that she was making was that Lincoln campaigned and courted different groups with slightly different messages tweaked for each group.
The problem is that nuanced reasoning goes over the head of both the media and most of the general public...
and we're just scratching the surface of Trump's Russian ties, whereas we've been over Hilary's emails for nigh on a decade now. Thing is, _everybody_ in Washington was doing this. Collin Powell proved as much.
Hell, that was one of the most badass things to come out of this. Hilary was asked if it was Colin's idea to run the server and she said no, it was her responsibility. A few weeks later Wikileaks dumped emails showing it _was_ Powell suggesting it. I've yet to see HRC get an ounce of credit for shielding Powell and the loyalty and shear brass balls it showed.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
right? Both he and his father were slum lords for Christ sakes. Seriously. One of the Guthrie's (Woody I think) had a song about Frank Trump.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Some Foos are not Bars. Therefore, no Foos are Bars. T/F?
Trump DDoS's you?
In other news, this has been another election cycle brought to you by the folks masquerading as the NYSE, NASDAQ, SWIFT and their associated manifestations.
WW3 will be along shortly. Don't fret whoever gets elected. The script has already been written at least a few chapters past November.
Either Trump is in the pay of Russia, or he's a dangerous nut who will start a war with Russia. It can't be both. But the Hillary campaign is flailing wildly as she loses, so they will claim anything, no matter how contradictory.
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
No your comment is pure unadulterated idiocy. Go learn what hyperbole means.
Hmmm. Hyper-bole. I know that "bole" is a tree trunk, and that "hyper" is when a kid is running around and screaming cause his mom won't smack him and tell him to settle down.
So, with those two items in mind, "hyper-bole" seems to be referring to that scene in that elf movie where the trolls were getting the shit kicked out of them by the walking forest. That Treebeard fellow was awesome, by the way.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
I'm sure everyone will give Trump the same benefit of the doubt that they give Hillary.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Citation please on the modifying. Wikileaks is one of the few true old-style journalist organizations.
If anything, Clinton is big business' Manchurian Candidate. At best Trump will be "George W. Bush II", I don't see him completing much of anything which may be a good thing for a change. The wall won't be built even if he wanted to WJC and GWB already tried it, at best it will create some jobs in a small Texas town and that will be the height of it's success. ObamaCare will collapse with or without him. Hillary will be investigated and exonerated regardless (since an investigation requires Congress, not a President) and I'm not sure what the rest of his platform is, if he even has any.
The Middle East will continue being a mess, with a little bit of luck, he's incompetent enough after all, Russia will continue to expand their control in the region with as much success and damage to their own image as the repeated US invasions in the region caused. The Korea's will continue to be at war and 'the bomb' and any of their efforts will continue to be a 'success' in NK media alone.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
I'm not agreeing with GP, buuuut...
...That's as stupid as painting Putin as a communist.
To be fair, Putin was a member of the party for 20 years.
“I was not, as you know, a party member by necessity,” [Putin] said. “I liked Communist and socialist ideas very much and I like them still.”
...Who's next? Bill Gates? Warren Buffet?
Buffet came first as a communist. I remember Republicans shouting that over the last 8 years.
SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
Their audience is apparently morons who don't know what a ping is.
Well, as an actual software developer who has worked with network protocols I can assure you that there are lots of different types of ping, TCP ping, etc.
Furthermore, those in doubt can just check the RFC for ICMP and discover that it includes echo packets with an arbitrary payload. That should get a person one dim lightbulb away from realizing that you can tunnel other things on top of ICMP, and then from there they might do a search of the interwebs and discover that is old hat.
The pedants in this article are mostly a bunch of tools who don't know an ICMP echo packet from a Russian in a fur hat! Worse, they don't know a Russian ICMP packet in a squirrel toupee from a Brazilian SSH attack!
So even though they're possibly not even talking about ICMP, if they were it would all make sense. But DNS is also used for tunnels, so that's probably what it really is. Also, DNS is more likely to make it into logs that people have legit access to and aren't private.
You think someone that "should have been indicted" is the best choice?
I've said many times that I voted for Jill Stein of the Green Party in 2012, and plan to this time as well. I don't even agree with most of their platform. But she at least is an honest person. I would much rather have an honest person filling that office than either Trump or Hillary.
And, no, I don't vote Libertarian because that party has worse a platform than the Greens do.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
How do you manage to be wrong in multiple ways on both points you claim?
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Do any of you guys remember one of the original Defcon's, where Dan Farmer (I think?) was talking about hiding payloads in the white space of DNS packets?
This quote from the article made me think about that.
"Earlier this month, the group of computer scientists passed the logs to Paul Vixie. In the world of DNS experts, there’s no higher authority. Vixie wrote central strands of the DNS code that makes the internet work.
---->After studying the logs, he concluded, “The parties were communicating in a secretive fashion. The operative word is secretive. This is more akin to what criminal syndicates do if they are putting together a project.” Put differently, the logs suggested that Trump and Alfa had configured something like a digital hotline connecting the two entities, shutting out the rest of the world, and designed to obscure its own existence. ---------
Wait what? One of the bank's computers was irregularly pinging Turmp's server and that was somehow his fault?
So the malware on Spectrum Health's server is perhaps something that the scanner employed did not find.
I mean, I'm not a conspiracy fan, but them not finding anything only tells me they didn't find anything. You can't expect them to prove a negative, but the second most likely explanation isn't "nothing," but rather routine malware. So their assurance that it is not routine malware, combined with not finding anything, makes me not trust that host at all. Their server is probably totally p0wned.
Has there been any presidential candidate in decades who wasnt a scoundrel?
Yes. Working backwards: Obama (in 2008, at least), McCain, Kerry, W (douche who went AWOL and didn't have much of a vocabulary, but not a scoundrel), Gore, Dole, Reagan, Dukakis, Mondale (maybe), Carter. That's most of the major party candidates going back almost 40 years, and I don't think any of them qualify as scoundrels or bad people, no matter how little I agreed with some of them. You can make a case a lot more easily for both Clintons, Trump, Bush 41, and Romney (which I say despite kind of liking one of them and accepting another), but that means most major candidates are not scoundrels.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
I have been AC here since the first year of operation. There is a percentage of slashdot users which judge posts largely by who said it and not on content. Unfortunately that group is self-reinforcing and has grown over the years. Now getting a popular username modded troll or an AC modded up is a rare sight.
Someone tell Hillary's minions that this isn't going to work.
Did you know the Clinton Foundation is a top rated charity that does real good work? I don't think there is any prohibition on charities collecting money from anybody that will give! Actually most people think, if an evil group gives some money to charity to make themselves look good... the charity might do some real good with that money!
Nice straw man, but the US policy in Syria doesn't require a bunch of volunteers to go and shed their own blood.
It calls for politicians to bomb more stuff, or not, and to authorize additional special operators, or not.
Well, they were contacted afterwards. If they know that a server is allegedly communicating with Russia, it's pretty easy to see who the server is talking to with a simple tcpdump from something upstream. So that should be hard to miss.
Now yes, cleaning up an infection is one thing. But missing something like that entirely should be pretty hard if they had actual professional help.
I've had even less clueful people catch a hacked AMI recently because it was sending data off somewhere unknown in the not so distant past, so I'm going to have a hard time saying it was entirely missed.
Her server wasn't hacked, the State Department's was. The idea that she created a risk is silly. In a more perfect world it would be true, but security is so awful in government it simply isn't true in the real world.
And where are all those Colin Powell emails? Oh right, he didn't use his own server he had hired people to secure, he used a freakin' consumer email from a major provider and would never even be notified if they were hacked.
Most of the Bush administration used the RNC's email server, and they deleted all the emails.
People who actually follow email scandals over time notice some significant differences, mostly in that Clinton's setup was more secure, and also that she deleted a lower percentage of her emails that the median politician in the past 15 years.
Bill Clinton stuck to phone calls and refused email because he didn't want to delete it, or to not delete it. Maybe that is what we should expect, because we're too childish and partisan to allow them to use the tools the way others do.
I can say that as somebody who has been following email scandals since the days when the news had to explain email, it really is a less important issue than a foreign government trying to tamper with our elections. That is new territory and shows we're not at risk of a new Cold War but already years into one.
Oh, you seem so sure... but things have really been falling apart in the polls, which are biased left to begin with.
See you on the 8th ;)
No, you probably won't. I vote early, like any sane person. Much less chance for the GOP to suppress my vote if I cast it before election day.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
No that's the point she spinned it into. If that had been her point, and if her actions backed it up, it would be totally fine. But her actions show that her public vs private opinions are not just "slightly different messages tweaked for each group" but outright contradictions and falsehoods. You can't tell people publicly that one of your positions is to "uphold the rule of law, protect our borders and national security" (that's on her website) while telling people in speeches "My dream is a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders." That's not nuance. That's not targeting. That means she's blatantly lying to one group or the other.
If you were spoofing the pings, you'd likely not get a response to record since you've sent your return address to presumably be one that you don't have.
http://motherboard.vice.com/re...
"The metadata in the leaked documents are perhaps most revealing: one dumped document was modified using Russian language settings, by a user named âoeÐÐÐÐÐÑ ÐÐмÑfнÐоÐÐÑ,â a code name referring to the founder of the Soviet Secret Police, the Cheka, memorialised in a 15-ton iron statue in front of the old KGB headquarters during Soviet times. The original intruders made other errors: one leaked document included hyperlink error messages in Cyrillic, the result of editing the file on a computer with Russian language settings. After this mistake became public, the intruders removed the Cyrillic information from the metadata in the next dump and carefully used made-up user names from different world regions, thereby confirming they had made a mistake in the first round. "
Good enough?
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Ping means to "check with" in regular English. No big deal. Is Bob coming to lunch Friday? I don't know. Ping him and let us know.
Learn to love Alaska
But why is it that the dog that belongs to your neighbors old buddy on the other side of town is always pissing on the hydrant in your yard? (Did I mention that you and your neighbor don't exactly get along?)
Rule 35 of the internet: "If it can be hacked, it will be". - Charles Stross
This article is embarrassing. It should make you sad.
I tend to lean right wing, but I really hated most right wingers. Conspiracy kookery, idiocy, you name it. It's a cess pit of shit and groupthink.
I honestly thought most left wingers were more reasonable, if wrong on many subjects.
I have now learned I was wrong, and left wingers are as stupid, gullible, and conspiracy minded as right wingers. It's absolutely fucking ridiculous. Who reads this nonsense and actually think it means anything?
Yes. Donald Trump wanted to communicate with the Russians, and communications is so hard nowadays that his only option was to setup this honeypot of a server with some obscure connection that "pings" (lol) a Russian server oddly. Makes total sense.
ffs. What a god damn joke this election is.
Remember that there are still people who believe that Charlie Chaplin (that guy who was a far more successful capitalist than Trump) was one because McCarthy and crew accused him of it.
You know the policy?
Then tell us, and more importantly tell people in Washington because they don't know either. It's seat of the pants while on fire "policy" being allied with a bunch one day and bombing them the next. Early on it seemed to be about working even with Daash/ISIL against Assad. Now it's working both for and against Assad, plus for the Kurds but against them if Turkey is involved.
Gangsters up to no good yes, but look at Hillary, the bitch uses email! Burn her!
I think this has been the most stupid Presidential race ever.
The hacks have exposed a ton of crap. Possible evidence of us selling weapons to Isis in Libya (RIP Vile Rat) and trying to claw them back, they faked violence at the Trump rallies (and blamed Bernie), they were talking about making hay of Trump's "bromance" with Putin long ago, they utterly shafted Bernie in every way. He even had people give him fake support just to steal his voters back at the end. They faked a Craigslist ad for Trump that was disgustingly sexist. Nobody there trusts each other. Carlos Danger (Anthony Wiener's) ways were known long ago, he appears to have gotten leaked classified info from his wife, top Clinton aide Huma, enough so that Huma sent emails from Hillary's device and vice versa, also forwarding classified things to webmail (Yahoo, Gmail). They talk about being especially worried about the sensitive pic of North Korea that was in her emails. They talk about quid pro quo to declassify one of the items she sent retroactively. In 2010, they talk about "how we just changed an entire Governor's race in 48 hours--without any fingerprints." They discuss an email from "Diane Reynolds" (Chelsea Clinton) about how the apple doesn't fall from the tree: you get a kiss on the cheek, then stabbed in the front and in the back. Hillary, if you're wondering, goes by "Evergreen" and "hrod" among other things. I haven't even covered the half of things, either. Oh, and FYI, some of that is from the FBI's response to FOIA requests, the rest is from the Podesta email dumps, which as we all should know, can be cryptographically validated via the DKIM signatures.
But yeah, let's worry about whether maybe Russia informed us of this. You know what Russia's stake in the election is?
Russia doesn't want to go to war with us over Syria.
Do you?
It is almost like you didn't know the movie existed, or didn't know that in the leaked speech, that is exactly the context.
When you pay a VIP to come give some talk to your company, who is not even in the same industry as them, they will talk about movies and stuff. That is what they pay for. It is not some super-secret illuminati induction. They literally tried to take her comments about the movie about Lincoln and use it against her, so she explained the context they left out. These attacks are so weak, they turn into softballs! Maybe taking her comments about a movie out of context works great in a fox news sound bite, but fails spectacularly when used in a direct attack in a debate where she can just fill in the blanks.
It is funny to see people pretend to care, but not even catch the events.
That isn't debunking, that is verifying. That's exactly what we're here talking about, yes.
Wow, man. Just wow. Nobody is saying there is evidence of a crime, they're saying that is very troubling that a presidential candidate has ties to Russia and denies it, and offers no explanation, and withholds his tax returns.
Only if China and the rest of the world sleeps for the entire time. Does not sound so good if they do not.
Looks to be pretty bogus.... it would appear that the damn thing doesn't even belong to Trump.
So why doesn't the server in question actually belong to Trump?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw...
Well, you are right about this correlating with election nonsense, but... yeah.
I can't help but view Donald Trump as a traitor to pretty much everyone who isn't Donald Trump.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Nuttiness is non-partisan. Just as Ben Carson demonstrated a while back for the conservatives, Jill Stein provides proof that a medical degree does not make a liberal especially smart, wise, or well-connected with reality, either.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
You're concerned with Trump's connection to "truthiness" at a time when the only real alternative is Hillary Millhouse Nixon, who has been certified by the FBI to have lied to the public hundreds of times over the past two years (an extraordinary achievement) and who could not even resist the urge to tell a whopper lie in her big response to the Huma e-mail discovery?
Right there, to the public and the press, she claimed that Comey had sent his notification letter to just the Republicans - something everybody in Dc associated with government knew to be a bold faced lie.
http://www.dictionary.com/brow...
to make contact with (someone) by sending a brief electronic message, as a text message:
The design team should ping marketing to set up a meeting next week.
Ping me when you arrive, and I’ll meet you at the door.
It may not be a popular use, but I certainly didn't make it up. That you are too dumb to know words doesn't mean they aren't real.
Learn to love Alaska
No. It belongs to a company that Trump hired for marketing purposes.
Without seeing the logs, it's hard to comment. I've seen a lot of attempted debunkings that focus on part of the story, but not the whole story. For example:
My first instinct is to assume, given the context, that it's a spam server. But in addition to not making sense why a spam server would be so limited in its acceptance of inbound connections or make so few DNS lookups**, I'm scratching my head here trying to figure out why Alfa would make the first DNS lookup of the new DNS without prompting. But maybe in the logs there's something that could help explain it. Maybe there was prompting - perhaps the trump-email server sent first, and alfa was doing a reverse D.N.S. lookup on it? Or maybe it's on the same I.P. and for some reason Alfa had spent days sitting around doing reverse D.N.S. lookups of the I.P. based on their last mail receipt? Seems a bit weird, but maybe the logs could clear things up.
** Re: the "so few DNS lookups": this one's a bit odd. The Trump campaign said that the server hasn't been used since 2010. But it's still acting like it's sending and receiving mail, just to a small number of recipients, during business hours. So one immediately pictures some sort of automated feedback loop, but that doesn't jibe with the communication patterns. Not sure how to parse that one. My gut still says "just a spam server", but it is odd.
"He's a god; it'll take more than one shot." â" Lady Eboshi, Mononoke Hime
...trust me, I'd be the first to do that if it took Trump down a notch.
There you go again, being reasonable. If you want to match the Trump crowd, you have to assume by default that everything he does is suspicious, at the very least, and probably has malicious intent. He went to the loo? Highly suspicious - probably wanted to hide his substance abuse. He passed a primary school in his car? Probably prospecting for under-age girls. Finding there is a Russian bank that communicates with one of his servers is practically watertight proof that he is in with Putin in a major way. If we were to argue like Trump's followers. Regrettably, most of us, who aren't his followers, are restrained by things like intellect, honesty and basic integrity.
Trump has being trying to break into the Russian development market but hasn't been able to strike any deals and there was some beauty pageant crap as well. Obviously if you are going to do a property development in Russian you are going to have to wheel and deal with Russian banks and those relationships take time to build. Major commercial construction projects do not happen over night and take many years to get going and working with a bank that knows the market is essential.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
From everything I've read, the most innocent possibility is that the Trump server has been infected by some idiot IT guy working at the Russian bank.
Trump's server shutting down directly after the Times contacts Alfa seems like a real "oh shit unplug everything" move.
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
An article questioning whether a Trump mail server was secretly communicating with Russia quickly fell apart Monday after security experts, journalists and the FBI weighed in.
The article from Slate, entitled “Was a Trump Server Communicating With Russia?,” discussed research from numerous computer scientists and the eventual allegation from a renowned DNS expert that the business server in question was covertly conversing with Alfa Bank – Russia’s largest private commercial bank.
“The parties were communicating in a secretive fashion. The operative word is secretive,” Paul Vixie told Slate. “This is more akin to what criminal syndicates do if they are putting together a project.”
The Clinton campaign, potentially aware of the story’s impending publication, immediately began spreading news of Trump’s alleged Russian ties across social media.
Sam Biddle, journalist for The Intercept, noted soon after that his news outlet and at least 5 others had passed on the story upon deciding that “it didn’t add up.”
Even as Clinton pinned the allegations to her Twitter profile, security experts, the vast majority opposed to Trump, began dismantling the story piece by piece.
Former GCHQ operator Matt Tait, who regularly analyzes breaking security news under the handle @pwnallthethings, demystified the story in a series of tweets.
Naadir Jeewa, an employee at DevOps consulting group “The Scale Factory,” noted the “secret server” was actually run for Trump by Cendyn, a hotel marketing company.
Robert Graham, another renowned security expert, similarly debunked the claim in a post on his blog.
“The response from the Trump campaign is overwhelmingly the most logical explanation,” Graham writes. “Trump hotel business outsourced marketing campaigns, who created the domain and setup (through Listrak) the servers.”
“It’s Cendyn who controls the servers, and not the Trump campaign. It’s unbelievable that the Trump campaign would even have access to those servers, much less be using them. Far from being ‘secret” or “private,’ this [sp] servers are wide open and obvious.”
According to a New York Times article released shortly after the Slate piece, the FBI had been aware of the allegations for weeks but found nothing of interest upon investigation.
“F.B.I. officials spent weeks examining computer data showing an odd stream of activity to a Trump Organization server and Alfa Bank,” the Times writes. “Computer logs obtained by The New York Times show that two servers at Alfa Bank sent more than 2,700 ‘look-up’ messages — a first step for one system’s computers to talk to another — to a Trump-connected server beginning in the spring.”
“But the F.B.I. ultimately concluded that there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts.”
Given how quickly the story disintegrated, it remains unclear whether or not the Clinton camp will face any lasting damage in the remaining days of the election season.
The server belonged to an email marketing company. In this case here isn't a big deep dark secret Trump-Russian conspiracy.
If you want an insight into Trump's ties with Russia, look at Paul Manaforte and read Time magazines article on the subject http://time.com/4433880/donald...
Greed is the root of all evil.
Gowdy had no right to ask her questions
It is felony perjury to lie during congressional testimony. Not that anyone enforces that.
In Soviet America, DNS queries you!
How do you manage to be wrong in multiple ways on both points you claim?
Simple! Like this: https://youtu.be/W8qcccZy03s
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
His server could have been hacked by Russians and we'd be sitting here arguing about how they have a cozy relationship.
Characterize the nature of the traffic, show me the contents of the packets, then I'll decide if I care.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Perhaps you should read the entire article before jumping to this conclusion. The traffic was peculiarly NOT random "from everywhere, including Russia, China, etc..." The traffic was almost exclusively between these two servers. Also, the amount traffic increased/decreased with campaign events. The traffic stopped when Alfa Bank became aware of the New York Times investigation. The server was renamed and traffic resumed directly from Alfa Bank. There's more, but I can't quote or refer to all the strange coincidences here. That's why you need to actually read it even though it is long and will take up a few minutes of your time.
This is a conversation about networking. That is the context in which we are using the word. In that context ping refers to an ICMP Echo Request. It absolutely does not have anything to do with calling your buddy to see if he is hungry.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
What fuels the fire of interest in Trump, even among people who aren't particularly interested in reality TV, is the possibility he might become president. Take that off the table, and becomes a lot less interesting except to a small core of true believers.
Indeed. As long as he has a chance of becoming President there is a real and very dangerous threat to the US and democracy. Once he loses (assuming he loses), he just becomes a raving lunatic demanding birth certificates from black guys living in a tall gaudy tower again.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
"probably wanted to hide his substance abuse" what? Eats too many Cheetos? That would explain the weird orange tints of the hair on a guy whose 70.
Errr...I hate him, and recoil at any stories about him or commenting on anything he says. He's convinced me he's not got anything interesting to say, on anything. Making stuff up I can get from the Ancient Aliens shows.
Who Gowdy? I've watched the hearings, that guy and his cronies ought to be selling FlexSeal.
There's a story here, why? Because you're talking about it... people are reading it, some percentage will dismiss it as garbage, some percentage won't.
Perceived basis in fact isn't necessary to make an impression on (persuade) people, it helps lend weight to an impression (persuade more effectively) with some, but in my experience, the majority don't know or even care about hard data and logical conclusions backing up assertions.
An op-ed based on a Twitter picture of supposedly an edited word document?
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Still though, this doesn't come off as suspicious to me at all. Since when is it odd or otherwise unusual that a server belonging to a billionaire talks to a server belonging to a bank in a foreign country? That's like saying that it's odd that there's dog piss on a fire hydrant.
The odd parts are that the server seems to have been configured to only speak to servers owned by an associate of Putin, and that the communication pattern roughly follows the time table of political events, increasing when newsworthy political events are happening and dropping off when it's not.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
However those hacked Wiki-Leaks emails from Clinton are perfectly fine.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
It's bullshit.
Without having read TFA, often even as a network engineer, I'll use the term "ping"
You should have stopped right there and read then. It wasn't a literal Ping, it was a series of DNS requests. The data comes from looking through the DNS logs. What was suspicious about it was that the server did not respond to a random DNS request they tried themselves. That most likely means it had been specifically set up to only accept DNS requests from a whitelist of servers. For some reason this one Russian bank was on that whitelist, and accounted for almost all the DNS traffic.
Problem is Trump won't go away post-election. If he wins it will be worse than this, and if he loses he starts Trump media and doubles down on the loose talk and continual lies.
This, Trump becomes white noise to everyone outside his own echo chamber. He'll be unceremoniously dumped by the Republicans and squarely blamed for their failure so all he'll be able to do is call Clinton names... which seems to be all he's done for his entire election campaign.
He could probably get his own show on Fox News. The Trump Truth or some such but beyond that he'll be easier to ignore than a crazy person with a doomsday sign in Times Square.
I'm kind of hoping that Trump wins as I'm planning a trip there next year... I'd like to see the USD drop against the sagging AUD and plummeting Pound.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Illegal tax avoidance? Citation please
Enough said...
You think someone that "should have been indicted" is the best choice?
Better than the other option on offer. And, yes, there really is only one other option on offer. Your vote for Stein does send a message, and that's a reasonable thing to do, but the only way it will affect this election is by removing one vote from whichever of the major party candidates you'd have voted for if there were no third parties. If the major party candidate you'd have voted for is going to win your state's electoral votes anyway, then your protest vote is a good one. If your vote might tip your state's electoral college votes away from the major party candidate you find less evil, then you've done yourself a disservice.
Personally, I expect I'll vote for McMullin. My goal is "anyone but Trump", and my state (Utah) will clearly deliver its electoral votes to either McMullin or Trump. Clinton's support in the state is so low that if McMullin & Trump split the rest down the middle Clinton would be in third place, so voting for her won't hurt Trump. Johnson had some support but it has nearly all defected to McMullin, since Johnson's voters weren't voting for him, they were voting against Clinton and Trump. The same is true of most of McMullin's supporters, but he actually has to potentially win the state. And if that happens, and if Trump & Clinton split the remainder of the electoral votes, it's even remotely possible that he could become president (probably with Tim Kaine as VP), unlike Jill Stein who may have more votes nationally but doesn't have enough in any one state to win electoral college votes, and therefore has no chance at the White House.
McMullin is (a) not Trump and (b) not Clinton, (c) not insane and (d) has a non-zero (though very small) chance of winning. Given that, plus the fact that voting for him is my only option for reducing Trump's odds of winning means that he's my clear choice. The only thing that would change my mind is a late surge by Clinton that made her viable in the state. The odds of that are even lower than McMullin seated behind the Resolute desk, though.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
We have done it now!
We have proved that an international company is talking to a bank in ANOTHER COUNTRY!
Fucking OP should feel bad for being such a shitty shill. If you are going to shill and spread FUD make it at least pass a cursory exam. Fucking horrible person should feel bad. Shit title. Shit OP. Shit people for voting it to visibility without even glancing at the article. (Not that I would ever advocate a full read of an article.)
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
A ping is an ICMP echo request.
Give me a ping, Vasili. One ping only, please.
Based on Russia's behavior in the last years, your assumption that they do not want a war is not apparent from their actions.
In 2014 alone, 38 airspace violations (Finland, Estonia, Denmark, ...) from Russian military planes... including close encounters with passenger planes and US planes or boats.
Actually it's rather useful because people can debunk this crap. The average Slate reader probably does not know much about technology and just swallow the author's premise.
Slashdot readers, on the other hand, will be more likely to call bullshit This is helpful.
The entire Russia conspiracy theory needs to stop. It's becoming more more like the North Korea hacked Sony incident; which turns out they didn't and it was an inside job. As yet no verifiable evidence has been presented that Russia is hacking the DNC. But more to the point - who the fuck cares, because they aren't PLANTING or ALTERING emails. The information that has been leaked is 100% real. So the problem the DNC has is, like Nixon, they've been caught with their hands in the cookie jar and are trying to deflect.
Of course they don't want war. They'd much rather people just roll over and give them what they want without a fight.
Since Slashdot is now pushing sketchy political stories, does that mean they are part of the disgusting relationship between the Democrats and the press? Are they "just another mouthpiece" now? Outlets such as ABC, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, HuffPo.....and others (how many?) have shown - in writing - they are colluding with the Democratic party and its operatives. The Podesta emails show it's one big revolving door and far from being a suspicious press, it has become the mouthpiece of the Democratic party. This is hardly refutable anymore. Read the Podesta emails.
So my question is this: Is Slashdot one of those outlets now? It's not as crazy as it sounds when the chief campaign officer (Podesta) is regularly emailing and meeting with Sheryl Sandberg (Facebook), Mark Zuck (facebook), Eric Schmidt, and many other tech luminaries in order to shape hearts and minds. It appears to be standard operating procedure to plant/trend/or tilt trends, news, or anything that might help the Democrats (or a favored group) get the message out.
I ask again: Is Slashdot part of this now?
Well I read TFA and it is suspicious. When the info came "out", the server was shut down AND a new server suddenly appeared and only one entity knew the name to look it up by, Alfa bank. It sounds like somehow the TeaLeaves guy has access to the DNS server logs (root servers) and so he/she is not looking at ISP data but the lookups. Since only one entity knew the name to lookup, it smells pretty bad for Trump. The article is long and detailed so I don't expect almost anyone to actually read it. The best way I can explain it is if I register a new name blahblahblahblah.com, and only one IP ever does a query to get the IP address of blahblahblahblah.com, then somebody had to tell me the name. No way is that random.
as "unplublic" as trump there is no way the logs of any of his servers would be accessible to computer scientist and i would not truest a packet sniffer on the public internet even if it was the next hop off of tumps private LAN. so this story seems fishy and people not call it out is odd two.
Sorry, forgot to point out that I was being sarcastic
Wow.
These 'computer scientists' obviously have no real-world IT experience:
- A once busy server now nearly idle... this phenomenon is called 'orphan servers' and is quite common, especially in non IT-centric organizations, and was a major marketing pitch for sever virtualization a few years ago.
- the level of activity so low it barely justifies the expense/effort to maintain it - makes the key assumption that it IS being maintained, as opposed to simply being left on-line.
- their inability to successfully 'ping' a server is either a sign that the server is tightly 'locked up' and only allows 'known' traffic, OR it is evidence of a poorly-maintained orphan server (see above).
What? The Russian server is communicating with the Trump server, not the reverse - the DNS lookup records are for the destination, not the source, right?
The FBI did not re-open the investigation for no reason. There is seriously damaging material that has been uncovered, something the FBI can no longer ignore.
Hillary knows her only chance is to be elected and pardon herself.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Jimmy Carter had a presidency that hasn'tbeen marred by corruption and incompetence. Much of what made Carter look bad was handled by the GOP in trying to make him look weak: Iran /Contra scandal.But to get to the point of power of the POTUS it involves a ton of manipulation and control of most of thepeoples thoughts in the room.
They don't want war. They want an arms race. Look at how Putin is prepping his public with propaganda. 50% of Russians are expecting an oncoming war with the US and/or NATO. Putin himself even said that their MIC was decimated after the collapse of the USSR and that the whole point of the nuclear deterrent is that it requires both sides to have equal strength and mutual annihilation to be inevitable. They currently lost that ability and with US/NATO missile defense systems all along Eastern Europe it is easy to imagine that this threat is easily leveraged to get Russia back into the arms race again.
http://blog.erratasec.com/2016/11/debunking-trumps-secret-server.html
Or maybe have a relationship with Mexico as good as we used to have with Canada, and eliminate the threat of global terrorism; instead of trump's plan to stuff our ears with cotton, shove our head in the sand, pay the Mexicans to build a wall, and let Russian nibble it's way towards Europe/Arctic oil reserves?
I think it would be funny if Trump became president; but congress/senate have dem majorities, blocking every little thing he tries.
So he'd be forever known for accomplishing nothing.
Doesn't matter how dumb South Carolina voters are.
Lying to Congress under oath is perjury. And the point of the law is so that Congress creates law and conducts its business using the best available knowledge, not lies. It is lethal to a democracy, for example, to have the executive branch lie without consequence and in that way steer the passage of law based on those lies.
They were worried about possible malware that would do a DNS lookup to find a command and control server. Once you are in, it's easier to remain undetected by having the hacked device reach out to you, than you trying to reach in past firewalls and other security.
the rest is from the Podesta email dumps, which as we all should know, can be cryptographically validated via the DKIM signatures.
No they cannot. DKIM does not validate the sender or receiver.
Here's a quote from one of the DKIM authors, posted to the Metzdown crypto mailing list.
DKIM doesn't do what is claimed for verifying email athenticity. A DKIM signature is
from the "administrative domain" which is not the same thing as the domain part of
the sender. Virtual hosting, many other infrastructure things make it so that the
administrative domain is neither one-to-one nor onto email domains in the general
case.
It means that legitimate users of a given system can forge messages from some other
user and they'll get a DKIM signature on them. Yeah, perhaps you can detect from
headers and other things that the message was "forged" but perhaps you can't. I put
scare quotes around forged because there are many situations where a user sends a
message with some other name on it that are legitimate and in many cases this isn't
a bug, it's a feature.
The DKIM signer simply stamps outgoing messages somewhere in the outgoing pipeline,
it doesn't have user authenticity in it as anything other than guidance.
Moreover, the DKIM signing keys have to be sitting on some server that processes
outgoing email.
This means that in a case where someone has hacked a system, if they have the email
stores, they probably also have the DKIM signing key. If they have the DKIM signing
key they can create whatever messages they want and sign them, with backdating and
anything else they want.
If you're using DKIM signatures to verify a hacked mail store, you're (e.g.)
assuming they have the user maildirs, but not the server config files.
Lastly, this property -- that DKIM doesn't provide author/message authenticity -- is
a *GOAL* of DKIM. When we were making it, we were very concerned that the legitimate
needs of spam fighting etc. would turn it into a tracking and surveillance system.
DKIM is designed to make the connection between the DKIM signature and author
authenticity tenuous at best.
Here's a short description of the DKIM use case: DKIM allows Gmail to know that a
message for Alice from her bank was created by her bank, even when it is forwarded
through her university alumni email address.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
I don't see the motive thing here.
I've worked with banks that only allow inbound connections from specific public IPs on a per port basis. If it's an automated service I'd be surprised if it let just anyone in.
I block reply notifications from ACs, and do not reply to an AC...usually.
I do this because it is important to me that my ideas are expressed conversationally, and my hope that they will be read by the person whose words I am responding to.
Kid-proof tablet..
It's starting to look like Trump is going to have more problems that being accused of finger f-ing women in public?
I am not sure they want an actual arm race, because I am sure they haven't forgotten how Reagan brought them down economically with that in the 80'ies.
What I am sure that they do want is that NATO and friends will back off and not do anything, as we have done in so many places, Ukraine and Syria to name a few famous ones.
Every time Putin rattles the nuclear saber Western and NATO countries rattle their knees, so Putin has no reason to have _any_ respect for whatever we _say_.
A full scale war is not even necessary, and also something we don't want, but shooting down a few Russian planes and helicopters and destroying a few tanks and other important equipment that can easily be seen on media, so the Russian public can also see it, _then_ Putin will listen. That is the only language he understands, being a USSR hardliner.
Also, USA should not _excuse_ killing a number of Syrian Al Assad forces by saying it was a mistake. I hope it wasn't a mistake, and it should be strongly emphasized that there is more where that came from, unless _they_ back off!
Russia and Al Assad doesn't want any civilian to stay in Aleppo, as this is a genocide if there ever was one!
NATO and liberal countries in the World, wake up!
Ouch!
The DNC were morons for letting Clinton anywhere near the nomination. It's like they and she thinks she's entitled.
She has more power than anyone else in the DNC.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
There's a new Harry Potter movie? Is it going to be shown on TrumpTV?
It's amazing that you think that someone, since at least 2009, has been sending fake messages with fake senders from Gmail, Yahoo and clintonemail.com without anyone wondering about the oddly incriminating messages showing up in their inboxes.
If you think you can fake these, you can get 1 bitcoin from erratasec.
Please show me the blockchain transaction when you win this, ok?
I know I'm going to get modded down for this
Of course you won't, because you said you would and instead got modded up. Cheap trick.
but yes: Barack Hussein Obama
Magnitudes cleaner than the Clintons or Trump, but he still got his nose dirty. Do you remember in his first presidential campaign his ties to Tony Rezko became an issue?
And he's still a politician and acts like one. Still a scoundrel, just not as rotten as some others have been.
You're right, I should've linked that all up, but by the time I had finished the brain dump it was too late at night and I was too tired to link everything.
There's a huge list of stuff here with easy summaries, but I don't think it's everything.
If you have particular items of interest, please let me know so I can pull up citations for you. I know the FBI dump is a pain in the rear to find stuff in due to not being able to search it. Most of this came from discussions on /r/wikileaks if that helps.
That's not proof that he had an account there, or even much in the way of evidence. It is peculiar, and the pattern is quite strange, but that's a different matter. I don't feel there's sufficient evidence to draw any real conclusions...certainly not in the summary. Just enough for speculations.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
This is not about some malware, but the suspicion that the Trump campaign coordinates with Russia. This is also not the first time this has come up. His old campaign manager Manafort worked for the Russian's puppet president in the Ukraine. Then there is the strange coincidence that the only thing the Trump campaign was interested in changing in the GOP platform was the take on Crimea and the Russian military involvement. And of course there is the odd, out of character deference that Trump shows to Putin.
Then show us with direct citations from the congressional record, HRC's lies. Can't can you? .
Do you look beyond MSNBC and Huffington Post for your daily news intake?
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
When I was young, it was the Birchers going on and on (and on and on and on) about how candidate (x) was a Godless Rooski Agent (tm). Now, it's the Left that's doing this. What a world, what a world.
(Me, there's no way I'd ever vote for either of the [deleted]s. I think I'm going to write in Cthulhu as the lesser evil. Calling IT "the lesser evil" seriously risks annoying IT enough to wake IT up, but at least I won't have to contemplate the prospect of either of those [deleted]s in the White House.)
History doesn't reflect what you are saying. It was not a singular arms race with the US during Reagan that caused the USSR to collapse. While Reagan spoke with heavy rhetoric towards the USSR, he also didn't do much but continue covert anti-communist support and proxy wars. The arms race was simply a convenient way to make money for the MIC in the US which has always been fueling politics. And by the end of it all, Reagan had a great relationship with Russia. Here is Putin himself saying exactly what I am talking about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Also since you seem to want the US to overthrow the Syrian government which is not our job. Please view this video of the French Foreign Minister saying that the Syrian Civil War is a creation of Western governments (US, UK and Israel with the support of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... It has nothing to do with the way Assad treats his people. I have friends and family who are veterans of recent wars in the Middle East so I take exception to you think that US troops should do this and should do that. It seems you are not even American so please don't assume you know shit about what our military should do.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Error: NSE - No Signature Error
Because Correct The Record pays people to be wrong.
You seem to be very young so you can only back up your opinion with YouTube videos from others, so I can't take it seriously.
USA is member of NATO and all over my continent and I know shit about what USA military should do, and unless you are a general in the same, you shouldn't tell me about shit!
I am sorry if your family had bad experiences in the Middle East, but I hope they did their job and lived up to the expectations that USA want us all to live up to.
Understood, but you've missed my point. We have a Russian server and a trump server. The traffic discussed in the slashdot article is DNS lookups by Russian server of Trump server. The Trump server has no reason to look up it's own DNS record. The Russian server is the one originating the traffic. Or are you saying that Trump hacked into the Russian server, and that it was Trump's malware on the Russian server that kept looking up Trump's server DNS record?
Then show us with direct citations from the congressional record, HRC's lies. Can't can you? If Gowdy or the rest of that clown parade* could find anything, do you think they wouldn't be pushing it?
Boy, that went south fast. Now, we've gone from discussion Congressional perjury to "You can't prove my client lied".
Do both sides play the game? You betcha.
Does the GOP have a proven record of such lies? Certainly since Ailes/Atwater etc. brought us the Nixon "southern strategy" and "stripping the bark" off political opponents. Gingrich brought the new age of incivility (go read about the GOPAC letter). So i believe they are lying long before I believe their opponents are.
And now the argument that if the Republicans do it, then it's ok to do.
Is HRC pure? No. Is she the devil they want us to believe? No.
And of course, the final rationale for why it's ok that Clinton committed multiple national security felonies. She's imperfect. It is rare to see all three of these morally dysfunctional arguments in one place. But I guess it's just not that hard to do, if morality matters far less to you than your tribe.
I guess your post is one of those examples where the post says more about the poster than about the subject they're posting about.
I'd agree with you about the corruption point, but definitely not the competence point.
Wow, that's the best you can find on him huh? Pretty pathetic. Guilt by association isn't a thing.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
It was more than just association, it was also favors and donations. You very rarely find refrigerators full of money or an explicit quid-pro-quo. That's why the Clintons aren't in jail.
At best Trump will be "George W. Bush II", I don't see him completing much of anything which may be a good thing for a change.
Imagine the next 9/11 happens on Trump's watch, or the next Perl Harbour, or Cuban Missile Crisis, or even the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Do you really see Trump reacting calmly to that, or being able to deescalate a tense situation?
Rosie O'Donnell did a critical piece on him almost 10 years ago and he still goes after her. A Muslim couple spoke at the DNC and he spent days attacking them (with obviously bad results for his campaign), a former Miss American was brought up in the first debate and he again spend days attacking her (with more obvious bad campaign results).
I have literally seen small children with better self control, and the Presidency is far too powerful a position to put in the hands of an ill-tempered child.
I stole this Sig
You're highlighting limitations on your own level of thinking there rather than demonstrating that she's somehow in the wrong.
There's nothing wrong with having an idealist mindset as a long term hope, but a realist mindset as a pragmatic set in stone goal.
For example, I've seen idealists say we should cut off all links to Saudi Arabia because of their treatment of women, with the view that doing so will punish them for not treating women well, an idealist would view having links with such a country when claiming to support womens rights as outright hypocritical, but a pragmatist would recognise that cutting off links may cause the regime to collapse and make things even worse for women, whilst noting that the Saudi regime is already opening up opportunities for women, such that the advisory council to the ruling body is now 50% female which is better than most Western parliaments.
It's possible therefore to say you support women's rights, but also support the existing Saudi regime without being hypocritical because the safety of pragmatism is often better than the massive risks of idealism.
So when someone like Hillary says her dream is a common market with open trade and open borders, that doesn't in any way mean she believes she can achieve that dream during her presidency, nor that hence she will take any actions towards that dream during her presidency. It's perfectly possible to dream of owning a Ferrari but not be a hypocrite by buying a Ford Focus because you realise your budget wont stretch that far.
I suspect that if you believe dreams and actions must always be the same thing, then you're an idealist, and are incapable of weighing up your ideals against pragmatism of reality. That's not a problem in itself, idealists are the people that come up with ideas of potential destinations, pragmatists are the ones that have to figure out whether we can actually get there - some people are capable of being both, but just because you can't separate the two doesn't mean it's valid to assume that everyone can't separate the two.
I speak from experience, I've had many ideas in my working life of where I'd like to see the companies I've worked for get to, but in reality market conditions, company politics and so forth means I've had to settle for something quite different than where I'd like to see the company be. She's not lying, she's just capable of separating her personal beliefs and hopes from her pragmatic actions of what the country wants, personally I think that's a good quality to have - far better than a straight idealist who breaks the country because they can't be pragmatic, FWIW that's precisely the problem we have in the UK at the moment with our only viable opposition, Jeremy Corbyn - the ideas he has are lovely (free shit for everyone), but there isn't a cats chance in hell of being able to pull them off without bankrupting the country so I'd rather take someone that has that as their ideal, but also has the pragmatism to understand that it's not something you can just do without hitting the brick wall of reality face first at 100mph.
Ah I seem to be very young; I am not. Youtube videos which you clearly didn't bother to click aren't credible to you. Hey clueless the Youtube videos were videos of Vladimir Putin and Roland Dumas speaking. Not some random people. Go ahead and keep denying relevant information that you don't even bother understanding.
You're highlighting limitations on your own level of thinking
No need to be a dick. I don't know why you started with this insult when the rest of your post is well reasoned and thoughtful. Very incongruous.
It's possible therefore to say you support women's rights, but also support the existing Saudi regime without being hypocritical
Of course it's possible, if you couch your support of Saudi Arabia as you did. If you don't criticize Saudi Arabia at all, then no, it is hypocritical.
It's perfectly possible to dream of owning a Ferrari but not be a hypocrite by buying a Ford Focus because you realise your budget wont stretch that far.
We don't have the full text of the speech so it's hard to say, but to take your car example, you cannot make a speech about your dream of owning a Ferrari while having your website extol the virtues of frugality. Like the Saudi Arabia issue, it's about caveats. It's not hypocritical to say "Buy what you can afford, right now that's a Ford Focus but one day I hope to be able to buy a Ferrari with my pocket change." It is hypocritical to say, as an example, "Frugality is important. Buy what you need. That's why I have a Ford Focus." and then to someone else say "Boy I really want a Ferrari, but the bank didn't approve me for such a huge loan right now." It shows a completely different persona than what is implied by the first statement, and it is a lie. It means that did not buy a Ford Focus because you value frugality, it's because you weren't approved for a loan. That is a lie.
I suspect that if you believe dreams and actions must always be the same thing, then you're an idealist, and are incapable of weighing up your ideals against pragmatism of reality.
I'm not an idealist on every issue, but I suppose I am when it comes to transparency and honesty. I have no problem at all with someone who supports Saudi Arabia for practical reasons, as long as they are honest about it. What I would not like, however, is someone who says one thing and does something that completely violates that. That's not an issue of practicality or realism, that's just deception. There are honest people who are realists and honest people who are idealists, it's not mutually exclusive.
A bank server pinging is strange, the bank server could be compromised and be acting as a bot net node. Compromised servers ping and scan ports all the time.
/.? seriously?
http://arstechnica.com/securit...
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
"This is nonsense. The evidence available on the Internet is that Trump neither (directly) controls the domain "trump-email.com", nor has access to the server. Instead, the domain was setup and controlled by Cendyn, a company that does marketing/promotions for hotels, including many of Trump's hotels. Cendyn outsources the email portions of its campaigns to a company called Listrak, which actually owns/operates the physical server in a data center in Philidelphia."
http://blog.erratasec.com/2016...
I had an IP coming out everywhere and pointing at a lost space in the sea in front of Africa and no one cared... I do not think a missile was sent right there. So what is so strange about a known millionaire having some forgotten computer connected to a bank in a rich (?) country? I regret Russians still speak Russian, they do seem to care about videogames we assume obsolete here so touching those servers is obbligato and incomprehensible. I know Africans call some people types Russian irregardless, but we are supposed to confuse them with Americans as a matter of fact. If instead of Russia it had an Indian server... that would be really worrisome, they seem to dislike (the existence of) Money as much as Chinese do.
You're effectively arguing though that you'd prefer someone who sticks to their ideals, even if it goes against the will of the populace that elected them.
Personally I think Hillary's stance is far, far better - "I have this personal view, but the electorate wants this so I'll pursue that instead". She may well want open borders, but it's clear based on her public policy that she understands that that's not what the electorate wants - you can only call her deceptive if she gets into power and pursues her private viewpoint, rather than her public viewpoint. The alternative is someone who doesn't differentiate between the two, they state their viewpoint and stick to it regardless of whether it's right or wrong, regardless of whether people agree with it or not. This problem is present with Trump, consider his comments on the use of nuclear weapons against ISIS, I doubt many people who support him seriously want him to use them, but if he does, despite it being grossly against the will of the populace, is that somehow better than if he privately wants to use them, but knows the public don't support it so opts not to?
Having a personal opinion, but recognising that public opinion overrides it is exactly the sort of quality you should want in a politican in a democracy, not decry and claim is hypocritical, or corrupt, or somehow bad. It's those whose views are unwavering regardless of what the population they profess to represent thinks that you should worry about.
but it's clear based on her public policy that she understands that that's not what the electorate wants - you can only call her deceptive if she gets into power and pursues her private viewpoint, rather than her public viewpoint.
If we were both aliens and this was the first election on Earth that we've seen, that would be reasonable... but you know that this is routine work for politicians. Now you're the one being an idealist.
If Clinton had a completely private, in-her-head position that "I want open borders but I'll do what the electorate wants" that would be fine, and we wouldn't even know about it. But when she's giving speeches and accepting large speaking fees for saying the exact opposite, I think it's very naive to give her the benefit of the doubt. The fact that we're talking about it shows that she doesn't have the discipline to keep her private stance private... what makes you think she will magically have the will power to keep her private stance from influencing policy if elected?
Having a personal opinion, but recognising that public opinion overrides it is exactly the sort of quality you should want in a politican in a democracy, not decry and claim is hypocritical, or corrupt, or somehow bad.
The danger with a person who governs by following polls is that polls are so easily manipulated, not to mention a number of decisions made in the upper echelons of government depend on information not available to the public, or even if the information is available the public may be ill equipped to process it and make a competent decision. You do have to, at some level, trust the instincts and personal views of the people you elect. And on a more practical level, that is just the way the process is set up now. You may not like it, but we don't evaluate candidates on how flexible they are to public opinion, rather they present their policy and we pick from the available options. Public opinion obviously goes into that, but no candidate is successful who says "all of my positions are subject to change, I don't have any firmly held beliefs, I'm just telling you what you want to hear, trust me." Calling someone a "flip flopper" is a real thing in political debates, for instance.. and it's not a compliment.
"If we were both aliens and this was the first election on Earth that we've seen, that would be reasonable... but you know that this is routine work for politicians. Now you're the one being an idealist."
On the contrary, I'm being a realist. There's a broad gulf between the blame mongering people like to engage in and what politicians are really, actually like.
"If Clinton had a completely private, in-her-head position that "I want open borders but I'll do what the electorate wants" that would be fine, and we wouldn't even know about it. But when she's giving speeches and accepting large speaking fees for saying the exact opposite, I think it's very naive to give her the benefit of the doubt. The fact that we're talking about it shows that she doesn't have the discipline to keep her private stance private... what makes you think she will magically have the will power to keep her private stance from influencing policy if elected?"
There's a vast different between having a private stance and acting on it, it doesn't matter if she doesn't keep it private, it's really irrelevant, what matters is if she acts on it, and you have zero evidence that she would, you're merely speculating that she would for partisan reasons. That's not really any different to saying if elected Trump would anally fuck every 5 year old in the country till they bleed to death because he agreed that his own daughter is a piece of ass and so must be a sexual predator. Everyone can make shit up, but it's not a good basis on which to make any kind of worthwhile decision. Decisions should be based on facts, and there's literally zero evidence that Clinton's private position matters in the fucking slightest beyond what you're choosing to project merely because you've already made your mind up and are trying to self-justify.
"The danger with a person who governs by following polls is that polls are so easily manipulated, not to mention a number of decisions made in the upper echelons of government depend on information not available to the public, or even if the information is available the public may be ill equipped to process it and make a competent decision. You do have to, at some level, trust the instincts and personal views of the people you elect."
It's really got nothing to do with polls, most elements of public opinion sway far enough in one direction or another for things to be obvious, it's not rocket science to recognise that if push came to shove, most people wouldn't want a nuclear war for example. Cases where there is even public division is why you have representatives to try and thrash out a votable compromise, and where it's not left to the president alone, that's kind of the point of having representatives. If you think a president should act unilaterally on divisive issues then what you're asking for is a dictator, I don't see any evidence Hillary wants to be that, nor does the idea of completely open borders exist as an issue that a president could unilaterally act or achieve anything upon anyway. Even her own party wouldn't give sufficient backing to it, so it's folly to pretend it even matters, and she's smart enough to know that there's no point having a fight she wouldn't have a cats chance in hell of winning because such fights only weaken you and leave you a lame duck.
"Public opinion obviously goes into that, but no candidate is successful who says "all of my positions are subject to change, I don't have any firmly held beliefs, I'm just telling you what you want to hear, trust me." Calling someone a "flip flopper" is a real thing in political debates, for instance.. and it's not a compliment."
It's also not that simple either, people get elected on issues where they do have sufficient support for their views, Hillary's private view isn't one of those things on the books, precisely because she would never get elected on it, and hence will know that there's no point pursuing it, regardless of how much she may wish it to one day be possible.
Are you perhaps trying to refer to the military acronym FUBAR?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
I wish I could mod you up as it looks like your were mod bombed by people who can't handle the truth.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Kind of like all the Hillary supporters still claiming she didn't break the numerous laws that have been outlined?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
You win the pedantic nerd award.
Gosh, thanks, I'm blushing with joy.
I haven't won a lot of awards, a few chess tournaments maybe, but a pedantic nerd award, I'll cherish that forever!!1!
And yes, the *most evil scenario* is that they're hiding stuff so evil that they want to hide it! And poor opsec.
Why would they bother to tunnel over weird protocols when they could just SSH there? Who should be spying on their traffic, again? If anything, some odd tunnel would make me believe the people who owned it weren't responsible.
In that vein, look at the DNS, it's not even Trump's server!
Great question. Maybe they have an idiot PHB project manager, or some trusted mob guy that they thought was more technical than he actually was? Maybe the Russians think the NSA cracked their SSH and that obscurity is the only game left? Who knows!
Why? I'll tell you why! Because of [long list of known unknowns]!!!
It is a well known technique to hide secret communications in plain sight, because that is where they least stand out. Presumably they trusted their payload to remain secret, and so far it has.
They may even have been surprised to be found by private researchers because of their innocuous obscurity. Perhaps they were avoiding use of channels that are more heavily monitored on the Russian side, worried about NSA moles or other access over there? The list of known unknowns that are relevant is pretty long, even just pulling them out of [a hat]. It isn't hard to realize that we don't (and won't) know.
If the server was hacked, OK, maybe. But the responses from the parties don't really match that. It seems like they'd want to admit that, because it is the least-bad possible answer. But they're denying that too; they probably don't want the server to become evidence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Not to be confused with FUBAR."
From your link:
"Not to be confused with Foobar."
It is like asking what "Hello World" is.
You're clearly disgruntled, but you don't really make a good argument against policy makers responding in realtime to events, which is basically what you rant about using a bunch of unflattering terms.
You do make a good case that you don't understand the policy, but not in a way that suggests possible remedy through explanation.
You also make a good case that you don't understand the different regional groups and ideological forces, other than a vague idea that ethnicity should be tied to ideology and that everybody in the same ethnicity should be on the same side relative to us. The only detail that I want to correct is to note that Turkey is in Iraq helping the Iraqi Kurds fight the daesh infestation in Mosul, and that is entirely consistent with longstanding US and Turkish policy.
Trump media and doubles down on the loose talk and continual lies.
What bothers me even more is that he genuinely doesn't seem to care about the truth - any truth. Or, perhaps he doesn't understand that "truth" is something that actually exists. Does than make him sociopath or psychopath (or both)? [genuinely asking] (Oh, and he seriously doesn't understand how video tape works.)
Following up for the thin-skinned moderators who modded this "troll". From Beyond Lying: Donald Trump’s Authoritarian Reality:
Trump was denounced repeatedly for “lying” and at times the apparently more egregious “bald faced lying.” But that is not a sufficient description. Neither was the charge by the philosopher Harry Frankfurt that Trump was in fact a master of “bullshit,” which is distinct from lying in that the speaker is not just communicating information he knows to be false, but is unconstrained by any consideration of what may or may not be true.
Which was also noted as not actually going far enough.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .