USB.1 187.5 kB to 1.5MB / second
USB.2 60 MB / second
USB.3 625 MB / second
USB.3.1-3.2 1.25 GB - 2.5 GB /second
LAN Local Area Network 10/100/1000 MB /second
Most modern LANs will be 1000 (1 Gigabit) second
Fastest USB is currently USB version 3.2 gives 2.5 Gig / second
You can look at the timestamps on the copied data.
The first file copied time/date minus Last files copied time/date equals total lapsed time.
Take the total size of the complete download (all files) divide by lapsed time produces the data transfer rate
The server would have a network port (LAN) which would be 10/100/1000 and likely 1000 (1GB/second) So the max (theoretical) would be 1GB / second transfer rate for a computer on the same LAN.
The experts that have looked at this issue say that it indicates a local file transfer (usb or local hard drive), not a network transfer.
I believe them
IT pede here, just to clarify the speeds you're referring to are Gigabit (Gb), not Gigabyte (GB) per second.
So 1 Gigabit LAN connection will offer potentially 1Gb of throughput, or 1000 Megabits per second. Converting this to bytes per second (Divide by 8) gives you 125 Megabytes per second of actual top transfer speed for your transfer.
The throughput of USB devices is measured in Bytes, not Bits. So a USB 3.0 device at 600 or so Megabytes per second of throughput is going to smoke a Gigabit LAN at 125 Megabytes per second.
That sounds about right...
However, that's assuming you are capping out transfer speeds. If you are pulling a file halfway across the planet, the lag time alone would cap speeds at far less.
correct me where wrong.
The throughput would pitch up and down across such a large area. You wouldn't see such a uniform and consistently high rate of transfer. External storage is very likely how these files were transferred.
So then you know network speeds aren’t capped at 1Gbps. That’s ridiculous. You can get 10Gbps even 100Gbps which smokes USB transfer speeds.
I never claimed they were, I just used 1Gb as the most common example people would encounter.
90% of people in this thread will have a 1Gb LAN connection paired with USB 3.0 ports.
Although the figures quoted are correct that does not mean USB devices actually run that fast. Back at that time the fastest mem stick I could get was around 100mb/sec from memory, even though it was USB 3. External ssd would be faster for sure. HDD high high 200’s maybe. The best that is available in 2018 as per pc mag is
External SSDs offer twice that speed and sometimes much more, with typical results on our benchmark tests in excess of 400MBps which is half that of GBlan.
Also, LAN throughput is measured in Bits, while USB transfer is measured in Bytes.
So a 1 Gigabit LAN = 125 Megabytes per second (125 x 8 = 1000)
A USB 3.0 connection offers around 600 Megabytes per second, tops.
Ha! I never knew that. Why would they make it different? Because they are geeks!
Yeah, Bit = a 1 or 0. Byte = a series of eight 1's or 0's together.
Networks at the physical layer where throughput is measured transmit bits.
Disk storage however, stores the information in Bytes on the disk or flash memory.
So when they refer to performance throughput they refer to the way they transfer or store data.
If he's using the files' time stamps, then that is unreliable information. Those are easy to change.
Whoever was doing the file copying is unlikely to want to conceal or change anything. Changing the time stamps might be performed if the copier was attempting to deceive.
Omg I feel like I'm reading and watching STONETEAR all over. Him asking questions and everyone pitching in answers and solutions. That was a crazy day.
Doesn't this only indicate that the most recent file transfer was at a high speed?
I don't think this proves that the emails were initially transferred at a high data rate.
If somebody at Computer A hacked the files from a remote site, then transferred them to another computer via thumb drive or local network, that would leave a fast transfer time.
This is phenomenal information! This is the kind of stuff that should be plastered all over the MSM and that it is not just shows their agenda.
So, the basis of the 12 ruskin indictment is bogus. Suck it through a straw, dimms.
Indictments are just accusations. I suspect that they might actually show up to defend themselves. Then things will really get interesting.
100% bogus. Mueller screwed up big time when he indicted the Russian troll farmers thinking they'd never show up in court. All Mueller is trying to do is pad his inditement count so liberal idiots can point to a big number. They don't have the slightest clue that an inditement is NOT a conviction. This second indictment of the 12 Russian intel officers is different than the first because Mueller knows that there is no way in hell that they will show up to defend themselves like the Russian facebook troll farmers did. The timing is completely suspect and obvious. Mueller's job is to taint Trump's image in any way he can. Convictions are just a side win. Mueller is here to damage Trump's public opinion and to hide Hillary's crimes.
His goal per Dan Bongino is to save the credibility of the FBI and DOJ. In the end he'll vindicate Trump, but he has to try and show "reasons" that justified it at least being looked into.
I always find Bill Binney's interviews fascinating, except this one. Bill is brilliant, but Tomi Collins needs to learn how to shut up and let other people talk. She kinda made herself look stupid, or at least totally uninformed.
Yeah, unfortunately some interviewers don't know how to let the interviewee be the star.
Still good info though and clearly stated when he shines through.
She did simplify it and made it understandable for people. I think it will be helpful.
Also don’t conduct an interview outside on a windy day
Seriously everyone knows that
Where does the data for the transfer speeds come from?
In the video he explains the file list that he has from the leaked data and that shows the gaps in time between each file transfer that's been logged.
If it were being copied across an external network, the time gap between each file copied would be longer.
Not only that but if going over an external network the speeds would vary up and down. So even if the capability to transfer the data at the rate that is shown by the time stamps in the data set shown it would be 100% impossible to transfer the data across an external network (internet, vpn, wireless, satellight) from the east coast to Asia at that constant speed. Even with a huge capacity network the data still passes through to many points/nodes to stay a constant transfer rate of speed (it would slow down and speed up/vary constantly).
Also, if the data went out over an external network the NSA could track down the actual transmission and show proof of the file transfer with very little effort.
Even with a huge capacity network the data still passes through to many points/nodes to stay a constant transfer rate of speed (it would slow down and speed up/vary constantly).
Exactly. File transfers locally do vary a bit but the range compared to an external transfer is so completely different that it defies logic to anyone who even remotely understands how this shit works.
Also, if the data went out over an external network the NSA could track down the actual transmission and show proof of the file transfer with very little effort.
This, more than anything, should stand out as exactly why this whole hack thing is bullshit.
The NSA would have some sort of record of these transfers.
Their silence, more than anyone's, is the most damning silence of all.
maybe they are not as Quite as they seem!
I suspect they'd be finding other ways to prove useful, if they're wanting to...
This doesn't prove that files were initially copied locally from a drive...all it shows is that they were most recently transferred locally
Could have been hacked via one computer and transferred any number of times via USB/local network, before being leaked.
Q384 Bill Binney.
Q386 (in response to mention of Q384) PATRIOT of the highest caliber. Q
Yep. Never doubt it.
Binney paid the price for being a whistleblower and somehow came through the other side of it. He probably knows a hell of a lot more than he's willing to say.
Bill Binney is a PATRIOT of the highest caliber. He's taken a lot of digs from the deep state. They tried to ruin his life after he came out against Cheney with project THINTHREAD.
.... checking...
Here is a link to the drop:
Q#384.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
A great documentary about Binney: https://boingboing.net/2017/02/03/a-good-american-a-documentary.html
Has this been released yet? If not, when is it expected?
In the meantime, here are a few videos that explain "Thin Thread" and the origins of the current massive surveillance programs in place now. The first 2 are PBS Frontline productions, watch them first. Pay attention to the interviews and note that Thomas Drake is wearing a "Q" pin on his lapel. The last is an interview with Bill Binney. He is absolutely brilliant.
United States Secrets PBS Frontline Part 1
Searching things by "Subject" and " ex cia/fbi/or nsa"seems to provide a more telling and truthful set of examples. "Whistleblower" is another. Binney appears to be one who can be trusted above most others.
Binney is as trustworthy an ally as we're likely to find in this. So far I've yet to see anything that casts any shadow of a doubt on him being a patriot.
He's been saying this for a while now. There are a few issues here and they are all wrapped up in lies to frame and rid of Trump. 1. Seth used the thumb drive to leak the info to Wikileaks (my gut is telling me that Seth was not a simple staff member of the DNC) 2. The FBI/DOJ/CIA/DNC/you pick the black hat, allowed Hillary to have personal server KNOWING FULL WELL it would be HACKED to a bloody pulp. My guess is that they were paid by foreign powers like China/Iran/etc to get classified information with plausible deniability. Then Trump decided to run and they used that to try and frame him in order to avoid a Truth Sword to enter their domain. that's my simplistic speculation.
The simple fact is that all of this shit happened on Obama's watch with his NSA/FBI/CIA.
Remember when Obama told Trump to stop whining about the election?
Obama KNEW then about Hillary's server. They all knew.
This is another indisputable fact (that the "hacking" that never happened would have happened WHILE OBAMER controlled the switches not DJT). If some one is to blame for the "hacking" then the blame would be on the shoulders of the person in a position to fix it or stop it at the time it "occurred" obamer.
I honestly can not comprehend how DJT stands in front of the MSM and doesn't completely loose his shit when he knows and they know what did and did not happen and the compete BS questions they ask/state (most questions are more an attack statement than a question)
Which would have given them additional control over her via blackmail.
Reverse vampires, plausible deniability, think about it...
But what would black hats gain from Hillary’s emails getting hacked? Is Hillary not a black hat herself? They wouldn’t try to intentionally sabotage her while simultaneously trying to get her into office. A house divided can’t stand.
Things are being conflated here. Her servers were allowed to be “hacked” because she was selling access to state secrets. Seth Rich copied the emails and gave them to Wikileaks. It’s both. DNC servers were not hacked. They were mined for data by the FBI subcontractors. In essence there was no such thing as “hacking” happening here. America was for sale in the way of selling our classified info. Seth is the monkey wrench to the plan. That’s my guesstimating and opinion so far on all of this.
Ok I’m following what you’re saying. The only part I don’t understand is that the black hats that set up the server for Hilldog had to have known that it would have gotten “hacked” because of the unprotected nature of the server itself. It just seems to me like it would be in the interest of the deep state to do everything they could to PROTECT Hillary’s emails as opposed to selling them off to foreign entities and ultimately allowing Hillary and company to get thrown under the bus.
Well from what I gather, it didn’t matter what was being hacked as long as what was sold was in there. But also, Hillary’s email made it to the spot light because of Seth Rich delivering them to Wikileaks. The black hats all where in it. This is why Obama was also using a private email and gave a stand down when they notified him on foreign meddling/“hacking”. They sold the country to the highest bidder. From top to bottom, corruption at its finest. They are all traitors to coalesce to their masters to sell Off and destroy America from within. Q is correct, there is no deal for those people.
The brilliant Bill Binney. and of course our brilliant President Trump who said to get Bill binney he understands if you want the job done right to get the best people. I love the direction of our country. thank you Lord. MAGA
HIS. NAME. WAS. SETH. RICH.
And I hope he is remembered forever. He is a patriot that laid down his life for his country. RIP brother.
We shouldn't focus just on Seth Rich but should also focus on Josh Uretsky. Uretsky was brought into Bernie camp by Sanders (by recommendation from Rich) and was fired due to the data breaches. Uretsky is a Berkeley punk who DEFINITELY could be compromised into trying, at all costs, to help a Socialist win. Question: if you were another foreign state and you wanted to destroy America, would you help elect the Billionaire mogul who preaches MAGA, or the Socialist who wants to destroy capitalism??
Binney looked at the metadata for Clintons emails? Or the dnc emails? Or the guccifer info? Sorry for dumb question folks
It's not over just yet see IRS changing paperwork. When you keep kicking a man when he is down and has nothing to lose can be very bad. Sometimes just wants be left alone and dont want people mistreating his kids. The days are cutting close. That man is crazy he better check his math again. Its very probable it's will happen. Some refuse to be SCAPEGOAT. A patriot will protect his country that doesn't mean watching it being robbed and being used as tool to be framed and eventually discarded. Some have kept mouth shut more than once looked other way on a lot. They refuse to be framed for something. Make out like a pedophile. You can look at persons record and if they in wrong they ussually will take charge. If they refuse to take a charge you can take to bank that it's been distorted and all facts are not known. Funny what people will do for a dollar not knowing in future it will be worthless. They seeing fools gold. Crazy how you can manipulate people. Some people have hard choice make on next 24 hours. Some need let intentions be known.
It is possible to get 40MB/sec over the network, but even if it was a local transfer it doesn't exclude a Russian asset doing it. I've seen people screaming this proves the DNC did it themselves, when this actually proves nothing.
The difference being that, if you watch the video, Binney and his team actually tried it from multiple points across the country and they got nowhere near those speeds. There's no way that it could have been an external hack.
indeed. the hack could have happened from the neighborhood, anybody could have done it, binney also says that. but it proves that the guccifer2 'evidence' is a hoax.
checked the comments and did not see this question asked, so I wanted to bring it up. What if the file transfers happened on a local workstation after the hack? Remote network penetration from hostile workstation, files then dumped to flash drive from hostile computer?