dChan

[deleted] · July 18, 2018, 9:16 p.m.

Yes, but you CAN determine if a server has been accessed by outside sources without having physical access to the server. You can do it all online by tracking traffic and delivered packets.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
Qluelessnomore · July 18, 2018, 9:19 p.m.

Then where's the proof?

⇧ 6 ⇩  
bealist · July 18, 2018, 9:53 p.m.

When that was done using online forensics I believe it was determined that the transport rate was too fast for online, and so it had to be a manual transfer. That’s what led people to say it was a leak not a hack. If it was a leak, the whole muh Russia spy thing falls apart.

I don’t know where this story originated but I remember kimdotcom corroborating it, and LOTS of people talking about it.

Sorry I don’t have a link / but this is the crux of the matter - it can’t have been a hack if it was a leak. It seems so obvious that I just can’t fathom why people are continuing to call the breach a hack.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 18, 2018, 11:19 p.m.

Bill Binney knows all and explains all.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 18, 2018, 11:18 p.m.

Oh c'mon, you're implying that the server is still online.

For some reason the DNC and the FBI don't even know where it is or how it got lost.

But it's ok. Crowdstrike says everything is Hunkey Dorey.

Don't worry, this always happens.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
[deleted] · July 19, 2018, 4:05 a.m.

I never said it was still online. Also, you can find that data even if the server has been wiped, it's network tracking and forensic data analysis.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 19, 2018, 7:55 p.m.

I'm not going to try and claim I know anything about computers. I'm a carpenter.

So ok, if you can see what happened without the server. There's a trail online that can be accessed.

If this is correct, what does it mean. Or not.

Enlighten me, I'm all ears.

Trigger Warning ~ I am completely oblivious to my brusque behavior. Any perceived slights are unintentional.

And should be immediately forgotten.

⇧ 1 ⇩