There are all sorts of hacker message boards where rootkits and other hacking tools can be downloaded. Trivial to obtain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rootkit A rootkit is a collection of computer software, typically malicious, designed to enable access to a computer or areas of its software that would not otherwise be allowed (for example, to an unauthorized user) and often masks its existence or the existence of other software.[1] ... Once installed, it becomes possible to hide the intrusion as well as to maintain privileged access. The key is the root or administrator access. Full control over a system means that existing software can be modified, including software that might otherwise be used to detect or circumvent it. ... Rootkit detection is difficult because a rootkit may be able to subvert the software that is intended to find it. Detection methods include using an alternative and trusted operating system, behavioral-based methods, signature scanning, difference scanning, and memory dump analysis. Removal can be complicated or practically impossible, especially in cases where the rootkit resides in the kernel; reinstallation of the operating system may be the only available solution to the problem.[2]
Did the Russian help Trump get elected? Hell no! Clinton was near the worse candidate for President ever. Did the Russian hack Clinton's email? Who cares? She was stupid enough to make it easy, but we learned little except the truth. Half of which we should have learned from a free press doing their proper work. No matter who is in power, security needs to be corrected to prevent hackers, Russian or other. It occurs to me now as I reflect on our history with Russia, that our greatest periods of tension with Russia, beginning during WWII, have always been when the Democrats are in power. Beginning with FDR virtually ceding Easter Europe to the Russians at Yalta, laying frame work for the cold war. Then Democrat Harry Truman letting the Russian seal the gates and take over vast territories in Asia, creating North Korea. Truman also failed to help Ho Chi Minh, whom helped defeat Japan, prevent the French from returning as Colonial overlords in Indo China, leaving him no option other than China and the Soviets as a source of aid. It was also the Democrat, Kennedy that the Russian thought they could steam roll in Cuba, by placing Missiles within short range of the US. Then again with years of tension under the Democrat Carter and his misguided henchman, Brzezinski harassing the Russians for their war in Afghanistan as sort of pay back for messing with us in Vietnam. Actually the Russian's purpose in Afghanistan was not all that different from the US mission there now. Attempting to eliminate havens for Islamic terrorist activity in their(our) country. Eiesenhower, tried to lessen the tensions, as was the intension's of Reagan, who was ultimately successful. Although Reagan had to ratchet it up, to show it for what it was, ridiculous. It does not surprise me to find Trump seeks to have better relations with the Russian, we should. I have no desire to contribute a grandson to the struggle over where the boarder ls located between Russia and the Ukraine. Enough of this using the Russians as a common enemy to unite this nation. We need to put that arcane game away, and use logic. The Russians did not help Trump get elected, the American people came to their senses as they occasionally do.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet Stuxnet is a malicious computer worm believed to be a jointly built American-Israeli cyberweapon,[1] although no organization or state has officially admitted responsibility. However, anonymous US officials speaking to The Washington Post claimed the worm was developed during the Bush administration to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program with what would seem like a long series of unfortunate accidents.[2] Stuxnet specifically targets programmable logic controllers (PLCs), which allow the automation of electromechanical processes such as those used to control machinery on factory assembly lines, amusement rides, or centrifuges for separating nuclear material. Exploiting four zero-day flaws,[3] Stuxnet functions by targeting machines using the Microsoft Windows operating system and networks, then seeking out Siemens Step7 software. Stuxnet reportedly compromised Iranian PLCs, collecting information on industrial systems and causing the fast-spinning centrifuges to tear themselves apart.[4] Stuxnet’s design and architecture are not domain-specific and it could be tailored as a platform for attacking modern SCADA and PLC systems (e.g., in automobile[vague] or power plants), the majority of which reside in Europe, Japan and the US.[5] Stuxnet reportedly ruined almost one fifth of Iran's nuclear centrifuges.[6]
For context, the Economist is a very well-respected right-of-center magazine. Kind of like The Financial Times.
First it was Comey, then it was the EC, then it was the fake news and then it was Russia Democrats now a days, complete shit show. Face the fact that your diety lost because she was fucking terrible.
Speaking of governments deliberately trying to influence elections: http://journal-neo.org/2016/08/04/c...rs-frequently-intervene-in-foreign-elections/
Either the Russians attempted to influence the election or they didn't, but if they did, is it an act of war that must be responded to or should it be ignored? I await the full investigation before letting myself worry about that question, but finding the truth should be beyond party affiliation.
My point being that it's a normal part of world affairs for governments to try to promote the election or ascendence to power of people that they believe will be advantageous for that government's goals. It's been happening since the dawn of organized nationstates. We've done it countless times and I'm sure there are many examples of other countries trying to influence our elections. The evolution of computer networks makes it easier for the system to be manipulated and I'm all in favor of making whatever changes we can to firm up security. That said, nobody has advanced any credible evidence that the outcome of the election was impacted in any substantive way by the WikiLeaks dump. Or are you of the opinion that the folks in California were too stoned to have been aware of those stories and so continued to vote for Hillary in massive numbers?
IMO, it is only in the realm of an "act of war" if they actively manipulated the vote by hacking computer networks to stuff the ballot results. I've seen absolutely no evidence of that. In fact what recounts we have seen have shown no evidence at all of that.
I think it's a fuzzy distinction; whether it was a sophisticated psy-op or a cyber-security operation, it's still an overtly hostile act. Like I said I'll wait for the full investigation before I decide what I think about all of this.
I used to play the board game "Risk" in my college years...was thinking of how Trump is allying himself with Russia, India, Taiwan, Japan, Phillipines and testing China..if you've ever played risk, it looks like he's going after China and Iran and might share the spoils with several of their neighbors....this is not a fact..just a thought I had about the logistics of his early contacts after the election and his tone with China and Iran...
Democrats shown to influence the election by voting for and passing laws which allow for illegal aliens to vote (no ID required in multitude of places). They influence the election by busing illegals & homeless, etc, to polling booths (video admittance from DNC operatives). They take massive foreign donations disguised through their charities. "The FBI does not dispute that the CIA's assessment could be accurate, said a U.S. official with knowledge of the matter. The difference lies in the institutional standards the agencies require in reaching such conclusions. While the CIA develops assessments based on a broad interpretation of available data, the FBI, as a law enforcement agency, requires a standard of proof that could sustain a possible criminal prosecution." "TheNew York Timesreports: “The C.I.A.’s conclusion does not appear to be the product of specific new intelligence obtained since the election, several American officials, including some who had read the agency’s briefing, said on Sunday. Rather, it was an analysis of what many believe is overwhelming circumstantial evidence — evidence that others feel does not support firm judgments — that the Russians put a thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump, and got their desired outcome.” In other words, someone only decided after Trump won that the accusation was worth making." But all of that didn't matter until they lost. Now it's a butt-hurt fervor over so-called "Russia's" attempt at influencing an election, however "broad interpretation & could" doesn't cut the mustard. This is a grasping at straws approach by the butt-hurt left, which resemble a certain twitter-loving poster here, to de-legitimize Trump's win.
It's completely expected the Clinton Foundation would have a folder names Pay to Play. Sheesh. Or that the hacker might organize what he found. The revelation hit you yet?
It's so funny, and predictable..... Recount funded by the D's out there fails miserably. So much so, Jill Stein will never be remembered again past last week, that it caused the Dems to try and recharge this "russia" hacking narrative. I actually am somewhat happy that the, Clinton, Podesta and DNC got their shit leaked. They were exposed for the corrupt scumbags that they are. Actually everyone should be happy.
