| > Even CrowdStrike seems to be backing away from those claims in this last week This is untrue: As we’ve repeatedly stated, we stand by the findings and analysis of our investigation, and, as detailed in our company statement, we’ve provided all forensic evidence and analysis to the FBI as requested. Additionally, our findings have been supported by the U.S. intelligence community and other cybersecurity companies. https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democ... > Assange... say[s] "It wasn't the Russians" Has he actually said that? The actual quotes I've seen have not been definitive: "The same day, Assange told NBC News that "it's what's in the emails that's important, not who hacked them." When asked by NBC News if WikiLeaks might have been used to distribute documents stolen as part of a Russian intelligence operation, Assange replied: "There is no proof of that whatsoever. We have not disclosed our source."[1] and "On Sean Hannity’s radio show, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said that hacked Democratic documents sent to reporters at Gawker and The Hill may have come from Russia. But, he said, he is confident the emails he received did not come from the same source.".. "“Our source is not the Russian government,” said Assange, later claiming WikiLeaks did not receive its material from any state actor, Russia or otherwise."[2] (Note "state actor" - which would align with the idea that the hacking group is just under direction of Russian intel, not that it is part of it) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guccifer_2.0 [2] https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/310654-assange-some... |
Re: Assange - yes - he is quite circumspect.