How is that at all relevant to your false allegation?
What do you mean by physical disks? I just told you that you aren’t getting any infrastructure from a cloud provider… the includes the servers and any drives associates with them.
Even if the servers were on prem… you still may not get the physical drives. The drives may be a part of a production environment and taking them would cause outages.
Ok. If you say so.
If Russia hacked, they were not the only ones. Also… I dont buy the premise that another hacker could not have set up Russia to look like the hacker. Hillary would not have welcomed that information. SO the company was not paid to produce it.
Standard excuses. If someone made an image - as libs said was done - then you can remove the original disk and replace with a new one with the image of the old.
Flailing and failing.
Yeah, I know so… I’ve had a “little” experience with them computers and such… Mighta even done a little security work here and there…
I said “maybe” but luckily for you we aren’t talking about on prem devices.
If you say so,
it’s just a diversion to create some doubt. it will work on many of the less technical partisans.
Funny. I’ve had a “little” experience with ground to air missile systems and Russian conops. But when the shootdown of the aircraft over Ukraine came up… you libs cared not about any actual experience with such things.
Same thing for certain classified information issues. And others…
I wonder if Trump’s sycophants will comprehend that he’s a liar and an idiot.
(Note: That’s not actually true: I don’t wonder about that.)
As a handy link, Mueller’s indictment can be read here:
Cool story, but it turns out that the people who do know what they are talking about have no such doubts. Because and I’ve demonstrated, the FBI had no problem attributing the attack to Russia.
Seems lik yours is a position borne of ignorance.
And yours is based on the belief there is no deep state.
It also doesn’t mention the reason the DNC technician rebuffed the FBI multiple times… As explained in memos the technician wrote after each of the early contacts with the FBI, the technician received a PHONE CALL that stated they were with the FBI and were wanting access to the DNC system to investigate hacking.
Now surely, a chief scientist, knows that one of the FUNDAMENTALS of security is NOT to give access to someone claiming authority in a phone call. This is called social engineering as is THE MOST effective way to breach a system.
So you have nothing other than lies, conspiracy and suspicion.
Gotcha.
The greatest threat is on the inside… a person who is authorized and either malicious, negligent, or otherwise intentionally allowing unauthorized access
Would you advise your staff to immediately grant access to your systems to someone who called and said they are with the FBI? Simple question…
I made no mention of that early FBI contact. Bringing it up is a diversion.
I seriously doubt if the request was made as you describe it anyhow. No one would grant the request without a proper vetting and protected remote access via a secure interface.
My cousin’s mom did. The guy said he was from Microsoft though and had an Indian accent. She let him remote in.
Yeah. Well congrats. Now some little kids in India probably use your picture for purposes you never imagined.
