ADVERTISEMENT

What to make of the Durham filing?

Marvin the Martian said:
The client should cache the DNS. So if I go to Rivals, my phone should know the path. So I am not sure what could be learned. I do not recall length of cache, but I am not sure what could be learned

By the way, there is a sporting event of some kind on.
Click to expand...
Good point. The allegation is "data mining," but I was imagining some kind of back room real-time monitoring situation.

Still, it wouldn't be that hard for someone with access to the DNS server to simply set up his own hands-free logging operation if he wanted, right?
 
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
Good point. The allegation is "data mining," but I was imagining some kind of back room real-time monitoring situation.

Still, it wouldn't be that hard for someone with access to the DNS server to simply set up his own hands-free logging operation if he wanted, right?
Click to expand...

There are a couple options. As the packets hit routers, the routers record the to/from in a log. One can get to those logs. That would be illegal.

One could intercept the packets inside the network. That would be illegal.

One could setup a router and have it advertise that it can get to the site in a low number of hops. So if the site were rivals, any nearby systems would see that and send rivals traffic to my router where I could read the headers. I doubt that is illegal, one has little expectation of privacy for packet headers travelling in the wild.

But those aren't DNS lookup attacks. I am less certain how to get it by mining DNS lookups. The cache should render that less effective. If there is a simple query "hey, have you sent people to rivals today", I have never seen it. But I would doubt that is illegal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hank Reardon
Marvin the Martian said:
There are a couple options. As the packets hit routers, the routers record the to/from in a log. One can get to those logs. That would be illegal.

One could intercept the packets inside the network. That would be illegal.

One could setup a router and have it advertise that it can get to the site in a low number of hops. So if the site were rivals, any nearby systems would see that and send rivals traffic to my router where I could read the headers. I doubt that is illegal, one has little expectation of privacy for packet headers travelling in the wild.

But those aren't DNS lookup attacks. I am less certain how to get it by mining DNS lookups. The cache should render that less effective. If there is a simple query "hey, have you sent people to rivals today", I have never seen it. But I would doubt that is illegal.
Click to expand...
These guys don't need to intercept anything, though. They have access to the actual DNS servers being used, according to the motion.
 
DANC said:
But he doesn't support Republican policies when he voted for a Democrat for President.
Click to expand...
I don't know that he did vote for a Democrat... maybe he said he did somewhere and I missed it.
 
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
These guys don't need to intercept anything, though. They have access to the actual DNS servers being used, according to the motion.
Click to expand...
Yep, a quick look, ultradns is a domain server provider. I cannot imagine there is any expectation of privacy for headers.

If you use a remote secretarial service and I call them and they forward to you, would them releasing my number and time of call be illegal?
 
Marvin the Martian said:
Yep, a quick look, ultradns is a domain server provider. I cannot imagine there is any expectation of privacy for headers.

If you use a remote secretarial service and I call them and they forward to you, would them releasing my number and time of call be illegal?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure, but the question isn't even about releasing. It is: would a high-level exec in the company looking at the logs because he doesn't like me and trying to find embarrassing phone calls from Marvin be illegal? And would sharing reports about that information with the FBI in supposed support of my criminal activity be illegal?

I don't know. I doubt it, but I don't know for sure.
 
Marvin the Martian said:
Yep, a quick look, ultradns is a domain server provider. I cannot imagine there is any expectation of privacy for headers.

If you use a remote secretarial service and I call them and they forward to you, would them releasing my number and time of call be illegal?
Click to expand...
Bad analogy. As I understand Durham’s allegation, a legit tech contractor used its WH access to mine, manipulate, or fabricate data for the purpose of hurting the President for a political purpose on behalf of the Democratic Party.
 
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
I'm not sure, but the question isn't even about releasing. It is: would a high-level exec in the company looking at the logs because he doesn't like me and trying to find embarrassing phone calls from Marvin be illegal? And would sharing reports about that information with the FBI in supposed support of my criminal activity be illegal?

I don't know. I doubt it, but I don't know for sure.
Click to expand...
I do not know either. But if you lookup pornhub, I am not certain you have an expectation that is private. Hence why there are companies that will hide your DNS and packets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU, UncleMark and Marvin the Martian
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: larsIU, Indianaftw, UncleMark and 3 others
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
You didn't even read your own links. The FBI did not say that they couldn't determine access.
Click to expand...
It's right there on the 2nd page in the paragraph above Sec. A.

But since you conveniently can't find it, I'll put it here for you. Maybe you can deny it, even though it's in front of your face.

"However, investigative limitations, including the FBI's inability to obtain all mobile devices and various computer components associated with Clinton's e-mail systems, prevented the FBI from conclusively determining whether the classified information transmitted and stored on Clinton's personal server systems was compromised via via cyber intrusions or other means." (the bold is mine to show the FBI says data was transmitted)

So, yes, I read my own link and have quoted it multiple times now. But you'll keep saying that's not what it says, because you cannot ever admit you are wrong.
 
UncleMark said:
I don't think we should. I don't know how fleshed out a voting tabulator software platform is, but it should be the absolute bare bones. If the machines in service have Windows, you're screwed out of the gate. A bare bones open source build with only the necessary modules should be the standard. The problem I can imagine is that the people making the decisions are county clerks with no understanding of basic machine functioning and who are susceptible to a good sales pitch, and who like something that looks familiar, like the Windows machine on their desk.
Click to expand...
I agree, and this is why so many people are suspicious - rightly or wrongly - about the voting machines. There should be no intelligence in the machine regarding vote count - it should be little more than a calculator.

I don't know why Republicans aren't pushing this point harder.
 
DANC said:
It's right there on the 2nd page in the paragraph above Sec. A.

But since you conveniently can't find it, I'll put it here for you. Maybe you can deny it, even though it's in front of your face.

"However, investigative limitations, including the FBI's inability to obtain all mobile devices and various computer components associated with Clinton's e-mail systems, prevented the FBI from conclusively determining whether the classified information transmitted and stored on Clinton's personal server systems was compromised via via cyber intrusions or other means." (the bold is mine to show the FBI says data was transmitted)

So, yes, I read my own link and have quoted it multiple times now. But you'll keep saying that's not what it says, because you cannot ever admit you are wrong.
Click to expand...
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding that words have meanings and different words mean different things.
 
DANC said:
It's right there on the 2nd page in the paragraph above Sec. A.

But since you conveniently can't find it, I'll put it here for you. Maybe you can deny it, even though it's in front of your face.

"However, investigative limitations, including the FBI's inability to obtain all mobile devices and various computer components associated with Clinton's e-mail systems, prevented the FBI from conclusively determining whether the classified information transmitted and stored on Clinton's personal server systems was compromised via via cyber intrusions or other means." (the bold is mine to show the FBI says data was transmitted)

So, yes, I read my own link and have quoted it multiple times now. But you'll keep saying that's not what it says, because you cannot ever admit you are wrong.
Click to expand...

So they couldn't prove the negative?
 
UncleMark said:
So they couldn't prove the negative?
Click to expand...
It says they didn't have access and we know why - because they were destroyed.

Goat can play cute games all he wants - he knows why they were destroyed and so does anyone who is being honest.
 
DANC said:
It's right there on the 2nd page in the paragraph above Sec. A.

But since you conveniently can't find it, I'll put it here for you. Maybe you can deny it, even though it's in front of your face.

"However, investigative limitations, including the FBI's inability to obtain all mobile devices and various computer components associated with Clinton's e-mail systems, prevented the FBI from conclusively determining whether the classified information transmitted and stored on Clinton's personal server systems was compromised via via cyber intrusions or other means." (the bold is mine to show the FBI says data was transmitted)

So, yes, I read my own link and have quoted it multiple times now. But you'll keep saying that's not what it says, because you cannot ever admit you are wrong.
Click to expand...

Read that again, the FBI could not determine. That is not the same as it happened.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Zizkov
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
I'm curious. Do you honestly believe you are winning, or are you just too stubborn to admit you lost?
Click to expand...
I don't care if I'm 'winning' or not. I'm posting facts and you're attacking me because I'm posting uncomfortable facts that you don't want to admit.

But keep dancing!
 
mcmurtry66 said:
They can have mine:.

What side of the body is your heart on.

When will the housing market crash.

UFOs

What does it mean if your right arm is numb

Is a coyote tougher than a pit bull
Click to expand...
Oh come on didn’t you watch “Pam and Tommy” on Hulu? Seth Rogan and Nick Offerman certainly picked a strange project to star in with that one.
 
Bill4411 said:
Oh come on didn’t you watch “Pam and Tommy” on Hulu? Seth Rogan and Nick Offerman certainly picked a strange project to star in with that one.
Click to expand...
Lol I think I'm going to take a pass on that one - and that's coming from a guy who's a big Tiger King fan. We're in a bit of trickbag tho. We planned to watch Inventing Anna but it has a horrible score on rotten tomatoes
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Bill4411
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MyTeamIsOnTheFloor

142,081,771 < 155,507,476

Replies
33
Views
910
The Water Cooler
mcmurtry66
M
stollcpa

Joe Rogan Interview

Replies
126
Views
3K
The Water Cooler
DANC
D
BradStevens

Brianna Wu--a progressive expressing regret at progressive politics re trans movement, identity politics, Israeli, etc.

Replies
7
Views
314
The Water Cooler
mcmurtry66
M
IUclover

Tips for my First Disc Golf Tourney Tomorrow?

Replies
52
Views
1K
The Water Cooler
mcmurtry66
M
K

She is the only choice we have but if Harris says she is going to curb inflation one more time by

Replies
43
Views
2K
The Water Cooler
ChicagoFineForNow
C
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back