Tea Leaves and Alpha Bank – UPDATED 11/1
Read this. JUST. READ. IT.
The article, by Franklin Foer, published on Slate at 5:36 p.m., is titled “Was a Trump Server Communicating With Russia?”
This is big. So big you’ll get sick of big.
Believe me.
____
UPDATE: This is a very long article, and I hadn’t finished it when I posted this. Now that I’ve finished it, I seems extremely likely to me that this is the information that Harry Reid was referencing in his letter to Comey yesterday. If so, this is just stunning–that the FBI has withheld this information from the public, yet Comey waited a nanosecond after learning of the emails on Weiner’s computer to announce it to the public even without knowing what they actually were.
Did Comey know last Friday that this news was about to break? Did that play into his decision to make that information public?
The plot sickens. In any event, it does seem that the info Reid wanted so badly to become public, now has, as of tonight. This is the “explosive information” that he was referencing in that letter. Near the end of the Foer article, he discusses the role that two NYT reporters, Eric Lichtblau an Steven Lee Myers, who also were chasing the story, played in the actual substantive events in September when they made their investigation known to Alpha Bank. And the Times reporters were in contact with Foer today, right after the Slate article was published. There should be a major story on this in tomorrow’s Times; I would think so, anyway.
But I hope one of these journalists, or another one, asks the computer scientists they’ve been working with if they think there’s a way to determine whether the same crowd that is communicating via the setup described in the article also played role in the appearance of tens of thousands of Huma Amedin’s personal emails on the hard drive of Weiner’s computer. And whether that is why Trump suddenly late last summer started claiming that Weiner had access to Abedin’s State Dept. emails.
Tomorrow should be an interesting day.
Added 10/31 at 10:14 p.m.
____
SECOND UPDATE: Reader Noni Mausa and I just exchanged these comments in the Comments thread this morning:
Noni Mausa / November 1, 2016 10:06 am
I have wondered for some years how long it will be till computer files, images, and emails lose their evidential status, given the expanding abilities of hackers — the digital equivalent of planting drugs or stolen goods in someone’s home is becoming rapidly more plausible.
As for the NYT article, I of course have no firsthand knowledge, (how many of us do? that’s why we have reporters). but the bona fides of the hacker-hunters sound bona fide to me. If messages of some sort were passing between a large Russian bank and Trump’s headquarters, with their frequency responsive to electoral events stateside, at the very least this seems an indication of common interests, whether financial or political. Even if they were “innocently” tied to ordinary financial dealings, this is still of deep concern when the presidency comes into it.
I dare say, since the dedicated mutual traffic on the server on Trump’s end has now gone dark, we will probably not be able to ever know the details of the Trump-Alfa conversation. Stay tuned for another half-dozen conspiracy theories, of which one, the least plausible, will be true, plus at least two major motion pictures.
Me / November 1, 2016 10:26 am
Wow. Noni, you raise a really interesting point about the Trump server. Based on all that stuff reported about retrieving stuff from Clinton’s server, I think the FBI COULD retrieve info from that server.
Soooo … if this is the stuff Reid WAS referring to by “explosive information” that the FBI is sitting on, has the FBI sought a search warrant to confiscate the server? If nor, why not? And if the FBI did NOT know of the server–something that seems unlikely, given that at least one of the scientists who provided the info to Foer, the Slate journalist, apparently works as a contractor for the FBI, and given that these scientists have been trying since last June to attract some media attention to their Reddit posts–will the FBI NOW IMMEDIATELY REQUEST A SEARCH WARRANT TO CONFISCATE THE SERVER? AND WILL THE FBI, UM, ANNOUNCE THAT, BEFORE THE ELECTION?
Harry Reid should hold a press conference on this. TODAY.
Updated 11/1 at 11:05 a.m.
Doing your Trump impression? It could be big but it isn’t yet. There’s too much they don’t know.
No, the NYT will have a big story about it tomorrow, including about two of its reporters’ direct impact on what happened. I just added a long update to the post on this.
You’re a riot. “Read this. JUST. READ. IT.”
AND YOU HADN’T READ IT?!
There are a few of glaring holes in this proposition. If the servers were set up to communicate only with each other, they would not use DNS at all. They would exchange IP addresses and use them without any DNS lookup at all. (I see this scheme all the time. We just put the IP addresses in /etc/hosts or in the application property files. The firewalls on the receiving end will only accept from a specific server on a specific port, encoded with a specific key.)
Second, there seems to be no indication that the Trump server did a DNS lookup for Alfa Bank. A one-way email conversation?
Finally, there IS such a thing a “‘regular’ DNS server traffic.” It happens every time someone does a ping, dig, or getent.
I’d read about three-fourths of it–enough to know its stunning importance, and that you should JUST, READ. IT.
Bev – Once again you are making very wild accusations. You say “Believe me”. Then you speak of a NYT article.
The article is out. The title is:
Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia
Got that Bev?
In the story the Times says:
no evidence has emerged that would link him or anyone else in his business or political circle directly to Russia’s election operations.
Quite different than what you have said..
Then you push the story about Alpha bank. You have that wrong too:
Alfa Bank sent more than 2,700 “look-up” messages — a first step for one system’s computers to talk to another — to a Trump-connected server beginning in the spring. But the F.B.I. ultimately concluded that there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts.
So the NYT does not support what you have said. The Times has the opposite side of what you are selling.
Bev – step back a bit. You have accused the Russian government of planting evidence in Weiner’s laptop. That is a very big accusation to make. As of right now I see no evidence that supports your accusations from the NYT.
These are some very bad people you are calling crooks. You can be certain that they are now monitoring your posts at AB. I think they have every keystroke you make. Are you getting paid a lot of money to take these risks?
BK:
And the need for court orders, actual evidence, and correct statements is what? Kettle calling the pot black. Comey came out and ascertained the emails on Weiner’s computer were HRCs two weeks before an election which is a violation of the Hatch Act. Setting this aside, he had not even examined the emails, could not look at them without a court order, and yet he sent a letter. He should be fired and stripped of his civil servant retirement.
I’d love to believe I’m going to live long enough to see the 70+ year ongoing demonization of the Russian/Commie boogeyman face some fact based accountability.
But I will be 56 next month with a family history of early heart disease. So not counting on it.
Runny – Violation of the Hatch Act? Are you a lawyer? Do you understand what is the Hatch Act? I suspect not. Read up on this – from CNN:
The key text is the emphasized phrase — which conditions a violation of the statute on whether the employee’s purpose was to interfere with or affect the result of an election. Thus, the Hatch Act does not focus on the effect of the employee’s conduct, but the intent. To that end, if Comey did not intend to interfere with or affect the upcoming election through his letter to Congress, then he did not violate the letter of the Hatch Act.
So to be on the wrong side of this administrative rule there has to be proof of intent (SOUND FAMILIAR?)
Run, you don’t know the facts – no one does. I say to you again (and again) if you think Comey is a crazy fool who has done something insane then please wait another few weeks. Wait for some facts. I think you will come to learn that Comey had substantial reason to do what he did. He discussed this with dozens of DOJ and FBI lawyers before he acted.
However, when all the info is out if we find that Comey acted with malice, that he did so without advice from DOJ lawyers, that his intent with his letter was to disrupt a national election, then I will join with you in calling for him to be dragged over the coals. If Comey is guilty (there is intent) then he will never again work as a lawyer or government employee again in his life.
Do really think Comey is that stupid?? He is not stupid Run. He knew about every risk he faced when he wrote the letter. He wrote the letter because he knew at the time there was a boatload of evidence on the Weiner computer to support his actions.
The CNN link on the Hatch Act.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/31/politics/what-is-the-hatch-act/
Bkrasting: the reporting thus far is that the Justice Dept. lawyers Comey consulted advised against making the statement. If he knew there was “a boatload” of evidence, one has to wonder how he knew since he claims to have known nothing until last Thursday although his people have had the computer without a warrant to search these emails for weeks at least. I agree that the facts are murky but they smell bad.
Here is the Hatch Act: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/7323
What do Director Comey do, exactly, that violated that law?
I have wondered for some years how long it will be till computer files, images, and emails lose their evidential status, given the expanding abilities of hackers — the digital equivalent of planting drugs or stolen goods in someone’s home is becoming rapidly more plausible.
As for the NYT article, I of course have no firsthand knowledge, (how many of us do? that’s why we have reporters). but the bona fides of the hacker-hunters sound bona fide to me. If messages of some sort were passing between a large Russian bank and Trump’s headquarters, with their frequency responsive to electoral events stateside, at the very least this seems an indication of common interests, whether financial or political. Even if they were “innocently” tied to ordinary financial dealings, this is still of deep concern when the presidency comes into it.
I dare say, since the dedicated mutual traffic on the server on Trump’s end has now gone dark, we will probably not be able to ever know the details of the Trump-Alfa conversation. Stay tuned for another half-dozen conspiracy theories, of which one, the least plausible, will be true, plus at least two major motion pictures.
Wow. Noni, you raise a really interesting point about the Trump server. Based on all that stuff reported about retrieving stuff from Clinton’s server, I think the FBI COULD retrieve info from that server.
Soooo … if this is the stuff Reid WAS referring to by “explosive information” that the FBI is sitting on, has the FBI sought a search warrant to confiscate the server? If nor, why not? And if the FBI did NOT know of the server–something that seems unlikely, given that at least one of the scientists who provided the info to Foer, the Slate journalist, apparently works as a contractor for the FBI, and given that these scientists have been trying since last June to attract some media attention to their Reddit posts–will the FBI NOW IMMEDIATELY REQUEST A SEARCH WARRANT TO CONFISCATE THE SERVER? AND WILL THE FBI, UM, ANNOUNCE THAT, BEFORE THE ELECTION?
Harry Reid should hold a press conference on this. TODAY.
I don’t understand what you all are arguing about? We all know that in high level, high profile cases like this nobody ever goes to jail. Are you kidding me or just like to blog out total nonsense? Nothing can be proven, no evidence of any wrong doing will ever be displayed and only the Washington brand of political insider justice of the elites will be served. What planet have you been on? Perhaps the space aliens did it as I heard they as also want to fix the election and was talked about in the e-mails. Comey is as innocent as a man as there is but if it fits you agenda to crucify him you will.
Why, exactly, do you think the immediate issue is JAIL rather than, y’know, information made public before the, um, ELECTION?
Seriously, William? You missed that point? Seriously?
“[The] bona fides of the hacker-hunters sound bona fide to me.”
Based on what? We don’t even know who they are. This “reporter,” or his source, could just be making it up.
Warren: chiefly because the hacker-hunter took pains to describe his/her process, possible interpretations, things he/she checked, and the technicalities in exhaustive detail, like an engineer describing the inner workings of an engine LONG PAST the level of detail that most listeners would ever sit still for.
It is very hard to imitate this sort of immersive explanation, and certainly impossible to do so on the Internet, subject to the swarming Nerd Hordes of Technicality.
I bought a used camera last fall chiefly based on this quality in the seller. I obviously was eager to buy the camera, but he spent more than an hour explaining it, looking at my old camera, discussing other lenses I might want in the future, and discussing the new camera he’d gotten to replace the one he was selling. If he hadn’t had a plane to catch, we would have had a seminar, complete with lunch break and PowerPoint lecture.
Once you’ve seen this professional involvement in person, it’s unmistakable and quite reliable.
“It is very hard to imitate this sort of immersive explanation, and certainly impossible to do so on the Internet, subject to the swarming Nerd Hordes of Technicality.”
Being a member of that Nerd Herd (I do this mess for the FFM), I could go through a shoot more holes in it than I already have, if you like.
Warren,
They explained who they were and why they want to stay anonymous. But not all of them are anonymous.
http://business.financialpost.com/news/fp-street/canadian-to-receive-fbi-award-for-uncovering-massive-botnet-scheme?__lsa=be98-1bcd
Earlier this month, the group of computer scientists passed the logs to Paul Vixie. In the world of DNS experts, there’s no higher authority. Vixie wrote central strands of the DNS code that makes the internet work. After studying the logs, he concluded, “The parties were communicating in a secretive fashion. The operative word is secretive. This is more akin to what criminal syndicates do if they are putting together a project.”
“Comey waited a nanosecond after learning of the emails on Weiner’s computer to announce it to the public….”
This is the part I missed. WHEN did Comey do that?
Nanosecond?? In other words Comey did not consider this at all. He did not consult with DOJ and FBI lawyers. In less than a second he made up his mind and wrote a letter.
Ok. But the facts will come out. The facts will show that at least 24 hrs went by. The facts will show that the letter to congress was discussed with not less that a dozen lawyers.
You folks are just making stuff up on the fly. Fortunately there is a record that we will be able to look back on.
What blows my mind with the conspiracy talk is that the conspiracy only works is if Comey has gone insane. He had a mental breakdown and acted without talking with anyone. He acted in a matter of seconds. He ruined his career – he will never work again. He ruined the reputation of the FBI. He will go down in history as one of the most demented and dangerous characters to ever hit DC.
But none of that stuff is true. Comey is a lifer in DC. He is a lawyer and would never -ever – write a letter without consulting with other lawyers. He did not take the most significant step in his life based on a nanosecond of thought.
Do really believe that Comey did this so he could support Trump? Only a fool would believe that.
geez
An entire post that makes something over a figure of speech.
“After studying the logs, he concluded, ‘The parties were communicating in a secretive fashion. The operative word is secretive. This is more akin to what criminal syndicates do if they are putting together a project.’”
THAT is the MAJOR flaw in the theory. If they were putting together a project in secretive fashion, they would just us IP addresses and bypass DNS look-ups, and thus DNS servers, completely.
Warren,
And if they adapted pre existing servers?
I am far from knowledgeable in this area, but I am going to listen to Vixie over some guy named Warren.
Did the “reporter” bother to confirm this story with Vixie?
It does not matter whether the servers are pre-existing or not. Just get the IP address once, use that in the addresses of your emails (i.e., TheDonald@12.34.56.78) and away you go. No hostname, no DNS lookup.
The traffic will show up in the ROUTER logs, but not in the DNS server logs.
Here’s another screwball thing. Most places host their own DNS servers. When one of the computers in a company’s system needs to translate a hostname to an IP address, it will query the local DNS server. If that server does not have the address in cache, then it will query other servers. So the Alfa DNS server would have to clear that address out of its cache frequently for that query to show up in other DNS servers. This just does not make sense for an email conversation. The address would continue to work and so would not be removed from the cache during the conversation. Weird indeed.
Warren,
Do you understand that you have used the quotes from Vixie about these servers in this story?
And you think Vixie did not confirm this story?
You should stick to the nerd herd and stay away from people who can read and write.
No — there is no indication that Vixie has confirmed the story.
Warren: “Being a member of that Nerd Herd (I do this mess for the FFM), I could go through a shoot more holes in it than I already have, if you like.”
Don’t bother. Not that you don’t know your stuff, or that I think “I have my own facts thank you” but simply because I am not equipped to judge the technicalities, one way or the other, and nothing short of a lightning-fast degree in computer stuff is going to get me there. That’s not gonna happen — I’m retired, emphasis on the “tired.”
But you asked me why I found the hacker-hunter’s statements plausible, and I told you why. My opinion isn’t going to effect this election one way or the other, and I don’t claim to own a Lasso of Truth, but if the reporters or their sources are making stuff up, they’re better actors than you usually encounter.
Warren,
I realize you do not understand that Vixie confirmed the story. The fact that he was presented with all of the work of the nerds and commented on his conclusion based on that research is something that only people who can read would know.
Vixie’s conclusions ARE the story.
Yet you think he did not “confirm” the story.
If ignorance is bliss, you are the most happy person in the world.
Maybe you missed the fact that Vixie’s comments came third-hand. First, the Slate author did not confirm them, but got them (apparently) from the NYT reporter, who did not even mention Vixie in his own article, but got that from these anonymous “scientists.” Could it be that the NYT reporter did not mention Vixie because Vixie either did not confirm, or outright denied, that he said what had been attributed to him?
All the Clinton as the lesser evil voters are getting sucked down with her. Right down the rabbit hole where ever it leads , enjoy the ride suckers.
It’s sort of like listening to a football fan defend Ray Rice after he beat the shit out of his girlfriend in an elevator. They want to win the superbowl so they pretend its not a big deal.