<\/p>\n
Michael Krieger
\nLiberty Blietzkrieg<\/p>\n
As usual, the rabbit hole gets much deeper the more you look.<\/p>\n
In yesterday\u2019s post,\u00a0Credibility of Cyber Firm that Claimed Russia Hacked the DNC Comes Under Serious Question<\/a>, I examined how CrowdStrike, the cybersecurity firm hired by the DNC to look into its hacking breach, had been exposed as being completely wrong about a separate attack it claimed originated from the same group it claimed\u00a0broke into DNC systems, and supposedly works for Russia\u2019s military intelligence unit, GRU. Here\u2019s some of what we learned:<\/p>\n An influential British think tank and Ukraine\u2019s military are disputing a report that the U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has used to buttress its claims of Russian hacking in the presidential election.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The\u00a0CrowdStrike report, released in December<\/a>, asserted that Russians hacked into a Ukrainian artillery app, resulting in heavy losses of howitzers in Ukraine\u2019s war with Russian-backed separatists.<\/em><\/p>\n But the\u00a0International Institute for Strategic Studies<\/a>\u00a0(IISS) told VOA that CrowdStrike erroneously used IISS data as proof of the intrusion.\u00a0IISS disavowed any connection to the CrowdStrike report. Ukraine\u2019s Ministry of Defense also has claimed combat losses and hacking never happened.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n The challenges to CrowdStrike\u2019s credibility are significant because the firm was the first to link last year\u2019s hacks of Democratic Party computers to Russian actors, and because CrowdStrike co-founder Dimiti Alperovitch has trumpeted its Ukraine report as more evidence of Russian election tampering.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Yaroslav Sherstyuk, maker of the Ukrainian military app in question, called the company\u2019s report \u201cdelusional\u201d\u00a0in a Facebook post<\/a>. CrowdStrike never contacted him before or after its report was published, he told VOA.<\/em><\/p>\n VOA first contacted IISS in February to verify the alleged artillery losses. Officials there initially were unaware of the CrowdStrike assertions.\u00a0After investigating, they determined that CrowdStrike misinterpreted their data and hadn\u2019t reached out beforehand for comment or clarification.<\/em><\/p>\n CrowdStrike declined to answer VOA\u2019s written questions about the Ukraine report, and Alperovitch canceled a March 15 interview on the topic.\u00a0<\/strong>In a December statement to VOA\u2019s Ukrainian Service, spokeswoman Ilina Dimitrova defended the company\u2019s conclusions.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Seems like pretty extraordinary incompetence. Either that, or something else was potentially at play; namely, a desire to push the narrative that Russia hacked the DNC, irrespective of the facts.<\/p>\n The whole things gets even more disturbing the more you look.<\/strong><\/p>\n For example,\u00a0Counterpunch<\/a><\/em> put out a very important article earlier today on the topic, adding several crucial nuggets of information.<\/p>\n First there\u2019s this:<\/p>\n The investigation methods used to come to the conclusion that the Russian Government led the hacks of the\u00a0DNC<\/a>,\u00a0Clinton<\/a>\u00a0Campaign Chair John Podesta, and the DCCC were further called into question by a recent BuzzFeed\u00a0report<\/a>\u00a0by Jason Leopold, who has developed a notable reputation from leading several non-partisan Freedom of Information Act lawsuits for investigative journalism purposes. On March 15 that the Department of Homeland Security released just two heavily redacted pages of unclassified information in response to an FOIA request for definitive evidence of Russian election interference allegations. Leopold wrote, \u201cwhat the agency turned over to us and Ryan Shapiro, a PhD candidate at MIT and a research affiliate at Harvard University, is truly bizarre: a two-page intelligence assessment of the incident, dated Aug. 22, 2016, that contains information DHS culled from the internet.<\/strong> It\u2019s all unclassified \u2014 yet DHS covered nearly everything in wide swaths of black ink. Why? Not because it would threaten national security, but because it would reveal the methods DHS uses to gather intelligence, methods that may amount to little more than using Google.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n That\u2019s weird enough, but it gets far\u00a0stranger. For example:<\/p>\n In lieu of substantive evidence provided to the public that the alleged hacks which led to Wikileaks releases of DNC and Clinton Campaign Manager John Podesta\u2019s emails were orchestrated by the Russian Government, CrowdStrike\u2019s bias has been\u00a0cited\u00a0<\/a>as undependable in its own assessment, in addition to its skeptical methods and conclusions. The firm\u2019s CTO and co-founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is a\u00a0senior fellow<\/a>\u00a0at the Atlantic Council, a think tank with openly anti-Russian sentiments that is funded by Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk, who also happened to donate at least $10 million to the\u00a0Clinton Foundation<\/a>.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n In 2013, the Atlantic Council\u00a0awarded<\/a>\u00a0Hillary\u00a0Clinton<\/a>\u00a0it\u2019s Distinguished International Leadership Award.<\/strong> In 2014, the Atlantic Council\u00a0hosted<\/a>\u00a0one of several events with former Ukrainian Prime Minister\u00a0Arseniy Yatsenyuk<\/a>, who took over after pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych was ousted in early 2014, who now lives in exile in Russia.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Recall that the FBI was denied access to the DNC servers by the DNC itself, and simply agreed to\u00a0rely on the results provided by CrowdStrike, which as you can see has ties to all sorts of anti-Russia organizations and individuals. I find it absolutely remarkable that James Comey head of the FBI outsourced his job to CrowdStrike.<\/p>\n There remains zero evidence that Russia hacked the DNC. I repeat, there remains zero evidence that Russia hacked the DNC.<\/strong><\/p>\n As cybersecurity expert Jeffrey Carr noted:<\/p>\n Jeffrey Carr\u00a0called<\/a>\u00a0the\u00a0FBI<\/a>\/Department of Homeland Security Report, the only alleged evidence released by intelligence officials, released in late December 2016 a \u201cfatally flawed effort\u201d that provided no evidence to substantiate the claims that the Russian government conducted the hacks, though that\u2019s what it was purported to do.<\/em><\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Absolutely remarkable, but there\u2019s more. As TechCrunch<\/em><\/a> reported back in 2015:<\/p>\n If you need proof that security is a red hot market these days, how about this morning\u2019s announcement that cybersecurity company\u00a0CrowdStrike<\/a>\u00a0landed a $100 million Series C investment round?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n The round was led by Google Capital<\/strong> with Rackspace, which happens to be one of the company\u2019s customers also investing. Existing investors\u00a0Accel and Warburg Pincus also participated. Today\u2019s investment brings the total to-date to $156 million.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Why do I find it interesting that Google was a major investor in CrowdStrike? Well for one, we know that Chairman of Alphabet, Inc. (Google\u2019s parent company), Eric Schmidt, was actively working to help the Hillary campaign. As I highlighted\u00a0in the 2015 post,Meet \u201cGroundwork\u201d \u2013 Google Chairman Eric Schmidt\u2019s Stealth Startup Working to Make Hillary Clinton President<\/a>:<\/p>\n An under-the-radar startup funded by billionaire Eric Schmidt has become a major technology vendor for Hillary Clinton\u2019s presidential campaign, underscoring the bonds between Silicon Valley and Democratic politics.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The Groundwork, according to Democratic campaign operatives and technologists, is part of efforts by Schmidt\u2014the executive chairman of Google parent-company Alphabet\u2014to ensure that Clinton has the engineering talent needed to win the election.<\/strong> And it is one of a series of quiet investments by Schmidt that recognize how modern political campaigns are run, with data analytics and digital outreach as vital ingredients that allow candidates to find, court, and turn out critical voter blocs.<\/em><\/p>\n There is also another gap in play: The shrinking distance between Google and the Democratic Party.<\/strong> Former Google executive Stephanie Hannon is the Clinton campaign\u2019s chief technology officer, and a host of ex-Googlers are currently employed as high-ranking technical staff at the Obama White House. Schmidt, for his part, is one of the most powerful donors in the Democratic Party\u2014and his influence does not stem only from his wealth,\u00a0estimated by Forbes\u00a0at more than $10 billion.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n According to campaign finance disclosures, Clinton\u2019s campaign is the Groundwork\u2019s only political client.\u00a0Its employees are mostly back-end software developers with experience at blue-chip tech firms like Netflix, Dreamhost, and Google.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Since Democrats seem so obsessed with the saying these days, \u201cwhere there\u2019s smoke there\u2019s fire,\u201d and there\u2019s plenty of smoke here.<\/p>\n\n