← Back to context

Comment by jampekka

3 months ago

NYT would of course never back erroneous allegations by US officials on geopolitical matters like these.

4 comments

jampekka

Reply
ethbr1  3 months ago

What satisfiable criteria would you like in a source?

  • bjourne  3 months ago

    Read the sources carefully. It all boils down to "US officials says so". It's different from the Podesta hack as forensic evidence were published linking Russian hackers to the attack.

    • ethbr1  3 months ago

      The Podesta "hack" was a spear phishing link, no? With the emails then published by Wikileaks?

      What forensic evidence was published?

      Afaicr, it was attributed on the basis of methods. Gmail didn't publicly disclose any internal logging.

      And the email chain of custody is unreliable, so post-leak analysis has the can't-spot-a-perfect-forgery problem.

      1 reply →