The Truth About CrowdStrike

The Truth About CrowdStrike

The media has been aghast over the last two weeks over President Donald Trump’s phone call with the Ukrainian President. One side of the media says this is proof that Trump is asking for a foreign country to meddle in our election via quid pro quo. While the other side insists that Joe Biden should be investigated for corruption. Both are viable discussions worth having, and we will discuss them in a different article soon.

For this article, however, we will be discussing the internet security firm, CrowdStrike. With all of the noise surrounding Joe Biden and Trump, the media seems to have left out the mentioning of CrowdStrike. During his talk with the President of Ukraine, Trump said,

“I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation in Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … The server, they say Ukraine has it.”

What and Who is CrowdStrike?

CrowdStrike is an internet security firm that was co-founded by Dmitri Alperovitch. Alperovitch has reportedly been critical of Russia’s Vladimir Putin and is also a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, which is a Washington based think-tank that is also critical of the current Russian government.

The Atlantic Council is funded by NATO as well the Open Society Initiative for Europe (funded by George Soros). Another major funder of The Atlantic Council is the Victor Pinchuk Foundation. Victor Pinchuk reportedly donated $25 million to the Clinton Foundation and was also invited to attend a dinner in 2012 at Clinton’s home. In 2013 The Atlantic Council awarded Hilary Clinton it’s Distinguished International Leadership Award.

In 2015, CrowdStrike received a $100 million investment from Google.

“Google Capital, the two-year-old growth equity arm of search giant Google (GOOG), announced its first security investment on Monday morning. The fund has pumped $100 million into cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike.”

In April of 2016, The Obama Administration appointed Steven Chabinsky to the Commission on Enhancing National Cybersecurity. Chabinsky at the time was the general council and chief risk officer for CrowdStrike.

CrowdStrike was hired by the DNC in 2016, to lead an investigation into who hacked the DNC as well as John Podesta’s and Hilary Clinton’s emails; and how those documents ended up in the hands of Wikileaks. CrowdStrike concluded after its investigation that it was the Russians who were the hackers.

In a court filing from the end of May 2016, during the pre-trial phase of unofficial Trump campaign staff member Roger Stone’s trial, the DOJ was asked to turn over unredacted documents that they and the FBI had on CrowdStrike’s report on the DNC hacking.

The government’s response was,

“The government … does not possess the information the defendant seeks.”

What this showed was that the FBI and DOJ recieved only redacted drafts from CrowdStrike as their evidence into 2016 Russian hacking. CrowdStrike also never completed a final report outlining all of their evidence supporting their findings.

The FBI never did their own independent investigation into the DNC servers and to this day have not had them in their possession. The DNC refused to give the servers and computers to the FBI to be analyzed and instead relied upon the work of CrowdStrike. The FBI and DNC accepted the conclusions from CrowdStrike without asking any further questions into the matter.

SKEPTICS OF CROWDSTRIKE REPORT

On July 24, 2017, the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) sent a memo to President Donald Trump outlining the timing of events surrounding the email hacking.

“June 12, 2016: Julian Assange announces WikiLeaks is about to publish ’emails related to Hilary Clinton.’

June 14, 2016: DNC contractor CrowdStrike, (with a dubious professional record and multiple conflicts of interest) announces that malware has been found on the DNC server and claims there is evidence it was injected by Russians.

June 15, 2016: ‘Guccifer 2.0’ affirms the DNC statement; claims to be a WikiLeaks source; and posts a document that the forensics show was synthetically tainted with ‘Russian fingerprints.'”

VIPS outlined in the memo how they don’t believe this sequence of events was a coincidence, but that it was perpetrated specifically aimed at blaming Russia for anything associated with the hack. Bill Binney, a former NSA technical director and member of VIPS stated,

“WikiLeaks did not receive stolen data for the Russian government. Intrinsic metadata in the publicly available files on WikiLeaks demonstrates that the files acquired by WikiLeaks were delivered in a medium such as a thumb drive.”

Another skeptic of CrowdStrike’s conclusions is cybersecurity expert, John McAfee. In an interview with Larry King, McAfee stated he didn’t believe that the Russians did the hacking of the DNC servers, John Podesta’s emails, or Hilary’s emails. He said,

“If I was the Chinese and I wanted to make it look like the Russians did it, I would use Russian language within the code, I would use Russian techniques of breaking into the organization.”

Essentially what McAfee laid out is that anyone who has the capacity to hack into DNC servers would also be smart enough to leave false clues behind to keep those investigating off their track.

777’s Take:

Our take is that the media should have been picking apart CrowdStrike and their investigation. When the media is reeling night after night about Russian interference in our elections we find it puzzling that they didn’t have the gumption to ask the real questions surrounding this issue.

1.) Why wasn’t the media critical of all the connections between CrowdStrike and the DNC? Is this a conflict of interest?

2.) How can the FBI rely on third party investigators? Considering the fact that if Russia did hack the servers and emails, then that would be of the utmost importance to national security, thus, relying on outside sources seems to be a strange course of action for the FBI to take.

3.) How did CrowdStrike get away with giving the FBI redacted drafts as their conclusion? You would expect something as serious as Russian meddling into our elections something the FBI would need to see in great detail, so they can take the appropriate steps to solve the crisis.

4.) Why hasn’t the FBI been allowed to view the computers and servers themselves and come up with their own conclusions?

The fact of the matter is we really don’t know exactly what happened regarding the hacks of the DNC server and emails. CrowdStrike says the Russians did the hacking, on the other hand, former NSA officials doing their own study on the hacking claim it was done by someone in house who had direct access to the servers.

The only fact we know is that the FBI has not done the proper investigation to get to the bottom of this issue. We the American people deserve a clear and concise explanation on what really happened during our 2016 election cycle, especially if it pertains to true nation security.

Sources:

https://dailycaller.com/2017/06/24/crowdstrike-five-things-everyone-is-ignoring-about-the-russia-dnc-story/

https://www.rt.com/usa/372219-larry-king-mcafee-cybersecurity/#.WGaDFP9c4q4.facebook

https://www.voanews.com/usa/cyber-firm-rewrites-part-disputed-russian-hacking-report