Seth Connell writes that this is awkward…
As the Democrats and the Left continue their obsession with Russia over election and email hacking, new information has been released that undermines their claim that Russia is the entity that did the hacking.
It turns out that the FBI did not even analyze the DNC email servers themselves to identify the source of the hacks.
The Hill has more detail:
The FBI never examined the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) computer servers during its investigation into Russian attempts to interfere in the election, BuzzFeed reports.
According to one intelligence official who spoke to the publication, no U.S. intelligence agency has performed its own forensics analysis on the hacked servers.
Instead, the official said, the bureau and other agencies have relied on analysis done by the third-party security firm CrowdStrike, which investigated the breach for the DNC.
“Crowdstrike is pretty good. There’s no reason to believe that anything that they have concluded is not accurate,” the intelligence official told BuzzFeed.
The report comes as controversy continues to surround the Intelligence Community’s assessment that Russia was behind the attack on the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s personal email account.
This is problematic. The FBI and intelligence agencies investigating the alleged hacking absolutely must verify this information. The fact that the FBI did not even request access to the DNC servers in and of itself is suspect.
In an investigation, this kind of information must be made available so that thorough analysis can be done. But the FBI didn’t even ask for access to conduct their analysis?
The Department of Homeland Security conducted an investigation into the allegation of hacking in the election, but the public cannot see it because the results are classified.
The White House has been under fierce pressure to provide a public accounting of the IC’s assessment.
Security experts widely derided a joint Homeland Security Department-FBI report released last week that purported to give technical indicators linking Russia to the breaches, calling it overly broad and “a mess.”
CrowdStrike has gone much further in its published forensics analysis.
That evidence is very strong, outside experts say.
Now, CrowdStrike may be an effective tool for diagnosing such issues. However, top investigative agencies need to get the information directly from the source, from the party that claims it was hacked, and must verify that information at multiple levels.
The fact that not even a request was made is rather disconcerting.