US truckers, Texas and civil war

[Belk]

It seems to me that the guy hacking the machine in front of a judge in minutes proved it was vulnerable to say the least.

What are the vulnerabilities of this device and how can it be hacked remotely without detection?

 

[SimplyMe]

Ha. The context was talking about a possible operation where intelligence computer experts hacked election machines. In that case it is a lot more than hackers. It would mean looking at all phases of the process and buildings, machines, workers etc. You may be imagining a lower level thing where some IT worker was involved or attempting something. We don't know. Not all hackers are equal.

Yes, I understand that you are claiming there was some grand conspiracy and, despite the number of people that would be required to be involved, you believe they are the only large conspiracy in history to be completely secret -- with no one having second thoughts or feelings of guilt (particularly true since you believe Biden is so horrible, wouldn't a few be upset they put such a "horrible" person into office).

 

[truthpls]

What are the vulnerabilities of this device and how can it be hacked remotely without detection?

Well, the link I posted earlier shows it is easy to hack. So, I would think that intelligence operatives could also hack it remotely since we know it can be connected to the net. I think there is motive and opportunity, but we do not know.

 

[truthpls]

Yes, I understand that you are claiming there was some grand conspiracy

You understand wrong then. I simply said that the machines can be hacked. Not that they certainly were. In other words we don't know. Claiming we do know is silly.

and, despite the number of people that would be required to be involved, you believe they are the only large conspiracy in history to be completely secret

No. The assassination of JFK and 911 and others probably count as well, if any were operations. I guess the bay of pigs was one, but we know about that now.

-- with no one having second thoughts or feelings of guilt (particularly true since you believe Biden is so horrible, wouldn't a few be upset they put such a "horrible" person into office).

Seriously? I doubt that any sort of operation staged by a nation (or internally with elements of security agencies or former operatives) (or both) would be conducted by people who cared too much about that.

 

[7thKeeper]

No. If such an operation involving world class intelligence operatives (and support for any security locally that needed bypassing etc) happening it could not have been detected obviously. Now if some janitor accessed a room they should not have or some such, that would have been detected. You seem to live in a Pollyanna or Andy Griffith show movie where all is like Mayberry and they are playing the glad game.

They actually do all sorts of intelligence operations all over the world all the time. Saying no one 'bothers' with that is absurd. The election in the US was also important for a lot of powerful people in the world. Now if you admitted no or almost no ID voting and untrustworthy machines etc were a problem and should be addressed before another election, you might have a leg to stand on.

No doubt there was that as well. It is no secret the media including the social internet media was hopelessly biased.

Yeah, that again accepts movie logic as reality on a casual basis. Support from local sources? Ok, sure. And when they get spotted by someone not involved? This again comes down to more players involved, the more easily these things are spotted.
Yeah, no one would bother with these types of stuff, because the amount of impact it could have compared to the risk of being caught is so bloody lopsided. And then there's the risk of getting caught because there's inconsistency in metadata, or compared to the paper traced, etc. This is pure fantasy.

 

[truthpls]

Yeah, that again accepts movie logic as reality on a casual basis. Support from local sources?

Do you have sources that watched for that? Any covert operation worth it's salt would not be discovered. It would not be possible to prove it never happened or did happen. You don't know.

Ok, sure. And when they get spotted by someone not involved?

If they are top notch and organized why would anyone 'spot' them? If for example they did something remotely what is to spot? And if, weeks before or whatever some tradesman or something was spotted, who would know what was really happening?

This again comes down to more players involved, the more easily these things are spotted.

If the national election of the US was targeted, how would there NOT be a lot of people involved?

Yeah, no one would bother with these types of stuff, because the amount of impact it could have compared to the risk of being caught is so bloody lopsided. And then there's the risk of getting caught because there's inconsistency in metadata, or compared to the paper traced, etc. This is pure fantasy.

Hacking a machine to make it biased in one direction would hardly a trivial impact. As for metadata or paper, any hacking would take that into account and deal with it one way or another. Claiming you know either way is fantasy.

 

[SimplyMe]

You understand wrong then. I simply said that the machines can be hacked. Not that they certainly were. In other words we don't know. Claiming we do know is silly.

No. The assassination of JFK and 911 and others probably count as well, if any were operations. I guess the bay of pigs was one, but we know about that now.

Seriously? I doubt that any sort of operation staged by a nation (or internally with elements of security agencies or former operatives) (or both) would be conducted by people who cared too much about that.

Except, as already pointed out, this couldn't have been "staged by a nation." You had Trump appointees in the top of all the intelligence agencies, loyal appointees, who never would have approved. What you have talked about when this was brought up previously, is "rogue elements" within the intelligence agencies. As such, it was not "stages by a nation" and it was far more likely to get caught.

I need to be careful here because I did not directly work in intelligence. Instead, I did security work and planning for intelligence -- meaning I know about security and about intelligence. I have knowledge of hacking, what vulnerabilities to look for and how to protect things -- and particularly in protecting machines from being hacked and keeping them off of any non-secure network (and how to keep secure networks, ones not connected to the Internet, secure).

I think you've watched too many spy movies where they can do anything and never get caught -- that isn't real life. We've tried to explain the holes in your ideas. Instead, you ignore what the people who understand much of this tell you -- and from how it appears to me, you refuse to believe because it threatens your political views and biases.

 

[Belk]

Well, the link I posted earlier shows it is easy to hack. So, I would think that intelligence operatives could also hack it remotely since we know it can be connected to the net. I think there is motive and opportunity, but we do not know.

In other words you are basing your ideas on your own lack of knowledge. As an IT professional who deals with security of government devices daily your claims are much more difficult then you imagine. Hacking these devices would be exceedingly difficult. To continue having it compromised without detection when they regularly have a checksum inspection prior to use beggars belief.

 

[truthpls]

Except, as already pointed out, this couldn't have been "staged by a nation." You had Trump appointees in the top of all the intelligence agencies, loyal appointees, who never would have approved. What you have talked about when this was brought up previously, is "rogue elements" within the intelligence agencies. As such, it was not "stages by a nation" and it was far more likely to get caught.

You appeal to deep state loyalty to trump? Ha But no one said the CIA or etc was involved directly. The scenario was that intelligence level operatives from somewhere, some nation, some secret division of a three letter spy agency, or people working on the side or with previous experience etc etc. We don't know. So your comment is way off target.

I need to be careful here because I did not directly work in intelligence. Instead, I did security work and planning for intelligence -- meaning I know about security and about intelligence. I have knowledge of hacking, what vulnerabilities to look for and how to protect things -- and particularly in protecting machines from being hacked and keeping them off of any non-secure network (and how to keep secure networks, ones not connected to the Internet, secure).

Great so how about a secure network they set up? Your general knowledge may not even apply to specialist knowledge of the machines and possible private temporary networks and doing the opposite of protecting. If you had experience even from afar at even a minor level I suspect you should know about the plethora of possibilities available for an actual operation. The usual security measures would not be an issue probably, whether secret entry was involved, bypassing cameras, installing a tiny temporary little device that could be triggered remotely, removing such a device later, or etc etc. The question becomes merely was there an operation involving highly skilled intelligence operatives or not. The answer remain, we don't know. The option of denying it was very possible is not on the table.

I think you've watched too many spy movies where they can do anything and never get caught -- that isn't real life. We've tried to explain the holes in your ideas. Instead, you ignore what the people who understand much of this tell you -- and from how it appears to me, you refuse to believe because it threatens your political views and biases.

That says almost nothing. I refuse to believe that the suspicious changes that night could not possibly have been a result of things like hacking. Why? Because we don't know either way.

Who comes across the border day and night? We don't know. We do know a few things such as that terrorists and criminals and cartel were among them! We also know the election machine was easily and quickly hacked by a guy with a pen! So don't give us conspiracy theories that it could not have been done. On the election fraud issue all we need to say is we do not know. (Not make out as if we do know)

 

[truthpls]

In other words you are basing your ideas on your own lack of knowledge.

No YOUR lack of knowledge! We do not know either way, period. We do know that there are many things in that election that seemed suspicious to a good many people. Therefore, it is reasonable to ask that the next election be very different and truly verifiable.

As an IT professional who deals with security of government devices daily your claims are much more difficult then you imagine. Hacking these devices would be exceedingly difficult. To continue having it compromised without detection when they regularly have a checksum inspection prior to use beggars belief.

Much of what computer warfare level people do around the world is difficult! Most of that you also probably would not even know about. What they could do if given the green light probably beggars belief as well. For example it would not surprise me if they could take out the power grid, the net, and a lot more right away if the time was right. Defeating a checksum inspection might not be as impossible as we imagine. We don't know. Why struggle to appear as if you do?

 

[Belk]

No YOUR lack of knowledge! We do not know either way, period. We do know that there are many things in that election that seemed suspicious to a good many people. Therefore, it is reasonable to ask that the next election be very different and truly verifiable.

Maybe you do not know. Certainly your posts suggest you have little understanding in this area. Do not presume to assign me my level of knowledge.

Much of what computer warfare level people do around the world is difficult! Most of that you also probably would not even know about. What they could do if given the green light probably beggars belief as well. For example it would not surprise me if they could take out the power grid, the net, and a lot more right away if the time was right. Defeating a checksum inspection might not be as impossible as we imagine. We don't know. Why struggle to appear as if you do?

Did you not read what I wrote? This is, quite literally, my job. So yes I do know what is and is not possible and no, no one is hacking these devices. Your "lack of surprise" is not a substitute for actual knowledge and experience.

 

[truthpls]

Maybe you do not know.

Right.

Certainly your posts suggest you have little understanding in this area.

Ditto

Do not presume to assign me my level of knowledge.

OK. You need to earn that

Did you not read what I wrote? This is, quite literally, my job.

So? There are IT folks and then there are other folks that are above that paygrade. If you want to claim that a remote hack was not possible with an elaborate intelligence op then you need to prove it. (not just mention the world checksum etc)

So yes I do know what is and is not possible and no, no one is hacking these devices.

Ha. A claim! We can work with that. Now that you have the positive claim, prove it.

Your "lack of surprise" is not a substitute for actual knowledge and experience.

Your allusion to knowledge of the unknown is not substance. Having experience as a cable guy, for example, does not mean we know every possibility a cable wire offers. Setting up systems for a business and offering some apps for protection does not make one a warfare level computer scientist or expert. You mentioning you have job experience in IT does not mean a whole lot, sorry.

 

[Belk]

Right.

Ditto

OK. You need to earn that

So? There are IT folks and then there are other folks that are above that paygrade. If you want to claim that a remote hack was not possible with an elaborate intelligence op then you need to prove it. (not just mention the world checksum etc)

Oh! I see. My bad. This is the whole "You need to disprove my made up in my head scenario" game. Yeah no I don't need to disprove your wild imaginings. Go try to shift the burden of proof somewhere else.

Ha. A claim! We can work with that. Now that you have the positive claim, prove it.

The irony. You first. I'll hold my breath shall I?

Your allusion to knowledge of the unknown is not substance.

I didn't allude to it. I directly stated I have relevant knowledge in this area.

Having experience as a cable guy, for example, does not mean we know every possibility a cable wire offers. Setting up systems for a business and offering some apps for protection does not make one a warfare level computer scientist or expert. You mentioning you have job experience in IT does not mean a whole lot, sorry.

Cool story bro. Let us know when you have anything besides your imagination.

 

[truthpls]

Oh! I see. My bad. This is the whole "You need to disprove my made up in my head scenario" game. Yeah no I don't need to disprove your wild imaginings. Go try to shift the burden of proof somewhere else.

Forget other people's heads. You need to show your claims have substance.

The irony. You first. I'll hold my breath shall I?

Guess we can't stop you

I didn't allude to it. I directly stated I have relevant knowledge in this area.

So what. What degree of expertise do you claim, compared to folks that say, work in computer warfare? The term IT doesn't mean we are world class state of the art experts. You can just say you don't know

Cool story bro. Let us know when you have anything besides your imagination.

I need nothing, you have the claim. I simply point out we don't know.

 

[Belk]

Forget other people's heads. You need to show your claims have substance.

Guess we can't stop you

So what. What degree of expertise do you claim, compared to folks that say, work in computer warfare? The term IT doesn't mean we are world class state of the art experts. You can just say you don't know

I need nothing, you have the claim. I simply point out we don't know.

You first.

 

[truthpls]

You first.

Here is what you said

So yes I do know what is and is not possible and no, no one is hacking these devices.

I replied

'Ha. A claim! We can work with that. Now that you have the positive claim, prove it.'

I have nothing to prove, since I said a few times we don't know. You made a positive claim and were asked to support it. Guess I win.

 

[Larniavc]

How’s the civil war going? Has it started yet?

I saw a video of some arguing rednecks decked out in MAGA gear fighting each other like two rats fighting over a urinal cake in a drain but I don’t think that counts.

 

[truthpls]

How’s the civil war going? Has it started yet?

I saw a video of some arguing rednecks decked out in MAGA gear fighting each other like two rats fighting over a urinal cake in a drain but I don’t think that counts.

I am guessing you have the highest respect for voters that dislike the demon policies of the left. I would hope that you are glad that there is no civil war.

 

[Larniavc]

the demon policies of the left

What’s that got to do with MAGAs fighting each other by their parked 1986 GMC C/K Sierra Classic 3+3s over the right to stand around protesting against -checks notes- the American government?

 

[truthpls]

What’s that got to do with MAGAs fighting each other by their parked 1986 GMC C/K Sierra Classic 3+3s over the right to stand around protesting against -checks notes- the American government?

Well, since one side is gone over to the dark side, and you insult the other side, and even their vehicles apparently, it has to do with your credibility as a character assassin.