What would it take to convince you guys that Russia did it?
Maybe some actual evidence. I mean, I understand the agencies have to be careful about what they declassify - but there's nothing here but naked conclusions. Most of this report is devoted to Russian propaganda efforts, and about half the report (Annex A) is just old info republished from several years ago.
This appears to be the extent of the detail provided on the hacking:
The General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) probably began cyber operations aimed at the US election by March 2016. We assess that the GRU operations resulted in the compromise of the personal e-mail accounts of Democratic Party officials and political figures. By May, the GRU had exfiltrated large volumes of data from the DNC.
Public Disclosures of Russian-Collected Data.
We assess with high confidence that the GRU used the Guccifer 2.0 persona, DCLeaks.com, and WikiLeaks to release US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets.
Guccifer 2.0, who claimed to be an independent Romanian hacker, made multiple contradictory statements and false claims about his likely Russian identity throughout the election. Press reporting suggests more than one person claiming to be Guccifer 2.0 interacted with journalists.
? Content that we assess was taken from e-mail accounts targeted by the GRU in March 2016 appeared on DCLeaks.com starting in June.
We assess with high confidence that the GRU relayed material it acquired from the DNC and senior Democratic officials to WikiLeaks. Moscow most likely chose WikiLeaks because of its self- proclaimed reputation for authenticity. Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries.
Look, I'm not a computer forensic cyber security guy, but this report reads like political bullshit with a healthy dose of ass covering. i mean the first report at least contained one piece of actual evidence - it just didn't really point to the Russian government. So then promise "wait till you see the next report" and this is it?!
Honestly, I think the best indicator will be how Trump responds. He got the classified briefing which supposedly has the actual evidence. He knows that if they actually have evidence, and he denies it, they'll leak it to the press. So if he continues to slam the intelligence as bullshit, that's an indicator that it is. If he clams up or tries to change the focus, they may very well some proof.
