Reply to post: Really?

Really?

Let's see ... " the box's SSH server fingerprint – 80:19:eb:c8:80:a1:c6:ea:ea:37:ba:c0:26:c6:7f:61 – is unique to its SSH public key. This fingerprint can therefore be used to find other machines on the internet that share the same public key." Asymmetric cryptosystems rely on public/private key pairs, one or more on each client and server, that must be used together to successfully protect information. Each public key is shared far and wide, while the corresponding private keys are held as closely as possible, since that's the key (sorry) for how these systems work. Finding the same public key on multiple hosts means exactly nothing except that each got a copy of that public key and is able therefore to interact securely with the owner of the private key.

That's one example of multiple "leaps of faith" that folks are grasping for in their almost frantic desire to find a "more evil that us" story that draws attention away from the contents of the stolen emails. Others are there as well, but reality doesn't matter to the masters of the art of political alchemy. Practiced by adherents of both parties, this rare branch of alchemy doesn't transform metals into gold, it focuses on transforming BS into truth through the chant-like repetition of fanciful stories until they magically become accepted as fact, no matter how patently ludicrous they are.

Mr. Trump is brash, rude, petty, and cannot seem to form a thought that isn't immediately communicated without benefit of editing or external advice. It is this very nature that largely mitigates the risks of him becoming president. Even if he is totally serious about some weird action, his chances of executing that impulsive act are minimized by his need to broadcast his concepts, even to those around him who are trusted by us to balance the powers of the presidency. While I truly hate the idea of supporting his ascendancy to that role, I can live with it. Anyone else remember LBJ?

The opposing triumvirate, O'Billery, is another story. They are more polished and guarded with their intent. They are more skilled at the underhanded techniques of today's politician. And they are surrounded by vast supportive cushions of like-minded elitists. One sociopath is a troubling instance for society. An entire ruling class of them is a disaster in progress. As long as they stand together, they are above such petty things as rules, laws, ethics, and simple moral responsibilities. To Hillary, the use of insecure and unapproved IT resources simply to cater to her preferences for ease of use is simply her right as one of the "above it alls". And nobody seems to link all of these little trivial points into one disturbing possibility ... that the SecState probably received a message via these resources from one of her ambassadors on the 11th of Sep a couple of years ago. It certainly contained that ambassador's misgivings about the lack of sufficient security at his location. It, or another nearby message, probably also contained that ambassador's itinerary for his trip ... that would be normal for the SecState to be told. I wonder if Chris Stevens knew how little his boss cared about making sure that information was shared only with those in positions of trust.

Back to the point ... those in a position to know should strive to point out the logical inconsistencies in the "blame Putin" distraction effort. While it may well turn out to be correct, it's a bit disconcerting to hear congress-critters, political hacks, and the news (oops, entertainment) industry reps so enthusiastically making up the baseline, fleshing out the salacious details, and pinning a "collaborating with the enemy" star on Mr Trump's forehead without the benefit of any basis other than unnamed experts. Sorry, but I've been in the business since long before "cyber" referred to anything but sex. And the breadcrumbs they're so frantically clutching at don't add up to a slice, much less a full loaf.