Guccifer 2.0 releases new DNC docs

Loading

The Hill:

Guccifer 2.0, the hacker who breached the Democratic National Committee, has released a cache of purported DNC documents to The Hill in an effort to refocus attention on the hack.

The documents include more than 11,000 names matched with some identifying information, files related to two controversial donors and a research file on Sarah Palin.

“The press [is] gradually forget[ing] about me, [W]ikileaks is playing for time and [I] have some more docs,” he said in electronic chat explaining his rationale.

The documents provide some insight into how the DNC handled high-profile donation scandals. But the choice of documents revealed to The Hill also provides insight into the enigmatic Guccifer 2.0.

The hacker provided a series of spreadsheets related to Norman Hsu, a Democratic donor jailed in 2009 for running a Ponzi scheme and arranging illegal campaign contributions. The DNC responded by assembling files to gauge the exposure from Hsu to its slate of candidates.

Similar files on Paul J. Magliocchetti, a lobbyist closely associated with former Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), provide a quick reference document outlining Magliocchetti’s donations to Republicans. Magliocchetti pleaded guilty in 2010 to involvement in a pay-for-play campaign finance scheme.

Guccifer 2.0 has claimed to be a Romanian hacker with no strong political leanings. Guccifer 2.0’s choice to release documents from Magliocchetti and Hsu, whose cases are now six and seven years old, shows a detailed knowledge of American politics seemingly at odds with the backstory provided by the hacker.

Experts have questioned whether Guccifer 2.0 is Romanian or even a single person. Tools used in the attack were matched to Russian intelligence agencies and, when tested, Guccifer 2.0 has struggled to speak in Romanian.

A popular theory explaining the attack is that the DNC hack is a Russian attempt to embarrass the DNC and influence the election. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has speculated that the hack was actually a false flag operation performed by the DNC to cast aspersions on his campaign.

Guccifer 2.0 was an unknown quantity until after the DNC announced it had been breached. He has since leaked a variety of documents, including counter-Trump strategies and donor databases.

The Guccifer 2.0 name, the hacker has said, is an homage to Marcel Lazăr Lehel, who called himself Guccifer. Lehel broke into the email accounts of former President George W. Bush’s aides and family, Clinton family confidant Sidney Blumenthal and “Sex in the City” author Candace Bushnell. Lehel, now imprisoned, recently claimed he had also hacked Hillary Clinton’s private email server. FBI Director James Comey later testified before Congress that Lehel later admitted he lied when he said he hacked the former secretary of State’s server.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I wonder if the hacker will surprisingly reveal any integrity in the DNC?

Hacker posts personal info of House Democrats and staff

What were seeing is undeniably a very one-sided attack directed against the Democratic Party.

Two U.S. cybersecurity firms have said their analysis of computer breaches at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, or DCCC, showed detailed evidence that the intrusions were likely linked to Russian hackers. The internet domains and registrants used in the breach of computers used by the committee tied back to a Russian hacking group linked to that nation’s intelligence services. That same hacking group, known as “Fancy Bear,” was previously connected to the cyber breach at the Democratic National Committee.

Both firms, Fidelis Cybersecurity and ThreatConnect, said the hackers created a fake internet DCCC donation site. The registrant for the fake DCCC site was linked back to other web domains used by “Fancy Bear.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who began publishing thousands of the emails last month, has said there is “no proof” Russia was behind the hack.

That’s an odd sort of statement, given that Assange almost certainly knows who’s providing him with a steady stream of illegally obtained information.

WikiLeaks Is Getting Scarier Than the NSA

With the publication of e-mails expressly aimed at damaging Hillary Clinton’s presidential candidacy, WikiLeaks has shifted from a global platform for whistleblowers to something less exalted—and lately, a bit strange. Julian Assange, the site’s founder, hinted darkly in a Dutch television interview on Tuesday that a young Democratic National Committee staffer who had been murdered in Washington on July 10 had been killed because he had provided information to WikiLeaks, which posted a $20,000 reward for information on the July 10 death of Seth Rich. “Whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often very significant risks,” Assange said. “There’s a 27-year-old who works for the DNC who was shot in the back, murdered, just a few weeks ago, for unknown reasons as he was walking down the streets in Washington.”

Assange offered no support for the incendiary suggestion—”We don’t comment on who our sources are,” he coyly replied, when the Dutch interviewer pressed for details on his guest’s insinuation. Nor was the suggestion welcomed by Rich’s family, which subsequently issued a statement praising the efforts of the D.C. police, who have said they are investigating the slaying as a mugging gone bad.

@Greg: I don’t like Wikileaks and I don’t like Assange. I find it very curious that the hackers are attacking Democrats in such a one-sided manner. I also find it amusing, since the left has been a huge cheerleader for Assange and Wikileaks, depending on what he was attacking.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2010/11/29/praise-wikileaks

First, they wasted their efforts. Everyone already KNEW Schultz and the DNC were cheering on Hillary. We also know they are racist; anyone that uses race as a political weapon and intentionally stirs up racial tension for a political end is racist. We know they lie, manipulate and alter data. No surprises there.

Snowden turned on his nation because he believed what Obama was saying and was disillusioned when he found out what a liar Obama turned out to be. Perhaps Assagne had a similar epiphany.