I've watched every bit of the Symposium thus far, and have some thoughts on the subject. Interested in others' thoughts as well....
This whole thing depends on the authenticity of the pcap data. What we've really seen so far is that there are lots of mathematical models that are arrived at through different processes and all arrive at a similar conclusion. That is, various mathematical models can all predict the election outcomes in various states/counties. Said another way, the machine algorithm could be written from scratch and come up with the same results.
However, the smoking gun is the hard evidence - the packet capture data. That shows what did happen and what was altered. The rest of the discussions are essentially deriving the code that alter the actual results.
Also, the pcap data source is the one thing Mike Lindell will not disclose. This is the really, really important part. IMO, this data came from the US military from the captured equipment in Germany. The equipment was the router for the aggregation system.
For those that don't know, a router can be used to decrypt encrypted packets from any machine(s) within its LAN (local network). So control of the router is critical. If you work for a business that can block any connection via https to a website and keep you from using a machine to visit that site, it's doing so by decrypting the local network traffic, understanding what site you're trying to visit, and then using rules to determine whether or not you're allowed to visit that site. Open source tools, like a squid reverse proxy, can illustrate this (ie, if you have control of your router and can run open source tools, you can do this yourself...)
So the biggest reveal in this symposium is probably the data source. Why would they give it to Lindell? I don't know. But the authenticity of that data can definitively prove that this election is stolen, while all of the other discussions revolve around how the data was changed. They are converging on a piece of code that could be set up to mimic exactly what happened and how - if you have the data set collected by the router, you can define how the code is changed on the mainframe. I don't see another means of collecting such a large data set from so many machines - it has to be at an aggregation point. Another such point could be across some node(s) monitored by the NSA, I suppose.
Thoughts?
This is pretty much my thoughts, but I will go further. Military was not simply collecting the packets. I think they were also collecting all communications by all the actors involved in this fraud.
The symposium is for people to understand what happened and for even the layperson to be able to explain to their friends in some reasonable detail. Its just setting the stage for the :habbening”
When it is revealed where the PCaP came from, you will also hear all other aspects of this surveillance - the phone calls, the ballots printed, the money transferred, the orders given, everything.
I have no doubt the Frankfurt server is definitely involved, but somehow that AT&T data center that got destroyed bu the Anthony Warner guy?
Oh, and I have to quibble about the router decrypting the packets. Routers dont decrypt the packets Iit meats the purpose if encryption). I think you meant to say decode.
That's true. It's really a sophisticated MITM attack. I have to try to oversimplify the statement a bit for brevity.
All packet headers have to have information on source and destination, but the data would remain encrypted. However, on the destination side, the data has to be decrypted. Thus, if you can intercept the packets via MITM to locate the destination and can get access to equipment on the destination side, you can get the data. I'm assuming this is what occurred.
I didnt notice this part. Do you really reckon they did the capture with access to the actual machines ? I highly doubt that - either they had to install non standard stuff on the machine, or process the captured encrypted packets offline with the SSL keys for the destination. Either feels impractical.
Hence my deduction that it is a offsite, military operation with encryption breaking non civilian tech.
I'm just assuming that's the case. If I were running an operation, I'd want packets encrypted. But of course, they have to be decrypted on the destination side. I'm just making an assumption, but of course, I have no idea. If it's 37TB of data, all streaming from different sources cast across the country, it would be very hard to capture data and get it all. So I'm assuming they got the aggregated data at a collection point.
Thus, I'm assuming they created certificates for the transport with a master CA they implemented. That would allow the decryption of all data if you got the master CA, any secondary CAs, etc. Just my take...
I am not even sure if the packets were encrypted. Did you hear the, talk about it (or that they used https for all these remote controlling)?
To make MITM work for https, you will have to allow insecure certificates on the machines. That confiuration would be easy to check.
If packets are encrypted and there is no insecure certificate setting, it would indicate a military grade capture. We all suspected that AES512 and below can be decrypted by the military/NSA etc, but we will get to see.
Personally, when I think about the origin of these pcaps, it gives me goosebumps!
I agree. Either we'll have to see that the MIL/NSA/etc can break certificates, or they're home brew certificates and they got the CAs and keys. If the packets were unencrypted, that would be ridiculously silly - but then again, we are dealing with stupid, reckless people....
CA is definitely possible, and I have suspected CA shenanigans even in the past with other things. If they did do that, that would be another redpill.
Its past 1 am here, and I wish I could keep watching the symposium :(
Thanks for the feedback. Get some rest!
Just woke up, and its all over?
Yep, it's over. The last day had a heavier focus on how state legislators can take action. No big reveal on pcap sources, validity, or whether or not they were tainted with malware by bad actors at the symposium.
The cyber expert on the “red team” hired by MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell now says the key data underpinning the theory that China hacked the 2020 election unveiled at the Cyber Symposium is illegitimate.
But cyber expert Josh Merritt, who is on the team hired by Mr. Lindell to interrogate the data for the symposium, told The Washington Times that packet captures are unrecoverable in the data and that the data, as provided, cannot prove a cyber incursion by China.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/08/interesting-timing-one-mike-lindells-cyber-experts-waited-week-bail-china-hack-theory-speak-reporters/
This is curious.... If they didn't get the edge equipment, then they couldn't really have any data - as best as I can tell. That would imply all of the data is made up. However, I can't really see this scenario. Not sure why the statement is out there.
Preface: I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone involved with this. Just laying out the field of what's being talked about. Whether you believe CMZ or E, or believe either of them are actors, this is what's going on.
E told us this before the symposium as well. He outed CMZ several times and CMZ also started to criticize the legitimacy of the PCAPs after being called out.
Glad to see my friend @CodeMonkeyZ finally admit to huge doubts about the PCAPS (Mike Lindell's "data"). I will be patient until the 2nd as well; though I doubt Lindell's team will ever provide the data. It is always good, when we are on the same page, old friend. And the people, well informed. :)
(It is still most definitely a CIA plot to distract the people from the Assange case on the 11th, and likely undercut the election audits)
https://t.me/TheOfficialE/511
Heres the thing.
Behind the scenes, we know they arent real. And they have refused to provide the audit team, of which @CodemonkeyZ is part, any of the data. (this despite last Saturday having been the original deadline for the pre-audit team) Which makes his comments here troubling.
We recognize it as an IC operation that just so happens to fall on the same day as Julian Assange's trial; where the US Government will seek the legal right to extract and imprison anyone on earth who would expose them.
What you are doing here, Ron, is purposefully misleading people using qualifiers, and relying on them to remain distracted and not think critically, because they are loyal to you.
Why wont you tell them the truth?
So, again, here's the thing: You are, at least here, helping the CIA do exactly what they want; which is to distract people from the real moves being made.
I JUST discussed all this with you privately. Dont make me leak it.
*You NEED to question Ron over this, not rely on my word.
https://t.me/TheOfficialE/503
CodeMonkey questioning the data https://t.me/TheOfficialE/503
Nothing like a good controversy to generate press. Could this be the reason?
One guy goes against all the others that are there, sounds like china paid more than 5 mil for his "testimony"
I understand little to nothing about these tech aspects. But what you said sorta makes sense, the important question being why and how does Mike have it.
How do we know the data was even encrypted?? Maybe they set up port forwarding directly to the SQL server.
We assume the counties setup VPN access for Dominion and the hackers used an VPN or ssh, but I think they got real lazy and just port forwarded some random port to the SQL server. Based on what I've seen so far, I would go with they got lazy and cocky with plain text port forward.
Not touching the statement and routers and encryption. I'm sure you mean if its behind a VPN.
I'm just assuming it was encrypted data. Like I stated above, it could just be - as you've stated - laziness... And yes, I'm assuming behind a VPN. Maybe none of that is true, however.