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...