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.Circumstantial at best.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.
"e-mail accounts targeted by the GRU in March 2016 appeared on DCLeaks.com" is an allegation, yet it is positioned as evidence that GRU used Guccifer 2.0.
"In July 2015, Russian intelligence gained access to Democratic National Committee (DNC) networks and maintained that access until at least June 2016." There is no explanation of how DNC e-mail was compromised. Was it improperly secured? Was it due to careless users with "password" for a password? Spam? Or more technical, specially crafted packets, and so forth? Explaining how the DNC e-mail was compromised would not reveal U.S. intelligence sources or methods. There is no explanation of why they assess that it was Russian intelligence which accessed DNC networks.
This is a more intense version of previous reports, and just as lacking.
The Russia-hacked-the-DNC narrative originated with Dmitri Alperovitch. His company Crowdstrike is funded largely by Clinton associates.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3511472/posts
They have the narrative down, just no facts to support it.