You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

ghost_marauder ago

Occam's razor. Dynacorp IP was attacking host of anti Dynacorp Information. Means and motive.

Alternative actors must first have access to that particular VPN, or put a RAT on somebodies computer (1 being simple, 2 being a bit more difficult (especially on corp machines)). Motive, probable disinfo and narrative building. Or, to knock out the information.

Disinfo to drive down reputation and stock (reputation is already in the toilet, so money would matter), or to false flag us.

Narrative building. Launch attack, get us to look into this, waist time and effort of investigators. Alternatively, get us to pay more attention to dynacorp because they are doing something.

Knock out the info. Taking down the Pizzagate wiki would be a good blow for a Hacktivist, or somebody wanting attention. Either way, failure would not be good enough, and a continuation of attacks would be required.

If there is not a continuation of attacks then either a, they realize they are being watched and are planning side strategy; b have already achieved their goal.


In the end, I'll stick with the razor. Going down the alternative bunny wholes without any proof or sign post is kind of messy. And apologies to those who actually made it through my rant. My mind works off of branching, and linear text is like the worst form of communication for me.

Catsfive ago

This is not how the razor works. The number of assumptions in both theories is still the same. Our standards for proof must remain high. There is nothing wrong with having two plausible theories in play here and considering them both equally.