Quote:
Originally Posted by PraguePoker
I can't imagine the incompetence of a technical team on a stream that wouldn't detect unauthorized access points to their systems over a period of 12+ months.
I've been a network infrastructure engineer for over a decade, my longest tenure was at Google but also worked at a defense contractor and tons of startups, so I have a lot more authority on this topic than I do at poker. At absolutely none of those organizations would a random internal employee sending out one video stream to a random endpoint get flagged unless they were already under high suspicion. There would be nothing "unauthorized" about anything. You have an internal network, the devices on that internal network are reaching out to all sorts of points on the internet for all sorts of valid reasons.
I agree that if, an internal employee decided to personally investigate JFK, and they either had access to the main computer or ran another computer in promiscuous mode to sniff the network traffic, they might notice the machine reaching out to a weird endpoint. They might, they also might not because computers are talking to all sorts of random **** on the internet all the time, but they might. But that would be a ton of forensics that would not typically be run on an internal employee. And there's zero reason to believe that JFK was being monitored to this extent. JFK was the watchmen, nobody was there to watch the watchmen.
OR, forget this whole stupid debate, let's just give you that this mirroring is complex and detectable, fine. In that case, JFK just watched the stream and sent Signal messages. That actually sounds way simpler anyway.
The key thing you seem to be missing, again and again, is that JFK LED THE INVESTIGATION. You keep acting like an expert team of external auditors craked down on JFK and carefully monitored everything he did while Postle was a superuser, and there's zero reason to believe that happened since literally everybody so far has said they raised concerns to JFK and JFK turned around and claimed there was an internal investigation done and it turned up nothing. The obvious conclusion is that JFK investigated himself and shockingly, did not find himself guilty.
Quote:
He also mentions they have an outside company do an audit every 3 months. So again, let's see the detailed results, including who from Stones assisted the outside auditors.
If you're JFK, you're sending Signal messages, or have the main box configured to mirror to a cloud endpoint, when the outside company shows up you just stop doing that, then you start doing it again when they leave. There would be no record that you did this unless you're a huge moron. It's really not that complicated. Unless they can show there was an external company there whlie Postle was a superuser which I highly doubt.
Quote:
I still believe this is the work of more than 1 accomplice, based on the time and complexity of this hack.
I absolutely think there could be more accomplices, but I really don't think there needs to be. It's not a complicated operation, at all. JFK is sitting there watching the stream and typing into Signal the hole cards to Postle, what part of that is complicated, at all? All the complicated **** assumes that JFK is innocent and actually investigating his own livestream which wasn't the case.
Everybody is coming up with these insane James Bond heist operation theories when it literally could have just been, JFK watching the stream and sending Signal messagse to Postle, then later JFK talking to Postle's bluetooth hat. And nobody watching JFK while Postle was a superuser. There is no reason to overthink it all so much.