Guccifer 2.0

"Guccifer 2.0" is a person or persona stating they were the hacker(s) that hacked into the Democratic National Committee (DNC) computer network and then leaked its documents to the media,^[1][2] the website WikiLeaks,^{[3][4][5][6][7]} and a conference event.^[8] Some of the documents they say they released appear to be forgeries cobbled together from public information and previous hacks, which they then salted with disinformation.^[9][10][11]

Cybersecurity experts and firms, including CrowdStrike, Fidelis Cybersecurity, Mandiant, SecureWorks, ThreatConnect, and the editor for Ars Technica,^[12] as well as the US intelligence community, state that some of the genuine leaks that Guccifer 2.0 has said were part of a series of cyberattacks on the DNC were committed by two Russian intelligence groups.^{[12][13][14][15][16][17]} The Russian government states it had no involvement in the theft.^[18] Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said that multiple parties had access to DNC emails and that there was no proof that Russia was behind the attack.^[19]

According to various cyber security firms and U.S. government officials, Guccifer 2.0 is a persona that was created by Russian intelligence services to cover for their alleged interference in the 2016 US presidential election.^[20][21]

Identity

Various cybersecurity experts have speculated that "Guccifer 2.0" is likely a creation of the Russian state-sponsored hacking groups thought to have executed the attack, invented to cover up Russian responsibility.^[20][21] The cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike, which analyzed the data breach, "posits that Guccifer 2.0 could be 'part of a Russian Intelligence disinformation campaign'"—i.e., a creation to deflect blame for the theft.^[20] Russia has made use of the invention of "a lone hacker or an hacktivist to deflect blame" in the past, deploying this strategy in previous cyberattacks on the German government and the French network TV5Monde.^[21] Thomas Rid of King's College London, a cybersecurity expert, states that it is "'more likely than not' that the whole operation, including the Guccifer 2.0 part, was orchestrated by Russian spies," and others concur.^[21] As of July 2016, US intelligence was not yet certain whether the breaches were normal espionage or whether they are part of a concerted effort by Russia and Wikileaks to attempt to manipulate the 2016 US Presidential election.^[12] The hackers that were responsible for the DNC email leak (called Fancy Bear by the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike) seem to have not been working (on the DNC's servers) on April 15, which in Russia is a holiday in honor of the Russian military's electronic warfare services.^[22]

Background

On June 21, 2016, in an interview with Vice "Guccifer 2.0" stated that he is Romanian.^[23][24] On June 30, 2016, "Guccifer 2.0" stated that he is not Russian.^[25][26] However, despite stating that he was unable to read or understand Russian, metadata of emails sent from Guccifer 2.0 to The Hill showed that a Russian-language-only VPN was used.^[27] When pressed to use the Romanian language in an interview with Motherboard via online chat, "he used such clunky grammar and terminology that experts believed he was using an online translator."^[27]

On July 18, 2016, government spokesman Dmitry Peskov denied Russian government involvement in the DNC theft.^[28]

On July 25, 2016, during an interview with Democracy Now!, Julian Assange, editor in chief of WikiLeaks, said that no one knows WikiLeaks' sources. He adds that "the dates of the emails that [WikiLeaks] published are significantly after all—or all but one, it is not clear—of the hacking allegations that the DNC says have occurred."^[29] The same day, Assange told NBC News that "it's what's in the emails that's important, not who hacked them."^[30] When asked by NBC News if WikiLeaks might have been used to distribute documents stolen as part of a Russian intelligence operation, Assange replied: "There is no proof of that whatsoever. We have not disclosed our source."^[31] Assange said that this was "a diversion that’s being pushed by the Hillary Clinton campaign."^[31] Journalist Emma Grey Ellis has written that "it's a little weird" that Assange has hosted a program on RT, a Russian state-run news channel.^[32] U.S. intelligence analyst Malcolm Wrightson Nance stated that Assange has long disliked Clinton,^[33] and Wikileaks' official Twitter account has issued many political tweets condemning her campaign.^[34]

Computer hacking activities

On June 14, 2016, according to The Washington Post, the DNC acknowledged a hack^[35] which was claimed by Guccifer 2.0.^{[4][5][6][7][25][36]}

On July 18, 2016, Guccifer 2.0 provided exclusively to The Hill numerous documents and files covering political strategies,^[2] including but not limited to correlating the banks that received bailout funds with Republican Party and Democratic Party donations.^[2]

On July 22, 2016, the hacker Guccifer 2.0 stated he hacked, then leaked, the DNC emails to WikiLeaks.^{[4][5][6][7][25][36]} “Wikileaks published #DNCHack docs I'd given them!!!”, tweeted Guccifer 2.0.^[7]

On September 13, 2016, during a conference, an unknown and remote representative of Guccifer 2.0 released almost 700 megabytes worth of documents from the DNC.^[37] Forbes also obtained a copy of those.^[8] Which focused on the DNC’s information technology infrastructure and analysis of party donors.^[38] Still according to Forbes, on September 12, 2016, ahead of that conference, Guccifer posted a public Twitter message in which he confirmed that his representative was legitimate.^[8] The Russian government denied any involvement.^[37] The DNC, the DCCC, U.S. intelligence officials, and other experts speculated about Russia involvement.^[37] NGP VAN, who state they are the “leading technology provider” for the Democratic campaigns, declined to comment on Guccifer 2.0's recent statements.^[8]

On October 4, 2016, Guccifer 2.0 released almost 860 megabytes of documents allegedly taken from the Clinton Foundation.^[9][39] Guccifer 2.0 said those documents implicate the Clinton Foundation and alleged Clinton Foundation donors in embezzlement from the $475 billion TARP public funds intended for what is often known as the “Wall Street Bailout” of 2008, however the donor list does not match that of the Clinton Foundation and instead seems to have been taken in the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee hacks.^[40][41] The Clinton Foundation denied it was hacked. One journalist remarked that it seems absurd that Clinton's team would have actually named a file "Pay for Play" on their own server, as Guccifer 2.0's screen shots of the alleged hack show.^[9][10] Ars Technica reviewed the documents and found that they were likely taken from previous breaches of the DNC and DCCC, with some of the material fabricated as propaganda.^[11]

See also

• 2016 Democratic National Committee email leak
• DCleaks
• Guccifer
• Hillary Clinton controversies

References

External links

• Guccifer 2.0 website
• F.A.Q. about hacker Guccifer 2.0
• WikiLeaks searchable DNC email database