Crowdstrike cashes in
Remember Crowdstrike? It's the company that single-handedly thwarted Putin's hacker invasion, or something like that.
They've been on a winning streak.
Red hot cyber security start-up Crowdstrike has just put a $3bn valuation on its head after raising $200m in a Series E financing round.
The company that helped chase Russian hackers out of the Democratic National Committee’s networks before the 2016 election will now be protecting government information held in computer clouds, the company said Thursday.
The cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which has assisted with many of the most high profile computer breaches of the past five years, received an authorization to operate on cloud-based government systems that are deemed “moderate impact level” under the government’s Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program, or FedRAMP, according to a news release.
Good for them. So why should we care if this company has landed a huge government contract?
We should care because of the countless political connections, and their suspicious involvement in the new rising Cold War with Russia.
As far as we know, the FBI still has not examined the DNC server that Russia allegedly hacked.
There has been no corroboration or second opinion on who may have hacked the server. The only source for this claim is CrowdStrike, who began monitoring the DNC system on May 5th, 2016, according to DailyMail.com.
The DNC also reportedly paid $168,000 to CrowdStrike.
You might think that with so much dependent on this private organization, that there would be more attention paid to their record, background, and connections to the Democratic Party.
In April 2016, two months before the June report that alleged a Russian conspiracy, former President Barack Obama appointed Steven Chabinsky, the general counsel and chief risk officer for CrowdStrike, to the Commission on Enhancing National Cybersecurity.
It's hard to ignore how incredibly odd it is to leave critical evidence that effects a major foreign policy decision on a private firm that was hired out by the DNC. Making it even more odd is the response.
The problem with this story is that, like the Iraq-WMD mess, it takes place in the middle of a highly politicized environment during which the motives of all the relevant actors are suspect. Nothing quite adds up.
If the American security agencies had smoking-gun evidence that the Russians had an organized campaign to derail the U.S. presidential election and deliver the White House to Trump, then expelling a few dozen diplomats after the election seems like an oddly weak and ill-timed response.
Into this tense and politically-charged environment Crowdstrike has done a major "Oops!" concerning their hacking accusations regarding Russia.
U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year's American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented data published by an influential British think tank.
In December, CrowdStrike said it found evidence that Russians hacked into a Ukrainian artillery app, contributing to heavy losses of howitzers in Ukraine's war with pro-Russian separatists.
VOA reported Tuesday that the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), which publishes an annual reference estimating the strength of world armed forces, disavowed the CrowdStrike report and said it had never been contacted by the company.
Ukraine's Ministry of Defense also has stated that the combat losses and hacking never happened.
In other words, Crowdstrike invented fake news to buttress their DNC hacking claim.
This is huge.
Even more suspicious, the Co-Founder of CrowdStrike Dmitri Alperovitch is a senior fellow on the anti-Russian Atlantic Council.
The Atlantic Council is the primary source of false, and eventually disproven hysterical accusations about Russia, that get picked up by the news media.
Even worse, the Atlantic Council is trying to lie us into a war against Russia, much like Bush/Cheney lied us into invading Iraq.
Paul Craig Roberts calls The Atlantic Council: The Marketing Arm of the Military/Security Complex.
Well, remember the very first Everyone-Is-A-Putin-Puppet article? The one using the web site Propornot? Well, people looked into that.
So, who's behind this poor attempt at shaping the narrative. Over the last week 2 independent researchers have both published their findings online. These 2 bits of research were both attempting to identify the clandestine group behind Prop or Not. The first bit of research was done using data forensics to identify the owners, and the second used linguistic analysis. Both pieces of research independently came to the conclusion that the main man behind Prop or Not is Atlantic Councils, Michael Weiss.
Michael Weiss is an author, the senior editor for The Daily Beast, a columnist for Foreign Policy, and a frequent national security contributor for CNN. He’s also editor-in-chief of The Interpreter, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and co-chair of the Russia Studies Center at the Henry Jackson Society.
That's not the only "coincidence". There is also too close of ties to the Hillary campaign.
The firm’s CTO and co-founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a think tank with openly anti-Russian sentiments that is funded by Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk, who also happened to donate at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation.
In 2013, the Atlantic Council awarded Hillary Clinton it’s Distinguished International Leadership Award.
A Ukrainian oligarch who was a big donor to the Clinton campaign.
What a coincidence!
It's just a coincidence that a company who's founder has an anti-Russian political agenda, and very close ties to the pro-war Washington establishment, who then tells the warmongers exactly what they want to hear (even openly lying), gets rewarded with an enormous government contract.
A contract that will enable the company to keep telling us about the Russian hackers invasion.