Thread by @ErrataRob

1/ It's weird how much this Rachel Maddow episode repeats Mike Lindell almost verbatim. Both assure us that data showing a conspiracy has been validated by cyberexperts, and that no credible expert has refuted it.

I'm a credible expert, and I refute both.

2/ There is no "Trump server". The Trump org had no control over the domain, and barring some vast convoluted theory probably involving space aliens, no control over the "server" that the domain pointed to.

3/ The domain was created by Cendyn, a hotel marketing company. Among their marketing activities is sending bulk emails, which they outsource to a company called Listrak.

4/ Cendyn registers a domain name to use when sending such emails, like hyatt-email.com, mjh-email.com, denihan-email.com, ....and trump-email.com.

Cendyn controls these domains, their customers have no control.

5/ Cendyn uses Listrak servers. The server the "mail1.trump-email.com" points behaves exactly like all the other servers Cendyn uses with Listrak.

Their customers have even less control over Listrak servers as they do Cendyn domains.

6/ Until March 2016, DNS lookups for "trump-email.com" look like those done for other Cendyn customers (e.g. hyatt-email.com). They are a side effect of spam.

Then Trump and Cendyn parted ways, ending their relationship.

7/ Cendyn explains the odd DNS traffic as the fact they repurposed their servers. They do a lot more than just simple email marketing, so this isn't far fetched.

8/ So at this point you have to create some wild conspiracy theory about a bizarre, secret relationship between the Trump Org, Cendyn, and Listrak that continued after their public relationship ended, and that Cendyn is lying.

9/ Why traffic uniquely from suspect Trump allies Alfa Bank, Spectrum Health, and Heartland? I dunno.

10/ It's unlikely that the data was completely fabricated. But at the same time, this complex conspiracy theory is even less likely.

That's the definition of a "conspiracy theory", theorizing a conspiracy when other explanations are more likely.

11/ The researchers were Democrat operatives currying favor with the upcoming Hillary administration. The data is clearly manipulated. It's not a stretch to conclude that such manipulations included complete fabrication.

12/ The situation is like Mike Lindell, who promises to have "packet-captures" proving 2020 election hacking. He claims he's completely verified them -- but won't let critics like me see them.

13/ In this case, they released only a manipulate DNS data set. They claim it's been verified. They won't let critics like me near it.

14/ Some cyberexperts attended Lindell's symposiums. He didn't provide us the packet captures, then claimed victory by saying that we couldn't prove they weren't from the 2020 election. You can't prove a negative -- I can't prove space aliens weren't involved, either.

15/ The same thing is true here. They won't give independent credible experts the raw data, and then claim victory because no credible experts have refuted the data.

I have refuted the public data. I can't refute private data they won't share.

16/ For your ammusement, here was my live-tweeting my 3 day experience attending Lindell's cybersymposium in order to have a look at the pcaps.

https://twitter.com/ErrataRob/status/1424878450867847181

17/ Note: Durham using the criminal justice system for political payback is ugly and evil. Maddow is right to criticize that. She's just wrong defending a conspiracy theory about DNS records, there is no evidence of secret communication with a Trump server.