Donald Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
He's an absolute nutcase and cockwomble on twitter, of that there is no doubt but Ford have announced they have cancelled a factory they were going to build in Mexico and instead are investing in the US:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Chevy-big-border-tax.html?ito=social-facebook

Ford announced a $700 million investment and 700 new jobs in Michigan on Tuesday.

It cancelled its plans to build a $1.6 billion plant in Mexico for production of the Ford Focus and said it would build the next generation of the vehicle at an existing factory in the foreign country.

Ford CEO Mark Fields said at a news conference that the 'pro-growth' polices of President-elect Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are encouraging.
Click to expand...
 
SWP's back said:
He's an absolute nutcase and cockwomble on twitter, of that there is no doubt but Ford have announced they have cancelled a factory they were going to build in Mexico and instead are investing in the US:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Chevy-big-border-tax.html?ito=social-facebook
Click to expand...

However its nothing to do with Trumps intimidatory style which won't continue when he assumes office and more to do with Fords own rationalisation plans and wanting to get more out of their existing plants. Their announcement its linked with lower sales in their small car division which are naturally made in a lower cost economy because you need to make small cars cheaply to make any money off them. Fords move would have happened anyway its just people are reading into it that this is Trumps influence. A decision like this is a long time in the making and not some panic move coz Donald threatened GM a couple of hours earlier. If you look at it Ford are trying to make more money on a much lower investment - $900m less than the Mexican investment would have been.
 
bluethrunthru said:
However its nothing to do with Trumps intimidatory style which won't continue when he assumes office and more to do with Fords own rationalisation plans and wanting to get more out of their existing plants. Their announcement its linked with lower sales in their small car division which are naturally made in a lower cost economy because you need to make small cars cheaply to make any money off them. Fords move would have happened anyway its just people are reading into it that this is Trumps influence. A decision like this is a long time in the making and not some panic move coz Donald threatened GM a couple of hours earlier. If you look at it Ford are trying to make more money on a much lower investment - $900m less than the Mexican investment would have been.
Click to expand...
So this is wrong?

"Ford CEO Mark Fields said at a news conference that the 'pro-growth' polices of President-elect Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are encouraging.

Employees will build an 'all-new small utility vehicle with extended battery range,' Ford said, 'as well as the fully autonomous vehicle for ride-hailing or ride-sharing' and the Mustang and Lincoln Continental. "

Why does blue moon always do this? Decide they think one way and as such, can never acknowledge anything that goes against that original thought?
 
bluethrunthru said:
However its nothing to do with Trumps intimidatory style which won't continue when he assumes office and more to do with Fords own rationalisation plans and wanting to get more out of their existing plants. Their announcement its linked with lower sales in their small car division which are naturally made in a lower cost economy because you need to make small cars cheaply to make any money off them. Fords move would have happened anyway its just people are reading into it that this is Trumps influence. A decision like this is a long time in the making and not some panic move coz Donald threatened GM a couple of hours earlier. If you look at it Ford are trying to make more money on a much lower investment - $900m less than the Mexican investment would have been.
Click to expand...

'Ford CEO Mark Fields said the decision to cancel the plant in Mexico was based in part on changing market conditions with sales of small cars declining as well as the pro-business climate the automaker expects under incoming President Donald Trump.

CEO Mark Fields, speaking at an event at the Flat Rock Assembly Plant, said the policies that Trump and the new Congress have indicated they will pursue were vital to the company’s decision.'

CaJ_yYlUYAAxBCO.jpg
 
CitizenTID said:
For the advanced tech savvy on here - how likely is it that the USA could prove (or even provide evidence of) Russia's involvement in the hacking they are attributing to them? Just heard on news a spokeswoman for whoever in the US saying that "it was very clear from day one that this was Russia."

This is from the same news segment saying Russian hackers used other people's servers to conduct the attacks. It very well might have been Russia but all this coming out of the US sounds like they want to pin it on Russia regardless of having the evidence or not. Regardless who did it - what evidence could they have on a hacker if it was through someone else's network? Wouldn't that have to be physical evidence (unless I'm misinterpreting this as sat at someone else's network and they meant a proxy). I presume the relevant systems would log IP addresses accessing the network but at the basic level, the hacker would be going through a proxy which could be running numerous if not hundreds of other IP addresses so how would they narrow that down to the culprit?

Unless they're all talking bollocks reporting it as a traditional hack when it could have been infiltrated hacks (i.e. at the system itself, as in whistleblowers).
Click to expand...

Sorry I'm responding to this a few days after your question. Let me put it in a way that hopefully makes this clear.

1) nobody hacks directly. Just like people use VPNs to make streaming services think they are from a different part of the world, hackers use them to mask their real origin. The VPN services that I use can be used in conjunction with one another. So I VPN using one and it established the link to say Manchester. Then I establish another VPN via a different service to Moscow. It is all but untraceable. Most of the time hackers (be they friend or be they foe) don't go to those ends, but it is very doable.
2) people and groups have traits. For example, if you are in Brazil and you are caught hacking within the country, it is possible to be executed. So Brazillian hackers have a common trait. They destroy everything when they are done. They don't leave a trace. Different hacking groups commonly use the same tools within those groups. Sometimes they leave something behind on purpose almost like a "Leroy was here" calling card. Russian hacker teams tend to leave behind some malware just to give an additional poke in the eye.

Occasionally I have to prove a vulnerability to my boss. I'm not a hacker in the purest sense of the word, but I follow it and try to replicate many of the things that I see as a way to try and close down vulnerabilities within the company that I work for. In reality, there isn't much reason to re-invent a hack if it is properly documented. Most effective hacks are social engineering hacks. People are lazy and do stupid stuff as a result. Just to prove this theory, and a known windows event viewer vulnerability, a couple weeks ago I proved to my boss that I could take over his test machine without his knowledge. Not only that, I made it look forensically like it was done from Russia using a VPN and a DDNS entry.

Point being, I don't care how good the computer forensic team is, if the hacker is remotely competent, there is no way to be 100% certain simply by looking at the device that was compromised.
 
Last edited:
Pokes28 said:
Sorry I'm responding to this a few days after your question. Let me put it in a way that hopefully makes this clear.

1) nobody hacks directly. Just like people use VPNs to make streaming services think they are from a different part of the world, hackers use them to mask their real origin. The VPN services that I use can be used in conjunction with one another. So I VPN using one and it established the link to say Manchester. Then I establish another VPN via a different service to Moscow. It is all but untraceable. Most of the time hackers (be they friend or be they foe) don't go to those ends, but it is very doable.
2) people and groups have traits. For example, if you are in Brazil and you are caught hacking within the country, it is possible to be executed. So Brazillian hackers have a common trait. They destroy everything when they are done. They don't leave a trace. Different hacking groups commonly use the same tools within those groups. Sometimes they leave something behind on purpose almost like a "Leroy was here" calling card. Russian hacker teams tend to leave behind some malware just to give an additional poke in the eye.

Occasionally I have to prove a vulnerability to my boss. I'm not a hacker in the purest sense of the word, but I follow it and try to replicate many of the things that I see as a way to try and close down vulnerabilities within the company that I work for. In reality, there isn't much reason to re-invent a hack if it is properly documented. Most effective hacks are social engineering hacks. People are lazy and do stupid stuff as a result. Just to prove this theory, and a known windows event viewer vulnerability, a couple weeks ago I proved to my boss that I could take over his test machine without his knowledge. Not only that, I made it look forensically like it was done from Russia using a VPN and a DDNS entry.

Point being, I don't care how good the computer forensic team is, if the hacker is remotely competent, there is no way to be 100% certain simply by looking at the device that was compromised.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that mate, confirmed my suspicions as Blue Phil did too. There just seemed to be a lot of non-IT people being interviewed by the news that weren't substantiating anything and sounded unknowledgeable about the subject yet made claims like "there's no doubt that from the start it was clear this was Russia."
 
CitizenTID said:
Thanks for that mate, confirmed my suspicions as Blue Phil did too. There just seemed to be a lot of non-IT people being interviewed by the news that weren't substantiating anything and sounded unknowledgeable about the subject yet made claims like "there's no doubt that from the start it was clear this was Russia."
Click to expand...

Yep. I've seen many of the same things. The reason you are seeing them in the news is that real IT/Security people would simply not be comfortable saying something so cut and dry. What happens is that forensic people do their analysis. They generally are writing up their findings, but they will be in techno-speak. I would pretty much guarantee there was one forensic person or maybe a small team that went through everything on the servers. Their writeups were analytical only. Those sheets were what was passed to the various intelligence agencies where they had people read it and come to their own conclusions. I see this quite often. If the news sources could figure out who actually did the forensic work and talk to them, I'd wager they are irritated that what they found was skewed to fit a political narrative.
 
SWP's back said:
So this is wrong?

"Ford CEO Mark Fields said at a news conference that the 'pro-growth' polices of President-elect Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are encouraging.

Employees will build an 'all-new small utility vehicle with extended battery range,' Ford said, 'as well as the fully autonomous vehicle for ride-hailing or ride-sharing' and the Mustang and Lincoln Continental. "

Why does blue moon always do this? Decide they think one way and as such, can never acknowledge anything that goes against that original thought?
Click to expand...

Of course its not wrong but if Trump Tweets overnight you have to understand the head of FoMoCo doesn't make a $900m dollar change in investment strategy as a result. This will have been some months in coming
 
Pokes28 said:
Yep. I've seen many of the same things. The reason you are seeing them in the news is that real IT/Security people would simply not be comfortable saying something so cut and dry. What happens is that forensic people do their analysis. They generally are writing up their findings, but they will be in techno-speak. I would pretty much guarantee there was one forensic person or maybe a small team that went through everything on the servers. Their writeups were analytical only. Those sheets were what was passed to the various intelligence agencies where they had people read it and come to their own conclusions. I see this quite often. If the news sources could figure out who actually did the forensic work and talk to them, I'd wager they are irritated that what they found was skewed to fit a political narrative.
Click to expand...
Presumably the forensic IT analysis forms just one part of the overall intelligence services investigation. I am sure they will also have other sources in the field that will support their conclusions. Whether they are deliberately misleading is another question.
 
bluethrunthru said:
Of course its not wrong but if Trump Tweets overnight you have to understand the head of FoMoCo doesn't make a $900m dollar change in investment strategy as a result. This will have been some months in coming
Click to expand...
Exactly. Now that Trump's the main man, the heads of these large corporations are happy to stroke his ego if it gives them a future advantage. As you say, they aren't making a decision based on a tweet.
 
Ford just realised that when there's a massive wall between the USA and Mexico

The Mexicans will keep the cars.....and the factory
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top