>Of course you have to laugh hard at the mediocrity of the second part of the "attack": directly contacting servers which can be reverse-looked up. Doh!
Is it mediocrity, or is it intended in order to send a message?
I'd say imaginary myself. I'm curious what the systems were that were obviously csis systems. He failed to include any logs or information beyond his claims.
The problem is you have a person who constantly has more and more amazing stories like this that he pushes everywhere with no proof. Logs or the hostnames or anything is pretty simple proof but require work to make up beyond a story. He put so much effort into detailing it why leave them out? That is why I want to see some sort of proof before I just believe his claims.
Is it mediocrity, or is it intended in order to send a message?
"We are on to you", etc?