hunter-dkim

phic authenticity stamp — one that can be used to verify the provenance of any email dump, regardless of how it reaches the verifier." Note that the "few hours" attack here is only relevant if they were using easily crackable 512-bit keys. The author of this article suggests (and I agree) that the 1024 or 2048 bit RSA keys are not easily crackable. (see https://crypto.stackexchange.com/a/42830) Maybe you are suggesting that someone could sign emails using the old crackable 512-bit keys. And they could, although we should disregard this as "not verification" given the weak keys. The article links to https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim#short-dkim-... - which verifies an email using a since-rotated 2015 key (which was 2048 bits), although that github erroneously states that Google was using 1024 bit before that (they were using 512). I would concede that the notion of "sometimes we should disregard some DKIM verifications based on the key length" is not easy to grasp and that email verification stories in the media could become muddier and harder to present. I would hope that interviewing experts gets you a reasonable estimation of how likely an email is to be legitimate.

e was in office (https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim). Are those lies too? Sure Trump lies, like any other politician. But sometimes he tells the truth, and the truth is so ludicrous, that it seems like lies, but when it finally comes out that it was true, we all sit and say to ourselves... maybe we should believe the guy. But I mean... continue on with the denial, you'll just turn more formerly anti-Trump people into pro-Trumpers.

e time, not the least of which in the Hunter Biden case, or for the purpose of authenticating any particular historical email. [1] - https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim

e level of skepticism? For example, how do we know the tax returns are real? Absolutely nobody has confirmed them except anonymous sources speaking to the NYT.

like Robert Graham[1] and Tony Bobulinski who are providing evidence for the authenticity of the emails recovered. > Also, Hunter's emails and photos were circulated in Ukraine last year to the highest bidder. Irrelevant. All evidence so far points to the laptop (which is genuinely Hunter Biden's) being the source of these emails. The DOJ has already acknowledged that it received (what I believe is the original) laptop drive, and they have been pursuing an active criminal investigation against Hunter since last year. The DOJ, State Department, and DNI all have said there is no evidence of foreign involvement, and even a Washington Post journalist has acknowledged that this likely isn't the result of foreign interference. > And no one is buying it. Wishful thinking. [1]https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim

private photos and videos of Hunter whose authenticity is not in doubt. A former business partner of Hunter has stated, unequivocally and on the record, that not only are the emails authentic but they describe events accurately, including proposed participation by the former Vice President in at least one deal Hunter and Jim Biden were pursuing in China. And, most importantly of all, neither Hunter Biden nor the Biden campaign has even suggested, let alone claimed, that a single email or text is fake." Add to that that at least one email has had its DKIM signature verified (see the link above). I hate Trump and think a second term would be an unmitigated disaster for our democracy. Even if the worst of the allegations or insinuations were true I think Biden would be better for our country than Trump. If I were an editor of a newspaper, I'd certainly think twice before publishing something like this, even if I thought they were accurate. But I would never throw shade on a fellow journalist for writing something like this. And as a voter, if I'm going to choose the lesser of two evils, I want to know just how evil the lesser one is.