Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity released a statement today on the claims of Russian hackers influencing the US elections.

The former intelligence officials say all signs point to “leaking” and not traceable “hacking.”

Executive Intelligence Review posted the statement:

“We draw on decades of senior-level experience— with emphasis on cyber-intelligence and security—to cut through uninformed, largely partisan fog. “We have gone through the various claims about hacking. For us, it is child’s play to dismiss them. The email disclosures in question are the result of a leak, not a hack. Here is the difference between leaking and hacking: TRENDING: BREAKING: 'At Least 10 Shots' Reportedly Fired at Police By Louisville Black Lives Matter Rioters — UPDATE... At Least Two Officers Shot (VIDEOS) “Leak When someone physically takes data out of an organization and gives it to some other person or organization, as Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning did. “Hack When someone in a remote location electronically penetrates operating systems, firewalls, or any other cyber-protection system and then extracts date. “All signs point to leaking, not hacking. If hacking were involved, the National Security Agency would know it—and know both the sender and the recipient. “In short, leaking requires physically removing data—on a thumb drive, for example—the only way such data can be copied and removed, with no electronic trace of what has left the server via a physical storage device.“

When hacking is involved, “the NSA is able to identify both the sender and the recipient involved.” Because of the Snowden releases, the VIPS.

“can provide a full picture of NSA’s extensive domestic data-collection network… which include at least 30 companies in the U.S. operating the fiber networks that carry Public Switched Telephone Network as well as the World Wide Web. This gives NSA unparalleled access to data flowing within the U.S. and data going out to the rest of the world, as well as data transiting the U.S.” “In other words, any data that is passed from the servers of the Democratic National Committee or of Hillary Rodham Clinton—or any other server in the U.S.—is collected by the NSA. These data transfers are broken down into smaller segments called ‘packets’, which enable the transfer to be traced and followed through the network…” “…All the packets that form a message are assigned an identifying number that enables the receiving end to collect them for reassembly. Moreover, each packet carries the originator and ultimate receiver internet protocol number (either IPV4 or IPV6) that enables the network to route data. When these email packets leave the U.S. the other ‘Five Eyes’ countries (the U.K,., Canada, Australia and New Zealand) and the seven or eight other countries participating with the U.S. in the bulk-collection of everything on the planet would also have a record of where the email packets went after leaving the U.S. “These collection resources are extensive; they include hundreds of trace route programs that trace the path of packets going across the network and tens of thousands of hardware and software implants in switches and servers that manage the network. “The bottom line is that the NSA would know where and how any ‘hacked’ emails from the DNC, HRC or any other servers were routed through the network…”