Slashdot Mirror
FBI Investigating Possible Hack of Democratic Party Staffer Cell Phones (cnn.com)
In what may be part of the original Democratic National Committee hack, the FBI is currently investigating a possible hack involving the cell phones of a small number of Democratic Party staffers. CNN reports: The development comes on the same day Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told lawmakers that 18 states have asked for help in warding off cyberattacks on their electronic voting systems. Law enforcement officials have reached out to the staffers individually about "imaging" their phones to search for evidence of hacking, such as malware. Investigators are still probing whether this attempted hack is part of the original breach of Democratic National Committee emails -- which is widely thought to be the work of the Russian government -- or a new hacking attempt. "Our struggle with the Russian hackers that we announced in June is ongoing -- as we knew it would be -- and we are choosing not to provide general updates unless personal data or other sensitive information has been accessed or stolen," interim DNC Chairwoman Donna Brazile told CNN. Cybersecurity was a major theme at the debate last night between Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. While Clinton blamed the Russians for the "election-related cyberintrusions," Trump said "It could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It could also be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds." We will update this story as it develops.
Online users brush aside weightist comment, just happy to be noticed.
Sorry. Couldn't resist.
Someone had to do it.
a couple of our own U.S. intelligence services are angry about certain issues, it is them not "Russian Hackers" bothering Obama admin and Hillary campaign.
The Russians, pffffffttt.
That needs to be implemented fast https://www.youtube.com/watch?... .
is imaging the phones...
Let's start with the important question: Android or Ios?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
If you find it to be a "struggle" to keep your phones or your computers safe from "Russian hackers", then your party and its candidates are clearly not competent to hold higher office.
The development comes on the same day Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told lawmakers that 18 states have asked for help in warding off cyberattacks on their electronic voting systems.
This is one of those phrases that should result in people instantly being fired but, for some reason, never does.
How long ago did the first Diebold issues come out? And this is still a thing?
I'm almost terrified to ask but these "cyber" attacks they're worried... that wouldn't be a reference to internet based attacks, would it? Did some psychopath finally decide that that best way to fix electronic voting machines was to connect them to the internet in any setup that didn't involve an air gap?
why we have Homeland Security? It's supposed to let the FBI ask the NSA dudes "um, hey. know how to hack these cellphones, or find out if they've been hacked, or even better, know how to make it harder to hack em?"
Cuz we all know the NSA can hack your cell phone 9 ways to friday.
In other words: just like everyone else.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
No one thinks it's suspicious that the DNC is the target of frequent and recurring attacks, while the Republicans haven't been touched once, and that Trump refuses to blame Russia for anything? No one thinks it's suspicious that several of his advisers have strong ties to Russia? No one thinks it's suspicious he's directly paid by Russia? Good god people, skepticism is helpful in the right amounts, but to pretend this isn't Putin's way of helping his financially submissive bitch into office is naive beyond belief.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
Sure, the Russian Government looks out for it's own interests in terms of attempting to sway foreign Governments. So does the USA, just look at the Middle East, Africa, and a good amount of Eastern Europe. Look how much money the US allowed to flow to Serbia, Georgia, the Ukraine. If you believe that Trump is somehow worse for the US than Hillary, or more beneficial to any Foreign power you either don't know Trump's platform (and the reason for his success) or don't care to figure it out.
One could say that Trump is too concerned with US interests, but that's not what people claim. US Allies have concerns about how he would renegotiate our current treaties because he comes off as too hard line for US interests. One could also argue that cutting taxes as much as he plans would have an adverse effect. Again, the arguments all go way the hell out in the weeds to "he loves Russia", and quite frankly that is a losing argument.
They both do business with Russia, and Hillary did hers while serving as Secretary of State. It's pretty obvious that pay for play landed a Russian company exclusive access to about 75% of the Uranium mines in the North America. The Clinton's don't care who's money they take, as long as they believe they gain enough political power in the bargain. If you believe Hillary's claim that she left the office broke, the Clinton duo has banked 111 Million dollars personally, and almost $2,000,000,000.00 for the foundation while she worked as a Public servant and he collected his Presidential retirement. If you believe you rake in 132million a year for giving speeches, I have a bridge for sale.
The one thing I noticed and heard Dennis Prager talk about today was Hillary's plan to force companies to share profits with employees (in addition to a huge hike in Federal minimum wage, extended required paid time off). The level of authoritarianism being published is frightening, and mimics what countries like Russia do today. Companies already off-shore or simply move jobs to avoid excessive taxes, and you think anyone will invest when they receive negative revenue for investing?
Neither candidate is good, but the lies about Trump are helping him more than hurting him. The days of not being able to find information don't currently exist, which is why you can bet your ass that the First amendment will be under assault from day one of a Hillary Presidency. You think Obama is good at ignoring FOIA requests, imagine how she will be.
Posting anonymously since the Hillary shills will hammer any negative post.
He may have been asked, but I would not be surprised if he refused. Snowden seems to be earnest. Assange, on the other hand, is clearly a spineless Russian tool.
Why can't someone hurry up and hack Trumps phone for some entertainment?
The researchers at the aforementioned security firm are basing their conclusion on three signals: the hacker used Russian computers to edit PDF files, he also used Russian VPN -- and other internet infrastructure from the country, and that he was unable to speak Romanian.
That's really thin evidence to support the assertion that it's the Russian government. Once you start accusing governments, any government could leave those kinds of clues, including the US governemnt. Non-governmental actors can forge that kind of thing, too.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
... of which there is no shortage visiting slashdot, seem to have already established and agreed that the best way to secure an election is to NOT USE COMPUTERS !!!
How much MORE money do you want to spend to only guarantee that your system is still hackable?
Why can't we just go with paper and count them by hand like every other ficking civilised country in the world?
You want to point the blame at the laziness of IT experts. We are the experts, we told you that it can't be done, and you stick your fingers in your ears and tell us to nerd harder. ... we get the election results that we deserve, and none of it is verifiable, none of it is accurate, it isn't even representative because of voter disenfranchisement and polling station "problems", so what does it fucking matter anyway ?
Fuck off, already
It's not like the successful candidate will keep their empty promises either.
Vote Green. Or Purple. Or polka-dotted.
Just don't vote Red or Blue, cause then you are CERTAIN that your vote doesn't really count, because "your guy" isn't going to follow your agenda anyway.
(I couldn't resist - or is anybody here naÃve enough to believe that Mr. Snowden is not being, er, *asked* to help with their efforts in this regard?)
Why would he even be useful in that regard? He accomplished what he accomplished because at the time he had access. Now he doesn't. He's only useful to Russia as a PR symbol.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
In other words: Not IT material.
The President of the United States is not an IT job. Despite your delusions of grandeur, your ability to configure an email server does not translate into competence at governing a nation and governing a nation does not require knowing how to configure a email server.
Didn't Hillary have the wet works guys deal with the leaker already?
I would expect any future candidate to at least take their required national security training which she refused to do. Of course, if you didn't have the training, it's really easy to call handling classified information "a mistake", rather than a willful violation...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
No citations or evidence to support my viewpoint. Such a shame common sense isn't.
No, it is. You've just explained why nobody is taking you seriously. There's nothing to support your viewpoint. It's common sense to ignore it until such time as there is. He's useful tp Russia even if he does nothing but speak occasionally and rile us up, keep us arguing amongst ourselves. If he gets caught being involved in espionage then he loses all credibility, and it's easy to leak information in that fashion. It makes more sense to assume that they're just using him to nettle us.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
"you're naïve enough to believe that V. Putin and Russia truly giving Snowden asylum based on strictly humanitarian reasons."
Of course not. He's doing it to stick it to the US. I'm sure Snowden moderates what he says about Russia, but he still criticizes them.
A warrant isn't "evidence." Snowden, whether you agree with him or not, seems to think he was doing the right thing for our country. The existence of a "moral imperative" is a subjective judgment.