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.
Makes a certain amount of sense that they would favor Trump, if only because he's far more likely to get into bed with them than Clinton, but they could be going after the Democrats out of spite for opposing them in Ukraine/Syria. You have to wonder how much they have, because as much as been leaked so far, it hasn't amounted to anything, so either they've used up everything and are trying to find more or they're just waiting for the right moment before dropping it all so that there's no possible way for the Democrats to respond in time.
if only because he's far more likely to get into bed with them than Clinton
You apparently missed the four years she was secretary of state. One of the most embarrassing turns at the state department, and one of those moments involved trying to "reset" relations with Putin.
It's clear she is in no way ready for this job - proven by her past performance.
Pootsky doesn't like Hil'ry because she publicly questioned the legitimacy of his election.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
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.
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?
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.
The hilarious thing is Trump supporters will believe the stupidest, most easily disproven conspiracy theories about Clinton, but insist that the well-supported fact that Russian hackers are messing with the election is a crazy conspiracy.
Incidentally, this is a topic where both sides can argue with each other and both be right. If Trump says, "we don't know it was the Russian government, and Clinton says, "experts say it was the Russian government;" those aren't logically contradictory positions.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Pootsky doesn't like Hil'ry because she publicly questioned the legitimacy of his election.
And the Democrats are more worried about the legitimacy of Trump's erection!
They write themselves, folks!
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
(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.'"
Yes, but Trump is no 10 Billion $ man either. Look at his scams. He's strictly a penny-ante grifter. Anyone with 10 Billion doesn't start some of the silly scams Trump has been behind unless they are so blinded by greed that they seem like a good way to spend time.
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.
Of course, if the DNC weren't doing all these shady things that get revealed through email and phone hacks, then there wouldn't be much to be embarrassed by.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
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.'"