CIA Prepping For Possible Cyber Strike Against Russia (nbcnews.com)

Slashdot reader schwit1 reports that the Obama administration "is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election," according to U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to NBC News: Current and former officials with direct knowledge of the situation say the CIA has been asked to deliver options to the White House for a wide-ranging "clandestine" cyber operation designed to harass and "embarrass" the Kremlin leadership. The sources did not elaborate on the exact measures the CIA was considering, but said the agency had already begun opening cyber doors, selecting targets and making other preparations for an operation. Former intelligence officers told NBC News that the agency had gathered reams of documents that could expose unsavory tactics by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Vice President Joe Biden told "Meet the Press" moderator Chuck Todd on Friday that "we're sending a message" to Putin and that "it will be at the time of our choosing, and under the circumstances that will have the greatest impact." When asked if the American public will know a message was sent, the vice president replied, "Hope not."
Not mounting a response would weaken U.S. credibility, one senior U.S. official said, while others said hundreds of millions of dollars has been allocated to the team mounting the attacks. Thursday US officials familiar with the investigation told CNN there was "mounting evidence" that Russia was supplying leaked emails to WikiLeaks, and last week in a conference call organized by the Clinton campaign, former Acting CIA Director Mike Morrell said it was "absolutely clear... WikiLeaks and Guccifer 2 are working with the Russians on this."

Comments

Re:For them theoretically hacking a private org?

[AHuxley]

The washingtonpost has:
"IP addresses listed" and near the end its " “not aware of any specific or credible cybersecurity threats relating to the upcoming general election systems,”"
CNN notes:
"We have seen no access into statewide registration database and no manipulation of that database." and "FBI investigators believe the the hacks and attempted intrusions of state election sites were carried out by hackers working for Russian intelligence."
The Guardian has
"in calling out what it says is Russian-directed hacking."
So its back to ip ranges a "calling out" and a 'believe"?

Re:For them theoretically hacking a private org?

[Ol Olsoc]

Calling people who want proof "trolls" is the oldest trick in the book. It's the sign of a completely unsupportable position.

Troll or not, not many people who disbelieve it will not accept any proof. Certainly the beneficiary of the hacks, Donald Trump, refused to believe na actual intel breifing on the subject. He says: "I don't think anybody knows it was Russia that broke into the DNC. I mean, it could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, okay?" During the second presidential debate he declared: "Maybe there is no hacking,"

So yes, it is possible thatthe Democrats hacked their own computer, but you have to look at the evidence:

Who loses, who benefits, and what is the motive.

Obviously, the DEmocrats have been embarassed by these leaks.

The Republicans have been the beneficiaries

The motive? Pretty obvious, which is to get Trump elected as president.

Now how would have the wherewithal to do such a thing, and have a reason to help the Republicans as well, specifically Trump.

And why has data form the GOP not been leaked. The party that outed Valerie Plame and Fabricated Evidence to get us into war with Iraq, and is proud of it probably has more interesting things than the DNC's promotion of Clinton over Sanders, and her Wall Street speeches. Not sayin', just sayin'.

You can draw your own conclusions, but a police detective would consider those issues a fine place to start looking.

And those are the publically accessible things. You do know that some things gotta be kept from the public for a while. Then again, there are people who believe that FDR planned Pearl Harbor as a ploy to get us into WW2, and that the holocaust never happened. Which speaks to my first paragraph.

SoI could see the conspiracists claiming that the Kenyan terror baby did this because of whatever weird ass reason, maybe in order to take our guns away and put everyone in FEMA death camps something, like he was going to do for the last 8 years

Re:For them theoretically hacking a private org?

[PopeRatzo]

and Hillary's credibility which is in free fall?

You might as well start calling her "President Clinton", so you can get used to it. Call it aversion therapy.

http://projects.fivethirtyeigh...

And just so you can get the bad news from conservative sites, too:

http://www.realclearpolitics.c...

https://electionbettingodds.co...

Re:Further

[quantaman]

The DNC leak is thought to be attributed to the person killed in the Robbery where nothing was Stolen.

Only by people who are desperately trying to deny Russia's role.

First he wasn't that important a figure, there's no reason to think he would have had access to all of the docs that were leaked.

Second a fatal mugging where nothing is stolen actually makes a lot of sense. Mugger comes up, victim decides to make a run for it, the mugger panics, shoots, and runs like hell because running away from a murder rap is more important than grabbing a wallet.

Third, he was conscious and breathing when he was found. So you apparently think that not only did the hit squad leave him alive, but that he wasn't really interested in telling the cops about the hit squad who'd just assassinated him.

Frankly the whole conspiracy theory is disgusting. A person is murdered and jump with glee at the opportunity to hijack their memory for you dumbass conspiracy theory.