Slashdot Mirror
Report: Russian Hackers Phished The DNC And Clinton Campaign Using Fake Gmail Forms (buzzfeed.com)
Citing a report from SecureWorks, BuzzFeed is reporting that Russian hackers "used emails disguised to look as Gmail security updates to hack into the computers of the Democratic National Committee and members of Hillary Clinton's top campaign staff":
The emails were sent to 108 members of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's campaign and 20 people clicked on them, at least four people clicking more than once, Secureworks' research found. The emails were sent to another 16 people from the DNC and four people clicked on them, the report said.
Researchers found the emails by tracing the malicious URLs set up by [state-sponsored hacking group] Fancy Bear using Bitly, a link shortening service... "We were monitoring bit.ly and saw the accounts being created in real time," said Phil Burdette, a senior security researcher at SecureWorks, explaining how they stumbled upon the the URLs set up by Fancy Bear.
The URL apparently resolved to accounts-google.com (rather than accounts.google.com), and Burdette says "They did a great job with capturing the look and feel of Google."
Researchers found the emails by tracing the malicious URLs set up by [state-sponsored hacking group] Fancy Bear using Bitly, a link shortening service... "We were monitoring bit.ly and saw the accounts being created in real time," said Phil Burdette, a senior security researcher at SecureWorks, explaining how they stumbled upon the the URLs set up by Fancy Bear.
The URL apparently resolved to accounts-google.com (rather than accounts.google.com), and Burdette says "They did a great job with capturing the look and feel of Google."
Using bit.ly. Oh the IRONY that the .ly TLD could somehow be involved in taking down Hillary Clinton.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
A few points on this alleged story:
1. The Clinton campaign desperately trying to distract attention away from Hillary's fundamental dishonesty.
2. Maybe the story is true, and the Clinton campaign hires people with the security acumen of a burned-out toaster.
3. Buzzfeed? Really?
4. Maybe they figure if they keep yelling "Trump is a Putin pawn!" enough we'll ignore the fact that Podesta is a registered lobbyist for Putin's bank.
There's one candidate in this race who has a proven record of taking money for favors from Russian sources, and it isn't Trump.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
Frankly I'm surprised we don't see this technique used more often.
#DeleteChrome
I'm still not sure how this points to the Russians... How do we not know that it isn't some dude sitting on the beach in Tahiti and bouncing it off a server or VPN in Russia? How do we know it isn't the Chinese doing the same thing? How about a disgruntled Lithuanian? Most anybody can look like they are from anywhere. In fact, on virtually any TV show where hacking is involved, they always talk about it not being tranceable because it is "bouncing all over the world" so it isn't like the Evil Lithuanians / Chinese / Icelanders / Argentinians / etc. hackers can't figure out how to use a few VPNs or hacked machines to do their job.
The most amusing bit about the democrats response isn't the fact they aren't screaming "LIES!" It's the fact that they are pointing at Russia and yelling "Those dicks did that!"
My guess is that if the defense is true - she pissed them off with the reset button!
http://www.theblaze.com/storie...
Or not.
According to that she was in bed with Putin.
that does ignore this book
http://www.penguinrandomhouse....
Which tells where the "reset button" was swiped from.
It amazes me that people forget that hillary reset relations and simultaneously screams about hacking.Was she a complete failure back then? Or is she lying now?
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
It's kind of scary that the people who want to be elected to run the branch of government that is in charge of implementing cyber security are such a bunch of damn clueless morons about it.
I mean there are high schoolers who would do better securing and safeguarding their emails than this crew...
Heh, who's the JV team?
What I get from that map is that, despite a clear majority of states voting for Trump, their model still for some reason "predicts" a Clinton win. Almost as if the election has been rigged. Somehow.
Every election is rigged by design, because of the electoral college system. If you're just now figuring out that the elections are rigged, you slept through civics and should probably refrain from contributing to political conversations.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
From the article:
"researchers assess with moderate confidence that the group is operating from the Russian Federation and is gathering intelligence on behalf of the Russian government"
I know it fits the playbook to simply call them "Russian Hackers" but hey, maybe...journalism instead?
-Styopa
It is certainly best for Clintons campaign ito fix blame on "the Russians". It would be better for Trumps campaign if he could blame China. Ergo if the Russians actually did it they would have false flagged China. That is if Russia cares.
The Founding Fathers created the electoral college system specifically to prevent populist perverts like Trump becoming president.
If anyone has a beef with the electoral college, take it up with the Founding Fathers.
You are welcome on my lawn.
What I get from that map is that, despite a clear majority of states voting for Trump, their model still for some reason "predicts" a Clinton win. Almost as if the election has been rigged. Somehow.
The astute reader will notice that 22 states on that map are colored red or pink. I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions.
Education and training is always the weakest link.
No, human trust is the weakest link.
I doubt that you can convert a single human being from "trust by default" to "distrust by default" through education. And training can only help with specific and narrow threats, and once attackers change their tactics, those who trust by default are just as vulnerable again.
It's a mindset, not knowledge. If you don't have healthy paranoia, you're always going to be prey.
Explaining virtually every spear phishing plan ever run on people for the last 20 years proves nothing. Who-is data for the domain they claim responsible is registered in France, not Russia. Registered to one "sacko.fatou17@yahoo.fr". Domain created 22FEB2012 and expires on 22FEB17. I'll paste more below just in case, but neither the name or the address of the registrant relate to Russia. Fatou is an older family name in France. You want to convince me it's Russian they need to do better than common knowledge. They make it sound like copying a Google page is hard, when in fact it's as simple as "save-as" and downloading a couple of pictures from the same source.
Domain Name: GOOGLE-ACCOUNT.COM
Registry Domain ID: 1703474033_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.register.it
Registrar URL: http://we.register.it/
Updated Date: 2016-03-26T00:00:00Z
Creation Date: 2012-02-22T00:00:00Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2017-02-22T00:00:00Z
Registrar: REGISTER.IT S.P.A.
Registrar IANA ID: 168
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: abuse[at]register.it
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +39.0353230310
Reseller:
Domain Status: ok
Registry Registrant ID:
Registrant Name: Google-Account
Registrant Organization: Google-Account
Registrant Street: 12 Allée des Noisetiers
Registrant City: St denis en val
Registrant State/Province: Haut-Rhin
Registrant Postal Code: 45160
Registrant Country: FR
Registrant Phone: +33.489750045
Registrant Phone Ext:
Registrant Fax:
Registrant Fax Ext:
Registrant Email:
Registry Admin ID:
Admin Name: Google Account
Admin Organization: Google Account
Admin Street: 12 Allée des Noisetiers
Admin City: St denis en val
Admin State/Province: Haut-Rhin
Admin Postal Code: 45160
Admin Country: FR
Admin Phone: +33.489750045
Admin Phone Ext:
Admin Fax:
Admin Fax Ext:
Admin Email:
Registry Tech ID:
Tech Name: Technical Support
Tech Organization: AMEN.FR
Tech Street: 12-14, Rond Point des Champs Elysees
Tech City: PARIS
Tech State/Province: PARIS
Tech Postal Code: 75008
Tech Country: FR
Tech Phone: +33.811887744
Tech Phone Ext:
Tech Fax: +33.140877689
Tech Fax Ext:
Tech Email:
Name Server: NS1.AMENWORLD.COM
Name Server: NS2.AMENWORLD.COM
DNSSEC: unsigned
URL of the ICANN WHOIS Data Problem Reporting System: http://wdprs.internic.net/
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
As long as they were using Gmail in the first place, enabling 2 factor authentication, with the second factor being a U2F key like an inexpensive Yubikey, would have gone a ling ways towards preventing this,
Kythe
What I get from that map is that, despite a clear majority of states voting for Trump, their model still for some reason "predicts" a Clinton win.
You're either not American or you slept through civics class in high school.
The number of states doesn't matter. The populations of those states (and thus the number of electoral votes each one has) are negligible compared to those in the Clinton column. In fact, the only populous state that's likely to go for Trump is Texas.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
The Founding Fathers created the electoral college system specifically to prevent populist perverts like Trump becoming president.
The EC has disagreed with the popular vote only four times in history and one of those was a Bush presidency. Tell me again how great it is.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If you want to revisit the Constitution based on the fact that "technology has changed", we can do that. But beware. Some of your most hallowed Amendments might go by the wayside.
But I agree with you that the Constitution is a living document.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Yes, but the map clearly shows the majority of the land area of the country is colored red. And everybody knows that the only fair way to conduct an election is for each square mile of the country's landmass to get exactly one vote.
and have never had any security proble...Slashdot is decadent. Comrade, why not visit sunny Moscow and rub lucky chest of King Putin?
Without gullible staff members there would be no democratic party leadership.
Paranoia is never "healthy". *Awareness*, however, is always a damned good idea.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Even if Hillary *is* a lesbian, what of it?
This is supposed to make up for the fact that no man who actually cared about his daughter would leave her alone with Trump?
More false equivalence from the RWNJ lobby.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
I'm voting for Hillary but I wouldn't leave my daughter alone with the Clintons either.
I hope all Americans realize that the rest of the world is dumbfounded that Clinton and Trump are supposedly the best candidates for the presidency of your great nation.
Surely not.
You are all lost!
If you like those odds, take them. Otherwise deal with it.
The Founding Fathers created the electoral college system specifically to prevent populist perverts like Trump becoming president.
Except that in this case Trump doesn't get the popular vote - he's at 42.5%. Clinton has 49.3%.
Also, electoral votes being a representation of the will and the number of the people in each state - they tend to vote in accord to the popular vote.
I mean... last time popular vote winner lost the election was in 2000 - back when Gore lost to Bush by less than 1% of the electoral vote, while wining the popular vote by 0.5%.
Last time before that... you'd have to go back to the '80s. 1880s. Before women could vote and just after black men got the right to vote... at least on paper.
Other than that... there are only two more cases of a winner of the popular vote not winning the electoral vote as well. In the 1870s and in the 1820s.
Winning the popular vote but losing the election is not a normal thing. It's an exception which happens very rarely.
Like, centuries can come and go between such elections.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Hiding behind what people did 200+ years ago means that you are either unable, but more likely unwilling to solve anything.
So no, do NOT take it up with the founding fathers. Go out there and solve the shit that is going on yourselves.I live in a country that is younger than the US and has gone through more changes on a political level.
Stop blaming others for the mess you are in.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
"There are at least a dozen current or former members of the domestic intelligence community who have died of "natural causes" or "accident" in the past three months."
You mean of a community made up of what is probably -- when you add together CIA, NSA, military intelligence and contractors -- tens of thousands of people, many of them old, "at least a dozen" have died in the past three months?
If you want to revisit the Constitution based on the fact that "technology has changed", we can do that. But beware. Some of your most hallowed Amendments might go by the wayside.
Rat, this is a ridiculous false equivalence and you know it.
"A living Constitution" is shorthand for the idea that Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her liberal friends shouldn't be bound by the actual words in the Constitution, but by (her interpretation of) the intent of the Constitution, which coincidentally always lines up with liberal policy preferences.
"Living Constitution" advocates are making laws and rulings against the plain text of the Second Amendment NOW, with that amendment still in place.
Changing the Constitution through the amendment process is different than ignoring it when it gets in the way, which is what "Living Constitution" advocates are advocating for.
Once we're squarely in "we're talking about changing the text of the Constitution with an amendment territory," repealing the Electoral College and repealing the Second Amendment have nothing to do with each other. If one was a good idea (neither are), that wouldn't imply anything about the other.
Awareness only works in retrospect - you have have something defined to be aware of. Faced with new ideas, it's useless.
Healthy paranoia and skepticism is what stops what people aren't aware of.
I appreciate how Slashdot posters have largely stayed out of the shit fest that is this campaign. Thank you.
But recently, more and more assholes like the AC at the top are spamming Slashdot with political bullshit.
I think that the majority of the Slashdot community would appreciate it if you cock suckers stayed in the designated cesspools that support your candidate and stay the fuck away from Slashdot.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
No they didn't. The idea was to ensure that the interests of the Federal government lined up with those of the member states. The separation of powers and rule of law is what's supposed to prevent Trump from being a problem.
When Trump and Clinton were neck and neck two or three weeks ago (gosh, has it been that long? But Arancia Mussolini's definitely definitely going to lose, right?), 538 was showing that they were also neck and neck in the electoral college.
The constitution does nothing to punish populism as long as that populism is sufficiently broad based, attractive to all of the country, not just some regions.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I didn't say it was great. I'm just pointing out that it isn't an evil conspiracy hatched by George Soros and Saul Alinsky.
Right. It's an evil conspiracy hatched by the rich white male founding fathers, who wanted to retain control of the nation. What, you thought they were fucking angels?
I do not believe that the United States would even exist without the electoral college. Why would Rhode Island want to participate in a popular presidential election when they have basically no say over who is elected? At least they're guaranteed 2 electoral votes through their senate seats. All of the little states could band together and have their voice heard through the electoral college. The five most populous states contain almost half the US population and would therefore dominate elections. It would lead to neglect of the smaller states and their departure from the union. Were the founding fathers saints? No. Of course not, but it sounds like they understand people a hell of a lot better than you do.
Democrats fire-bombed a GOP office today.
Somebody firebombed a GOP office. Whether it was "Democrats" or not is as yet unknown. I would say it was almost certainly crazy people, which america (unfortunately) has plenty of, and who come (unfortunately) in all political persuasions.
At the moment, the Democrats are raising money to re-open the office. https://www.rawstory.com/2016/...
Seriously? You listed CNN, NY Times,GO, and CBS News as sources of evidence?
No. He listed CNN, NY Times,GO, and CBS News as "liberal media" that did cover the story, showing that the statement "the liberal media and Hillary are entirely ignoring the attack" is false.
They are proven to be owned and or controlled by rich and powerful friends of Clinton.
In which case, his post shows that the original post was completely and totally false, doesn't it?
The building was vandalized with the phrase "Nazi Republicans Leave Town or Else". Who else do you think would have done it?
The correct answer is: "I don't know, and you don't know either."
It's hard to believe it was the Democrats, since all the polls and all the indications show that they're winning. Why in the world would they want to change a winning game?
Throwing bombs isn't something you do if you're winning; it's what you do if you're losing.
But, with that said, I doubt it's the Trump campaign. I expect it was lunatic fanatic crazies.
Whether the lunatic fanatic crazies thought they were on Trump's side, or on Clinton's side, is yet to be seen.
Taking the side that the candidate up by six points should be losing.
The candidate winning by six points SHOULD be losing, if ethics mattered as much as her supporters claim they do.
The candidate losing by six points SHOULD be losing, if being hypocritical mattered, like they claim it should.
The real question is, why are EITHER of them winning when both shouldn't even be close to winning? If everyone who doesn't like either candidate, and is holding their noses why swallowing the poison of their vote actually voted their conscience, NEITHER Trump nor Clinton would win.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.