Slashdot Mirror


State-sponsored Hackers Targeting Prominent Journalists, Google Warns (politico.com)

State-sponsored hackers are attempting to steal email passwords of a number of prominent journalists, Google has warned. The hackers are suspected to be Russians, reports POLITICO. Some of the journalists who have received such warnings from Google as recent as two-to-three weeks ago include Jonathan Chait of New York Magazine, Julia Ioffe, who recently started at The Atlantic, Ezra Klein of Vox, and CNN's Brian Stelter. From the report: "The fact that all this started right after the election suggests to me that journalists are the next wave to be targeted by state-sponsored hackers in the way that Democrats were during it," said one journalist who got the warning. "I worry that the outcome is going to be the same: Someone, somewhere, is going to get hacked, and then the contents of their Gmail will be weaponized against them -- and by extension all media."

102 comments

  1. Russian hackers = the best by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2, Informative

    Just amazing the reach of Russian hackers. First, they managed to get the DNC & Hillary Clinton to write thousands of self-incriminating (and on Hillary's side, remarkably foul-mouthed - or is it foul-keyboarded?) emails. Then they suborned the DNC to steal the nomination from Sanders and give it to Clinton, to give Trump an easier opponent. Next they induced a DNC staffer named Seth Rich to steal the compromising emails and give them to Wikileaks, which dutifully publishes them, showing the DNC to be corrupt and Hillary to be venal. Then they managed to get Rich to set himself up for a mugging in which he is shot twice in the head but nothing is stolen. Then they manipulated the Director of the FBI to announce just before the election that many, many thousands of emails potentially involving Hillary have been found and need to be examined. And finally, they finessed the US intelligence community into believing he hacked those DNC computers to influence the election, thereby concealing - and taking off the discussion table - any examination of the DNC's & Hillary's wrongdoing.

    I heard that they found the cell-phone-smashing sledge hammer in Putin's basement!

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:Russian hackers = the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You're apparently a moron or pretending to be one for the purpose of conflating news events... The fact is there are state sponsored crackers in Russia and their methods have been documented. They attack journalists in Russia and opposition figures, Ukraine military, and yes they attacked bot GOP and DNC campaigns. Being stupid is your right as an American I suppose, but no one here should bother entertaining your sarcastic and poorly conceived notions of how intelligence and propaganda campaigns are carried out in 2017.

    2. Re: Russian hackers = the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yes, yes, you deeply believe in corruption and evil on the Democratic side, but are utterly silent when it comes to hawking sweatshop made Trump branded products from the White House. Something that unlike your phantoms, actually happened.

      Seriously, I bet you can't even work up the nerve to admit that Putin is a grade-A despot, as inclined to deception, malice, and corruption as anybody you can name, and Trump is at best, his stooge, at worst, his patsy.

      But even if we ignore that, you're going to have to deal with the incompetence of Devos, the bigotry of Sessions, the corruption of Price, the cowardice of McConnell and the shallowness of Ryan.

    3. Re:Russian hackers = the best by notputin · · Score: 0

      Yes! I am glad you have deduced the same thing as many of the country has in undermining this misinformation and fake news. Great detective work!

    4. Re:Russian hackers = the best by Fragnet · · Score: 1, Redundant

      For godssake, what am I missing here? I grew up during the Cold War. Not only were journalists regularly bugged and burgled, they were often spies themselves.

      Please, everybody born after 1989 learn a little history in college. Drop your feminist dance therapy major.

    5. Re:Russian hackers = the best by admin7087 · · Score: 0, Troll

      You're really just a tool.

    6. Re:Russian hackers = the best by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Allow me to summarize your post for the benefit of everyone:

      This news story doesn't fit my worldview and/or my personal agenda, so I'll just mock and ridicule it, LOL

    7. Re:Russian hackers = the best by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      I agree with you, the OP is clearly too young to know about such things, probably believes all that is just stuff from movies and isn't real -- or the OP voted for Trump and/or needs to have his bloodwork checked for excessive lead contamination.

    8. Re:Russian hackers = the best by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      I think it's likely the latter. At this point there's still way too much emotional investment in some quarters to Trump to admit that the Russians are quite willing and capable of all manner of mischief. Which seems odd, considering the US isn't the only place Russia is mucking around, and concerns over electoral and political integrity is a growing issue in Europe right now.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    9. Re:Russian hackers = the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So based on your "I grew up in the cold war" anecdotes about SO MANY -(Citation needed) journalists being spies... nobody should believe anything reported about state sponsored hacks, because the reporters themselves might be "in" on it?

      Please continue dancing around while you mention feminism for no reason. If you did in fact learn anything in college can you demonstrate a little of it next time instead?

    10. Re:Russian hackers = the best by negRo_slim · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're apparently a moron or pretending to be one for the purpose of conflating news events... The fact is there are state sponsored crackers in Russia and their methods have been documented. They attack journalists in Russia and opposition figures, Ukraine military, and yes they attacked bot GOP and DNC campaigns. Being stupid is your right as an American I suppose, but no one here should bother entertaining your sarcastic and poorly conceived notions of how intelligence and propaganda campaigns are carried out in 2017.

      No proof, no belief.

      And I don't even doubt much that it could be Russians but show us the fucking proof for Christ's sake!

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    11. Re:Russian hackers = the best by mmell · · Score: 0

      I don't suppose you have any (non-alternative) facts to back up your allegation, do you? Absent such evidence, I can only conclude you're little better than a parrot, faithfully repeating what you've been taught to say. I don't suppose you have even once stopped to consider how much we have to lose to forces which have been unremittingly hostile to the freedoms we here in the United States have quite famously treasured for over two centuries. What did they promise you, command of the Western District? Your choice of concubines when the shooting was over? A lead role in a cage?

    12. Re:Russian hackers = the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I too am American, baseball and rock and roll! And I too laugh at how ridonkulous that hackers are blamed what American incompetence and corruption. Now that we have super strong President Trump he will crack down on corruption and drain the swamp! baseball and rock and roll!

    13. Re:Russian hackers = the best by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      So, basically, 'Never underestimate the awesome power of denial'? :-)

      My personal opinion is that Putin would like to resurrect the Soviet Union, or at least a version of it; he's got his eye on empire-building, and the U.S. and it's allies would definitely stand in his way. Stands to reason that being supportive (both overtly and clandestinely) of a totally inexperienced, arrogant fool like Trump would further that agenda. Get the U.S. and it's allies in disarray because we have a totally inappropriate and disruptive President, and it makes it that much easier to acquire territory in Europe.

    14. Re:Russian hackers = the best by grcumb · · Score: 2

      So based on your "I grew up in the cold war" anecdotes about SO MANY -(Citation needed) journalists being spies...

      Spies is a strong word to use, but yes, it was more or less assumed that journalists from behind the Iron Curtain were intelligence operatives and were expected to gather information and data about much more than they wrote about. Likewise, there were more than a few writers and reporters who knowingly (and sometimes unknowingly) provided the CIA with intelligence from their areas of expertise.

      This doesn't imply cloak-and-dagger stuff, or breaking into offices late at night (let's leave the Nixon White House out of this, shall we?). For the most part, it would take the form of one or more journalists hanging out after work and trading scuttlebutt—interesting and useful information that was either not newsworthy or not well-enough sourced to report on. There would frequently be a CIA intelligence operative present during the conversation, and they didn't always try very hard to hide it.

      Let it be known that this channel never entirely dried up. I've had several conversations with 'embassy staff' who were clearly trying to pump me for information. And I'm happy to share with them what I'd share with anyone else. If that helps them get a better understanding of a sensitive situation, then I've done my job as a journalist and a responsible citizen.

      To take a slightly more controversial example, consider Gloria Steinem's famous escapades as a 'recruiter' for CIA propaganda operations. She willingly accepted payment for identifying people to speak at international conferences who would tout the government line about freedom and democracy. The CIA considered this a necessary tactic to thwart the flood of communist and socialist messaging that was flowing in from Soviet-funded sources. Ms Steinem had no qualms about taking cash for it, and although I would baulk at accepting payment for something done out of principle, I can't say for certain I wouldn't have done the same thing as she did.

      nobody should believe anything reported about state sponsored hacks, because the reporters themselves might be "in" on it?

      No, all he's saying is that context matters. Attempts to spy on reporters, overtly and covertly, have been ongoing since reporters first existed. And reporters are—or should be—aware of it, too. It really does come with the territory.

      Please continue dancing around while you mention feminism for no reason.

      Yeah, the anti-feminism jab was gratuitous and out of line. You've got a solid point there. But just because he can act like a dick doesn't mean he's entirely wrong.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    15. Re: Russian hackers = the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have them here as well.

    16. Re: Russian hackers = the best by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute, I thought Trump is Bannon's puppet? So which is it, Putin or Bannon?

      Sessions? The same Sessions who got an award from the NAACP for breaking up the KKK? Racist? I'm getting cognitive dissonance here.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    17. Re: Russian hackers = the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sessions? The same Sessions who got an award from the NAACP for breaking up the KKK? Racist? I'm getting cognitive dissonance here.

      No, I'm sensing some fantasy delusions here, Sessions never got an award from the NAACP for breaking up the KKK, which would be pretty hard, since it never had any singular organization while he was alive anyway, and the organization remains much as it has been for the past few decades, but the only claim of Sessions getting an award from the NAACP in 2009 is so recent, and is specious, with no particular association or claim to it.

      Maybe Sessions didn't go down to the plaque shop himself, but there's no evidence to show who did, the NAACP isn't supporting it or him.

      Isn't it suspicious that there's been no press release or media brief from when he got it?

      Huh. The only question is...why?

      What does Sessions have to hide, that he needed a fake award to give him credibility?

  2. Bull Pucky by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Funny

    Nonsense. This is just more fake news from a bunch of snowflake libertards seeking to illegitimize our great president, The Honorable William J. Le Petomane.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Bull Pucky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, he definitely didn't get a harrumph from those guys, so...

    2. Re:Bull Pucky by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. This is just more fake news from a bunch of snowflake libertards seeking to illegitimize our great president, The Honorable William J. Le Petomane.

      On the bright side, given his track record in Atlantic City, the Trump Memorial Gambling Casino for the Insane would probably go bankrupt pretty quickly.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    3. Re: Bull Pucky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree.
      The daily mail is not a reputable new source but the POLITICO is?
      POLITICO is the poster child for partisan "news".

    4. Re:Bull Pucky by notputin · · Score: 1

      We simply cannot underestimate his greatness in this matter. These fake news stories do nothing but harm our great relationship with such powerful countries!

    5. Re:Bull Pucky by uniquegeek · · Score: 1

      The EFF disagrees with you. Journalists, both high-profile and not, have been specifically targeted with exploit kits for some time.

      The usual reason is goverments want to uncover who protected sources are.

    6. Re:Bull Pucky by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Whooooooooosh!

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    7. Re:Bull Pucky by hey! · · Score: 1

      You are making a Blazing Saddles reference, I know, but the actual Le Pétomane was an interesting character. He was a French professional flatulist. He was the toast of Paris until, disgusted by WW1, decided humanity did not deserve his art and retired to run a bakery in Marseilles.

      It's enough to make you believe in a God -- albeit of the kind who would mock a noble soul with a ridiculous talent.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    8. Re:Bull Pucky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really?

      Putin's thugs are looking for sources when they shoot, stab, suffocate and defenestrate journalists?

      I just thought they were looking to impress chicks.

  3. Hard Time Believing by bheilig · · Score: 1

    I just have a really hard time believing the Russian hacker narrative. Can't explain why. Maybe it seems too convenient for the DNC.

    1. Re:Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably because you're on Slashdot.

      Chances are good you've run a server at some point, and realize a cursory glance at your logs means Pyotr h4xx1ng your shit is a far cry from "ABLOOBLOO STAET ACTORZ!"

    2. Re:Hard Time Believing by CaptainDork · · Score: 0

      Have any other hacking incidents been associated with Russians?

      Any at all?

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    3. Re:Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      It's pretty obvious you don't read much about it so perhaps doubting it "generally" is just a natural extension of you having no clue?

      The people who classify and categorize and analyze attacks don't tend to make unfounded conclusions based on their 'gut' as you do. They know what they're talking about, it's not political for them. They look at everything, every detail available, and they came to a conclusion based on it.

      Maybe read more and see how that goes for you instead of just being full of gut-thoughts? Or do you require political conclusions first, and the connective tissue is irrelevant?

    4. Re:Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but they can't provide any proof of any of them. State secrets... hahah

    5. Re:Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty obvious you don't read much about it so perhaps doubting it "generally" is just a natural extension of you having no clue?

      The people who classify and categorize and analyze attacks don't tend to make unfounded conclusions based on their 'gut' as you do. They know what they're talking about, it's not political for them. They look at everything, every detail available, and they came to a conclusion based on it.

      Maybe read more and see how that goes for you instead of just being full of gut-thoughts? Or do you require political conclusions first, and the connective tissue is irrelevant?

      Google as a company has already come out as partisan and willing to lie on behalf of the democratic party. Why should they be trusted without proof?

    6. Re:Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Google as a company has already come out as partisan and willing to lie on behalf of the democratic party" Do you even READ the NEWS?

      ARE YOU HIGH, BREITBOT?

      TODAY we find out that Trump's SENIOR MILITARY ADVISORS HAD ILLEGAL CALLS WITH RUSSIAN CONTACTS AND LIED ABOUT IT DIRECTLY, MULTIPLE TIMES.

      KellyAnne Conway cannot tell a TRUTH. Drain the fucking swamp indeed, "yet her emails persisted" - REALLY?

      You think Sergei Brin is the REAL MASTERMIND OF DECEPTION in the USA's POLITICAL SPHERE?

      Google obviously made the whole thing up, Iran-Contra was invented by Wikipedia's leftist contributors, etc.

      You breit-holes really get plugged up with shit doncha?

    7. Re: Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Without going into details, I work for a hosting provider and we see ongoing access attempts that can only have originated from state actors. There is quite a large divide in experience between Google and someone who managed to get one whole server on the interwebs.

    8. Re:Hard Time Believing by mmell · · Score: 1
      Why, you're brilliant! You need to notify the NSA and the CIA immediately, so they'll stop wasting money, resources and effort on Russia and concentrate on more dangerous and subversive players. Sanctuary cities, for example.

      Then again, maybe the cabal wasn't clearly described for you. I'll be happy to help you with the big words, if that'll help.

    9. Re:Hard Time Believing by mmell · · Score: 1

      Hey, MM - lay off the ad hominem jazz. Won't accomplish anything, it just plays into the hands of the current White House and their Russian allies.

    10. Re:Hard Time Believing by MightyMartian · · Score: 0

      I think you're mistaken. I am in deadly earnest. I think the parent is an idiot. It's okay, there are lots of idiots out there, and by all accounts Baby Jesus loves them, a lot more than Baby Jesus loves Mexican and brown-skinned people.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    11. Re:Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reality has already come out and proven itself to be in stark contrast to most things that the republican party and the Trump administration state

      damned partisan reality

    12. Re: Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "ongoing access attempts that can only have originated from state actors"
      this sounds like the kinda bs a state actor would say

    13. Re: Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, all the trolls shrilly denying Russian state involvement sound more like state actors to me. I mean, why would anyone without a dog in the fight go out of their way to deny something they don't know about?

    14. Re: Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dozens.

      They just arrested one on LA.

    15. Re:Hard Time Believing by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The only countries not hacking are the ones incapable of doing so. Russia has, well, leaky digital infrastructure and as such it is the number one point for digital hack routing. In fact if you do not hack via a Russian IP, you are pretty much an amateur. There are quite a few countries that are the sources of attacks but not the originators, in fact the only country not likely to be hacking from a Russia IP would be Russia, think of how stupid that would be (well that was a super easy hack to block it had a Russia IP). Not that it would not happen but it is far more logical to route the attack through another country and they would all be doing, well, at least they should be ;).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    16. Re:Hard Time Believing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah, the known trollface MightyMartian has spoken ...
      After years of reading your bullshit, it is hard to believe anything you say.

  4. If your personal emails are released... by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... and there's nothing unprofessional in them, the more embarrassing some personal stuff may be the more sympathy you'll get from the public and against the hackers.

    On the other hand if the emails reveal unethical behavior, collusion with one party or one particular candidate of the party that goes against the journalistic integrity, then what I can tell you. Be a better professional.

    1. Re:If your personal emails are released... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      In order to stay more focused on the real concern, let's keep our eye on the ball, OK?

      It's the little round thing.

      The takeaway here is that Gmail is crappy.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    2. Re:If your personal emails are released... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The takeaway here is that Gmail is crappy.

      Nope, the takeaway is that the MSM is acting in a manipulative manner they don't want revealed to the public.

    3. Re:If your personal emails are released... by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2

      On the other hand if the emails reveal unethical behavior, collusion with one party or one particular candidate

      The same could be said for Republicans who are trying to hide their tracks.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    4. Re:If your personal emails are released... by uniquegeek · · Score: 1

      It's not just "someone read the emails". It also gives them an easy & trusted avenue to deploy malware and trojans to the target and all their contacts.

    5. Re:If your personal emails are released... by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

      But what if hackers selectively release work emails which individually make the reporter appear unethical but which are not when taken in the context of other emails the reporter sent on the same subject?

    6. Re:If your personal emails are released... by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 1

      It's hard to imagine that case but if they do I'm assuming 1) the public will notice emails are missing which undermines the credibility of the release, and 2) the hackee can release those emails themselves to prove their innocence, which would make hackers look like clowns.

    7. Re:If your personal emails are released... by PMuse · · Score: 1

      Again with the, "Why would you want privacy unless you had something to hide?" argument.

      The answer is that even legal, ethical facts can be deeply embarrassing. If you enemy learns such a secret, he can use it to wound you or to turn your neighbors against you. Imagine that you had:
      1. divorced a spouse because of their drinking problem or abusiveness
      2. had a child who became a felon
      3. been bankrupted by medical expenses / job loss

      Don't talk to me about illogical. Don't pretend that my new community will treat me with fairness or compassion, or that I can magically find people who will. In real life, people keep secrets for good reasons. Because sometimes you just need a chance to start over and be known for what I am now.

      And, don't tell me that I should submit myself to the judgment and compassion of the doxxers. It only takes one doxxer who values his cause more than justice and then the damage will be done.

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
    8. Re:If your personal emails are released... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's plenty of evidence to suggest that Trump's advisers are being aided by Russian Intelligence services. Russia helps them because they're a bunch of shit disturbers wrecking the international credibility of the US and the efficacy of the US state. Russia sees gain by weakening western powers.

      Many media sources are rightly critical of the Trump administration for the three week long catastrophic blunder that has been the start of this presidency. No doubt they're seeking to discredit western media to blunt dissent.

      Yeah, this is how free nations fall. Get ready for shit storm.

    9. Re:If your personal emails are released... by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.

      -Cardinal Richelieu

    10. Re:If your personal emails are released... by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I never made that argument. Privacy should be protected. What I'm saying is *if* you are a journalist, and *if* you get hacked, and *if* those emails reveal unethical journalistic behavior, don't expect any sympathy from the public. And on the contrary, if anything like you listed is revealed, we will be on your side, because we hate the weak being hit, even if you were a little bit unprofessional.

      I'm saying that because this warning appears to preemptively control damage to the reputations of journos who probably know their emails would reveal they have been unethical but they thought it was OK because they were fighting for the "just cause".

    11. Re:If your personal emails are released... by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and there's nothing unprofessional in them, the more embarrassing some personal stuff may be the more sympathy you'll get from the public and against the hackers.

      Hardly. The embarrassing personal stuff will be turned into evidence that the journalist is unprofessional - or at least undesirable. ("Scott Mediapersonality is into $kink, how can we trust him!".) The goal here, on the part of the hacker's Masters is weaponize the email - and that's terrifyingly easy.

      "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."

      Dig into my email, and you'll find nothing unethical... But you will find a lot of otaku/anime material. A couple of quotes from those emails, put into an article with plenty of fanservice and hentai screenshots... and there's a lot of people who don't know who'll willingly believe I'm a rapist, a pervert, a pedophile. Hell, if they really wanted to, my SCA emails could be similiary spun - "here's a guy who gives fealty to a King! How can he believe in democracy!".

      Etc... etc...

      People in general won't believe the facts. They aren't even interested in the facts. All they know and think is what their Masters tell them to know and think.

    12. Re:If your personal emails are released... by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So, this is what I don't get. Why aren't ALL OF US mad at BOTH PARTIES? Instead of always pointing the finger with "see, you guys do it too and or did it first!" I'll never understand why the latter is always the case. We all get fucked in the end, do we not?

    13. Re:If your personal emails are released... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the GP is describing exactly what happened with the DNC e-mail leak. Releasing more e-mails is just leaking more information and admitting the leak is accurate.

    14. Re:If your personal emails are released... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't insightful. It's nazi apologetics.

    15. Re:If your personal emails are released... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Because our Masters have been exceedingly successful in divide-and-conquer. They convinced enough people (sheep) that electing their Angel Babies and keeping the Other Sides Hell Spawned Demons out of office is more important than anything else.

    16. Re:If your personal emails are released... by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

      "The public?" The public is only going to notice emails which support their preconceived notions and political affiliation and ignore the rest.

    17. Re:If your personal emails are released... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    18. Re:If your personal emails are released... by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 1

      That is actually very different. The quote means when you have only six lines (written by the hand of a man so to prove its authenticity) a skilled manipulator can interpret them in so many ways as to find a way in which to hang him. The key is six lines -- less than that would be too little to work with, and *more than that would destroy the ambiguity*. With 1000s and 1000s of lines by Podesta and others there was very little doubt what they meant and did. (None of which was terribly spectacular or unexpected though, just a confirmation what everyone thought anyway.)

      That said maybe Cardinal Richelieu can be called as the character witness for these journalists...

    19. Re:If your personal emails are released... by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

      It's so frustratingly infuriating to be wide tf awake in a world where people would rather stick their heads in the ground and be ruled-over. People, WAKE. THE FUCK. UP.

  5. An obvious problem ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... Gmail.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:An obvious problem ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... electronic methods of communication

      as convenient as they are they are vulnerable to both digital hacks and social engineering campaigns...

  6. Russian boogie man hackers by NotARealUser · · Score: 1, Troll

    Wow, I wish I had Russian genetics. They seem to be able to do all the really big scary computer stuff that us non-russians are not capable of doing. I am not trying to denegrate Russians here, but the media is so incredibly naive. It is as if putting "Russian" in front of it, no matter the evidence, turns the so called hack into something mysterious, huge, and scary.

    Most of the so called hacks, are simply social engineering and phishing scams. The Podesta thing could have been done by any old graphic designer that just made a nice looking "official" password reset email. I am really quite disappointed at what passes for a hack these days. In fact, if a Russian spat on someones shoe, the headline would probably be "Russians hack shoes".

    Yes, Russia does have many brilliant developers. But they also are a historic safe haven for VPN services. Of course most attacks "originate" from such areas. Anybody with half a brain knows you don't do something nefarious online without redirecting your trail through territories that are not friendly to your home's prosecutors.

    I think the media owes it to every self respecting programmer to start narrowing the definition of "hack". Did they use a man in the middle to fraudulently update a software package? That might be a hack... Did they cause the buffer to overflow in some C program, exposing information contained in parts of the memory? Ok, that is a hack too. I can think of lots of scenarios where hacks could take place.

    But... if they simply sent an email asking someone to put in their existing password and tricked some tech-illiterate into doing something stupid, that is not a hack.

    1. Re:Russian boogie man hackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Most of the so called hacks, are simply social engineering and phishing scams." - Because that's effective, and when targeted they call it spearphishing... And they use variants of known-state-sponsored malware and methods from APT groups categorized by previous attack forensics, like ones that tracked Ukrainian artillery brigades in Luhansk.

      But because YOU DO NOT APPARENTLY CARE TO READ ABOUT THIS STUFF IN DEPTH, you can sit on your bean bag chair laurels and doubt the sophistication of the attacks or the competency of the forensic investigators, sure. Comfy? Let me get you a pillow for your lazy head to rest.

      There are no "VPN services" that also offer state sponsored malware variants for use targeting people watched by the Kremlin, you fucking idiot.

      If you're literally too Left/Right politically-minded to understand there could be people around the world who want to fuck with US sovereignty, I right here and now question your Americanism and intelligence generally.

    2. Re:Russian boogie man hackers by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Wow, I wish I had Russian genetics. They seem to be able to do all the really big scary computer stuff that us non-russians are not capable of doing. I am not trying to denegrate Russians here, but the media is so incredibly naive. It is as if putting "Russian" in front of it, no matter the evidence, turns the so called hack into something mysterious, huge, and scary.

      Those wascawy Wussians, hacking Amewican ewections & weportews emaiws!

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    3. Re:Russian boogie man hackers by NotARealUser · · Score: 1

      Wow, that escalated quickly!

    4. Re:Russian boogie man hackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What depth? We've done this many, many times before; people ask for evidence, and are only given appeals to authority and are mocked for not trusting the US government to be honest. What could be more lazy and intellectually bankrupt than that?

    5. Re:Russian boogie man hackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just the latest in a long line of scare tactics...painfully obvious to those without their heads up their asses.

    6. Re: Russian boogie man hackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, in this case the US government is Trump and he swore blind the Russians weren't involved in hacking until, having apparently seen the evidence, he's changed his mind. I guess he's now lying and in on the big lie too?

    7. Re:Russian boogie man hackers by mmell · · Score: 1
      As it should.

      Incidentally, I trust the NSA and the CIA when they assert that such things are in fact happening. I don't trust you, tvarish.

    8. Re:Russian boogie man hackers by mmell · · Score: 1

      So who is behind it, then. POTUS? We already know he actively hates the news media and would gladly repeal the second amendment if he thought he could pull it off. Make that, will repeal the second amendment as soon as he thinks he can pull it off.

    9. Re: Russian boogie man hackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no doubt that "Russians" are involved in hacking, but, based on what's been made public, the connection between "Russians" and "Russian Government" is tenuous and circumstantial.

  7. There is no such thing as journalistic integrity.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Journalistic integrity died out in the early 2000s. What we have now are journalists who misrepresent stories, such as the fake "OMG, Fukushima radiation levels are the highest ever measured" coupled with the maps of tidal waves (pitched as radiation spreading.) The journalists no nothing about anything nuclear related, and will make stuff up on the spot. Seen this with other journalists who cite "anonymous sources" for their tales. Then, look at journalists and guns. They can't even get the name of what the rounds go into correct, much less specify actual specifics. Instead it is about emotion and fear.

    Every journalist wants to get hacked. That means they can wring their hands and say they were important enough that someone actually bothered to go after them, which gets them notoriety.

    Days past, if a big news supplier was found to be lying past the usual yellow stuff, they would be shuttered. Now, on either side, someone can allege a conspiracy against them and keep going.

    tl;dr. There is another name for US journalists in every other country. That term is "liar."

  8. my advice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never say anything on the internet that you would not say to your mother on a postcard.

  9. they can even warn about drug test for politicians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This has been happening in Gravataí, in Brazil for a long time. There's cyber criminal with dangerous knowledgement about HP networking named Vinucius Link, who is Sponsored by a crooked banker too keep the wheel rolling for local politicians. But don't worry, the guy is from the sissy mafia, not a pscyho mafia.

  10. Hacker, Cracker, Jacker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As an old dinosaur, I applaud your use of "cracker" rather than "hacker", but it probably means you aren't black. I personally prefer "jacker", but I'm afraid it's too late for that terminology to catch on...

    1. Re:Hacker, Cracker, Jacker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an old dinosaur, I applaud your use of "cracker" rather than "hacker", but it probably means you aren't black. I personally prefer "jacker", but I'm afraid it's too late for that terminology to catch on...

      If you took a poll of Slashdot users, I'm sure you'd find that most of them are "jackers"... in their beds!

  11. if russian hackers are after the press by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does it mean i will be able to play battlefield in peace?

    turns out no, it doesnt, they can multitask!!! cyka blyat!

  12. Considering the relationship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    between Trump and the press I would also worry about our intelligence operators also. Any one who deals with sensitive information should change email passwords often and they shouldn't store old emails on any online sites or sites on a network. But some USB drives. They should archive old emails. Everyone needs to get paranoid.

  13. Re:There is no such thing as journalistic integrit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "OMG, Fukushima radiation levels are the highest ever measured"

    AC 'cuz I'm admittedly off-topic. I read a story on the Fukushima radiation levels yesterday - Specifically regarding a robot they sent in to assess the state of things inside and do some work. The part I found really interesting was that their method of estimating radiation levels was based on noise present in the camera images.

  14. That's not a real president... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who's that? Nanci Pelosi told me that Bush was still president?

    1. Re:That's not a real president... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that "lovely" negro lady, representative Maxine Waters (a 13-term Democrat from Los Angeles) told us that Putin was invading Korea ...

  15. Nothing to hide right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you've got nothing to hide, what are you worried about? Isn't that the common logic these days? Or wait, does that only apply if an arbitrarily determined moral police says who gets to do the hacking?

  16. Since when by ruir · · Score: 1

    Gossip is news???? Shit article.

  17. Suspect the hackers could be Russians? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Some consumer brand of email gives users a colourful message and its a Russian warning?
    Words like "suspect"? then "have to guess that it’s the Russians"?
    If the company changes the "big bright red bar" to any another color would that feeling be altered?

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  18. a proper place to live is Uganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uganda!!!

  19. Awww - did 'ums get 'ums feewings huwt? by mmell · · Score: 1
    What's wrong - afraid the Drumpf . . . er, Trump brand will be tarnished by this?

    I know - you figure Russia is too technically backwards to mount such an attack (despite being the first nation to put a satellite or a human in orbit). Or a nation steeped in the tradition of Lenin, Stalin and Trotsky could never do such things (despite their attempt to put nuclear-tipped missiles in Cuba). Or is it that our Glorious Leader has decreed that Russia's okay, so this couldn't possibly be true? Oh, wait - that's Divine leader, isn't it?

  20. China has been doing this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Journalists has been warned years ago to setup a separate email account for investigating and reporting on Tibet, Uighur or any problem that Chinese government doesn't want to be reported. If your main email account is contacted with information on them, you were supposed to pretend that you are too busy and cannot follow it up instead of returning email with your alternate address as this may be from a Chinese "counter-spying" organization.

    Why did this news source decide to make a big deal about it "BECAUSE OF RUSSIANS!" instead of little Chinese?

  21. Those pesky ruskies again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So are we gonna pretend that this isn't just pushing the agenda of the left to continue to vilify the Russians for the purposes of delegitimizing Trump and the right? Russia's been doing this for years, what's with all this urgency now?

    Maybe the reason why only hear about Russian hacking is because the US and its allies don't have to hack these journalists as they all resided within their borders and thanks to mass surveillance of the citizenry they have all the data they need on these prominent journalists and thanks to backroom dealings all this surveillance is shared. Since Russia isn't on the NATO team they have to do it the old fashioned techno-elbow grease.

    And I'm guessing no one talks about China doing it because it's an open secret and China has its hands in the ownership of a lot information outlets that these reporters work for?

  22. who cares? by ooloorie · · Score: 1

    Some of the journalists who have received such warnings from Google as recent as two-to-three weeks ago include Jonathan Chait of New York Magazine, Julia Ioffe, who recently started at The Atlantic, Ezra Klein of Vox, and CNN's Brian Stelter.

    These people haven't had anything of substance to say for years.

  23. Not a whole lot of sympathy here. by sethstorm · · Score: 0

    These aren't journalists, they're hardcore leftists faking yet another incident. The alleged "targets" are just too in line with their narrative.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Not a whole lot of sympathy here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for your opinion Ivan (or should I say Vlad?). Real journalism is a weapon against tyranny. Fake journalism is how they troll reality.

  24. No sympathy here, leftists & modbombers. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    These aren't journalists, they're hardcore leftists faking yet another incident. The alleged "targets" are just too in line with their narrative.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:No sympathy here, leftists & modbombers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my yes, well your opinion settles it then, doesn't it?

      You know that opinions are like assholes, because everyone has one?

      In refutation of established facts, you offer your opinion. Slow. Clap. That really is the last word, you've destroyed all opposition with your incisive commentary, witty repartee, a masterful use of alternative facts.

  25. Told. You. So. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what happens when hackers get a free pass for political interference. Now they are emboldened to go after journalists. Next up, who knows? Could be you!

    The political right have done a deal with the Devil and have lost their moral compass. The Right used to be the party of justice, accountability and consequences. Now anything goes as long as it benefits Our Side, right?