Slashdot Mirror
Days Before Election: Macron Campaign Says It Is the Victim of Massive, Coordinated Hacking Campaign (cnbc.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNBC: A large trove of emails from the campaign of French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron was posted online late on Friday, a little more than a day before voters go to the polls to choose the country's next president in a run-off against far-right rival Marine Le Pen. Some nine gigabytes of data were posted by a user called EMLEAKS to Pastebin, a document-sharing site that allows anonymous posting. It was not immediately clear who was responsible for posting the data or whether the emails were genuine. In a statement, Macron's political movement En Marche! (Onwards!) confirmed that it had been hacked. "The En Marche! Movement has been the victim of a massive and co-ordinated hack this evening which has given rise to the diffusion on social media of various internal information," the statement said. In its statement on Friday, En Marche! said that the documents released online only showed the normal functioning of a presidential campaign, but that authentic documents had been mixed on social media with fake ones to sow "doubt and misinformation." "The seriousness of this event is certain and we shall not tolerate that the vital interests of democracy be put at risk," it added.
So far as I can see, it's no big secret that Putin would like to destabilize the EU, especially NATO countries, because a weak EU/NATO means it's easier for him to implement his long-term agenda.
How is Democracy at risk over this? Does not "information want to be free"? Is not it good that voters know more about the candidate, than less?
Suppose, somebody hacked Trump's tax-returns — would that also be denounced as a threat to Democracy, or cheered?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Of course, they do — financed by Russia Le Pen wants to lift sanctions against Kremlin and endorsed Crimea "occupendum" as a legitimate transfer of Ukraine's land to Russia.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Julian, if you're listening, the check is in the mail. It's a bigly check, believe me. You're a great guy, many people are saying you're the greatest person to witness the Civil War. We're going to make the best prison pen pals, believe me.
I was about to make a joke about your mixed metaphor "horse in this fight", only to discover that horse fighting is apparently a real thing.
"He's a liar whose lawyer is lying about his lying lawyer's lies."
Macron is still the favorite, so yes, this may come too late to influence the election, but in the longer term I think Western nations are going to have get used to, and find ways to deal with this tactic. This new form of propaganda cyberwarfare has allowed Russia to punch considerably above its weight, and time and time again we're seeing the goal here is to disrupt the Western alliance. It's certainly not a guaranteed win, as it now seems that Russia's alleged interference in the US election is likely backfiring, and forcing Trump to take a harder line, not to mention that despite Fox News and the Republicans best attempts to bury the news, the investigation into Russian ties to Trump's campaign are ongoing.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
They don't have a horse i this fight.
Le Pen wins, the entire EU will likely collapse. The Russians don't have a horse in this fight. They have the whole barn and every living create in it in this fight.
> Has it been? Citations?
This is one of those non-denial denials. They use the statement to sow doubt about all of the documents, while leaving themselves an out when any docs are later verified. The last time someone claimed that, it was Donna Brazille. My past comments go into great detail, down to posting the DKIM keys and how to obtain them, as to why her statement could be proven mathematically false with a key from Hillary's own DNS server. Given that this confirms there are real documents out there, the onus should be put on the deniers to identify which items are fake.
It's fascinating how the media is only now catching up to this. It's also fascinating that nobody has bothered to show people where they might be obtained: http://archive.is/eQtrm
It's not bad enough yet. The French indulge their delusions more thoroughly than you may appreciate. They're not going to shift gears until some mufti is mounting the heads of infidels on the Arc De Triomphe.
Le Pen had the best line of the campaign so far; France will be led by a woman — either me or Merkel.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Accuracy is always good, but a lot of it is subjective. And, besides, when Hillary's e-mails were posted, no one protested the content. People were outraged over "Putin" meddling in the US elections, but I don't recall anyone calling any particular e-mail a fake...
Hillary's E-mails were verified by their DKIM headers. As far as I'm aware, none of those E-mails have been shown as fake, and it would be pretty hard to fake the DKIM signature or claim that an E-mail was fake if it had a correct DKIM signature.
I don't know if a similar mechanism is available here, we'll probably find out in the next day or so.
Overall, I'm completely in favor of any correct (verified, impossible to fake) data dump on political candidates, including Trump and other GOP leaders if there were any.
We've always said "if you don't want people to know what you're doing, don't put it on the internet". What's good for the people is good for the leaders. We need to show them what it's like to have shit for privacy, like us.
This sort of thing will only make cheating and corruption harder for future candidates. Knowing that any aide or sysadmin could make their innermost decisions public lowers the "iiquidity" of such actions quite a bit. Even cell phone conversations cannot be considered private any more.
Data dumps are currently spotty and one-sided, but I expect future big elections will show both sides in stark.
And that's a good thing.
Hillary didnt need to worry about losing either.. and she was far ahead in the "polls" heh.