Slashdot Mirror
Russian Cyber Hacks On US Electoral System Far Wider Than Previously Known (bloomberg.com)
An anonymous reader shares a Bloomberg article: Russia's cyberattack on the U.S. electoral system before Donald Trump's election was far more widespread than has been publicly revealed, including incursions into voter databases and software systems in almost twice as many states as previously reported. In Illinois, investigators found evidence that cyber intruders tried to delete or alter voter data. The hackers accessed software designed to be used by poll workers on Election Day, and in at least one state accessed a campaign finance database. Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter. In all, the Russian hackers hit systems in a total of 39 states, one of them said. The scope and sophistication so concerned Obama administration officials that they took an unprecedented step -- complaining directly to Moscow over a modern-day "red phone." In October, two of the people said, the White House contacted the Kremlin on the back channel to offer detailed documents of what it said was Russia's role in election meddling and to warn that the attacks risked setting off a broader conflict.
You should read up on classical conditioning, specifically learned helplessness. There's already enough 'bad' when it comes to voting. Electronic voting doesn't work. Hand counting is inaccurate. There's a disillusion about whether or not a person's vote really matters since elections are based on this screwed up electoral college system - where a chosen few (compared to the general public) can decide who leads.
There have been activists and those speaking up, sure... but until our elected officials actually listen and do something about it, we're just going to keep going on this downward sloping status quo. The anarchist in me thinks "good, get rid of these career politicians that only want to pad their own wallets and retire into C-level golden parachute jobs". Then I see things like the uprising in Egypt and worry that the U.S. could go to that extreme.
It's worth remembering that the US has (or rather had) spies in the Russian FSB and wider Russia:
http://www.newsweek.com/has-putin-just-arrested-two-american-spies-548528
"News broke on January 24 that two Russians—Sergei Mikhailov, the second-highest-ranking officer in the cyber-intelligence unit of the Federal Security Service (FSB), and Ruslan Stoyanov, a private cybersecurity analyst specializing in antivirus programs [side note, he's EX FSB]—were arrested on charges of treason."
And that two of these were arrested a few days after Trump got into power and got hold of an unredacted piss memo naming a current and former FSB agent who had supplied intelligence on the Putin election interference plans.
The obvious implication is, that Trump got hold of the piss memos and passed the names of these spies to the Russians for revenge.
There was a misdirection, a claim that these two WERE BEHIND the US election hacking, but Putin has since suggested Russia might have been framed.... which indicates the bogus nature of that misdirection.
http://nypost.com/2017/02/01/russian-officials-charged-with-passing-secrets-to-us/
"Four Russian security officials were slapped Wednesday with formal charges of treason for passing secrets to the US government, according to published reports."
"Three of the defendants were identified as Federal Security Services (FSB) officials Sergei Mikhailov and Dmitry Dokuchayev, and Ruslan Stoyanov, a higher-up at the cybersecurity firm Kaspersky Labs, CBS News reported."
The Times article literally describes a real world hoax fabricated by Russia that you can look up and verify yourself on Wikipedia, in local news stories, wherever you'd like. It also has a sit down interview with a troll who worked in one of these buildings, outside of the building itself--followed by an interview with one of the 'editors' of the Kremlin's fake news outlets that employ these trolls. So let me say this, whether you're a troll yourself or a skeptic who's been duped, it doesn't matter--the truth is the truth.
If there's something we need to know, publish it and stand behind it (with your names and titles) already.
Former FBI Director James Comey came out and testified in public under oath.
The Russians interfered in our election during the 2016 cycle. They did with purpose. They did it with sophistication. They did it with overwhelming technical efforts. It was an active measures campaign driven from the top of that government. There is no fuzz on that. It is a high confidence judgment of the entire intelligence community and the members of this committee have seen the intelligence. It's not a close call. That happened. That's about as unfake as you can possibly get. It is very, very serious, which is why it's so refreshing to see a bipartisan focus on that.
Nobody will name the staffer or say what happened to him.
Nobody will name him? So the thousands of articles that have the name "Charles Delevan" don't exist? This interview with the guy doesn't exist? The front page article in the New York Times (complete with a screenshot of the actual email) doesn't exist? Don't confuse your own ignorance with a conspiracy to keep information from you.
Enigma
Two reasons. A) it would have created confusion and panic in our voting system as to whether votes were being correctly recorded (with electronic voting we don't know, but that's another issue) and B) it would have given another excuse for the con artist to claim the election was being rigged (though you'll note he never said which way it was being rigged).
First up, seriously, ditch the name-calling. I get that you hate the guy (thanks to that), but let's keep it objective.
Trump did say that the election may be rigged, yes... but Obama's response was to totally refute it. I understand the argument of not wanting to cause panic or uncertainty, but Obama's administration specifically said nothing to the state election commissions - that part is the most troubling. Did he think it would be rigged in Clinton's favor and so didn't bother, or (Occam's argument) did he fail to do so out of ...? It's not a case of avoiding panic if you have an underling send word to various elections commissioners - that is, assuming something actually happened (or happened successfully) to imperil said voting machine infrastructures.
No it's not. It was a concern since they called Moscow directly to let them know we knew what they were doing. Similar to above, had Obama said anything about Russia interfering with the election it would have been seen as an excuse and would have given more fire to the con artist's delusions about the election being rigged.
I'm pretty certain that a simple admonition wouldn't deter any spy agency, let alone as old, subtle or as skilled as the Russian ones. And Trump was the only one complaining publicly about it (Clinton joined Obama in telling everyone that he was simply complaining for no reason).
Perhaps they (Obama and Clinton) pooh-poohed the charge due to a misguided notion that the election, if rigged, would put Clinton in the White House (or worse, that perhaps they were assured that the real hacking attempts were occurring via some Russian VPN connection from DNC-paid operatives)? I don't hypothesize that last bit without basis, mind - after all, the Democrat National Committee literally (both publicly and privately) rigged the primaries to prevent Sanders from winning the nomination, so the possibility is certainly there.
I also have a very hard time believing that there was any success in the alleged effort (if it were via Russian attempts), else we would have heard about it loudly, publicly, and with mountains of concrete evidence made public - by every elected Democrat and media source to lay eyes on said evidence.
Yes, we would have, because since Hillary would have been president, the same Republican-led House and Senate which are running interference for the con artist over the current Russia investigations, would have spared no expense to get to the bottom of what happened. They would have used it to claim her presidency wasn't legitimate or it was tainted, neither of which they are doing now. They would be digging as deep as possible to find every scrap of information regarding Russia's interference, the exact opposite of what they are doing now where many members are saying it's no big deal and the investigations should be dropped.
I disagree with part of this, and here's why: Certainly, there would be shouting from certain quarters of the Republican Party, but it would be as effective as the whole 'birther' outcry... in that it would be just a few "nutjobs" speaking about it, and I daresay that the MSM (CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, et al) would have quickly relegated it to the realm of Alex Jones and Jesse Ventura.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
So you think we should just ignore all of the massive amount of evidence from a dizzying array of sources, many of them independent and professional with no stake in the political world, just because you think it's all a gigantic sour grapes excuse argument?
The person you responded to stated very clearly the same thing most of us who are not leftists/progressives have been saying. SHOW US SOME EVIDENCE! What we have is a report based on 3rd party paid for by the DNC claiming "Russia" hacked the DNC. The FBI requested access to the servers to run a Federal investigation and were REFUSED!
Anonymously source claims are not evidence! For all we know there could be one person responsible for every single anonymous source. Read the statements on the record by Comey, Clapper, Obama, etc.. etc.. who all stated that the Election was not tampered with. Not 1 vote was changed, and according to them not one vote was cast illegally. (and we just had 12 Democrats indited for voter fraud, link so we know that issues exist, but no evidence that a R or Trump did anything illegal). We were promised an investigation into fraud, and I'm hoping it's either underway or will still be completed.
The sources in TFA are all biased sources. I don't see anything new here, just the same old Stalinist tactics we have seen since last July from the Democratic party and MSM. If you want to sway my opinion, start producing facts.
Like many others, I don't fall for appeals to emotion, appeals to authority, or ad hominem. I study facts!
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.