Bipartisan US Election Group Issues Security Tips (reuters.com)

An anonymous reader quotes Reuters: A bipartisan Harvard University project aimed at protecting elections from hacking and propaganda will release its first set of recommendations today on how U.S. elections can be defended from hacking attacks. The 27-page guidebook calls for campaign leaders to emphasize security from the start and insist on practices such as two-factor authentication for access to email and documents and fully encrypted messaging via services including Signal and Wickr. The guidelines are intended to reduce risks in low-budget local races as well as the high-stakes Congressional midterm contests next year.

Though most of the suggestions cost little or nothing to implement and will strike security professionals as common sense, notorious attacks including the leak of the emails of Hillary Clinton's campaign chair, John Podesta, have succeeded because basic security practices were not followed... "We heard from campaigns that there is nothing like this that exists," said Debora Plunkett, a 31-year veteran of the National Security Agency who joined the Belfer Center this year. "We had security experts who understood security and election experts who understood campaigns, and both sides were eager to learn how the other part worked."
The group includes "top security experts" from both Google and Facebook.

Comments

Who needs hacking and propganda?

[Anonymous Coward]

Between the meandering redistricting and Fox News - that goes out of its way to misinform their viewers - who needs foreign hacking?

And an electorate that refuses to actually learn the issues but instead listens to only what it wants to hear, we are just headed towards an "Idiocracy".

The election of a reality TV show host is the start. Trump just shows how stupid we've become as a society.

Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho is coming.

Re:Who needs hacking and propganda?

[DNS-and-BIND]

Media shows why it's so mistrusted after falsified Trump fish-feeding 'story'. Here are several credible mainstream media outlets and Jezebel reporting the story.

Bloomberg's White House reporter: Trump and Abe spooning fish food into a pond. (Toward the end, @potus decided to just dump the whole box in for the fish)

New York Magazine: Trump Under Fire for Improper Fish-Feeding Technique

Jezebel: Big stupid baby dumps a load of fish food on Japanese koi pond http://bit.ly/2zAyCD6

CNBC's Christina Wilkie (in a now-deleted tweet): "Trump and Japanese PM Shinzo Abe were scheduled to feed koi spoonfuls of food. Until Trump poured his entire box of fish food into the pond."

New York Daily News: Photo of Donald Trump dumping fish food into koi pond during Japan visit draws Obama comparisons

The Guardian: "White House reporters, keen perhaps to pick up on a Trump gaffe, captured the moment when he upended his box on their smartphones and tweeted evidence of his questionable grasp of fish keeping. Some speculated that a poor palace employee would be dispatched to the scene to clean up the mess as soon as the two leaders disappeared inside."

CNN: Trump feeds fish, winds up pouring entire box of food into koi pond

The media was not only blatantly overt, but intentional in its deception. The greatest danger to our nation comes from a free press that chooses sides in the political process. And that has openly and unapologetically taken place.

Re: Bipartisan vs Google and Facebook

[DNS-and-BIND]

No, the questions are not revealed to the candidates ahead of time. Unless you're Donna Brazile, and you leak the questions to Hillary Clinton and let her prepare answers ahead of time, while forcing Donald Trump to think on his feet. Hey, that's totally OK to do in a democracy that prides itself on fair debates.

The organization that fervently opposes checking ID to vote in elections did just that during its election for party chairman.

"We have to make sure that we can not just count the ballots but verify every name and signature," Brazile said as party members began applauding.

Donna Brazile said after Seth Rich was killed, she kept the blinds down to protect from snipers, possibly Russian. LOL. The Russians break every rule of engagement to start a possible WWIII with us to kill a man who...according to the DNC, didn't leak any emails.

Step 1: Voter ID

[DNS-and-BIND]

If those that demand no Voter Identification were concerned for the poor, they'd facilitate the acquisition of ID, not seek ways to avoid it. After all, what's the best job you ever had where you didn't need to identify yourself? I'm just confused how anyone buys beer or cold medicine without an ID. WTF?

Only ONE party disapproves of measures to make our elections secure. Voter ID is NOT a function of America's "racist past" EVERY COUNTRY THAT'S not a dictatorship has some form of assuring that the person voting is entitled to. EVERY COUNTRY.

California liberals allege voter fraud, demand voter ID. LOL. Democrats think voter identification laws are important for their party elections, but think they're not important when it comes to our elections.

Maxine Waters, an advocate against voter ID, requires an ID to attend her town hall meeting.

Hillary Clinton's Book Tour. Valid Photo ID Required. Wait, isn't this suppressing minority turnout? Why's it racist when we do it in our super-important elections, but Hillary does it for her book-signing and suddenly it's not racist? Someone want to take a stab at this one?