Slashdot Mirror


US Response 'Hasn't Changed The Calculus' Of Russian Interference, NSA Chief Says (npr.org)

An anonymous reader shares an NPR report: The admiral in charge of both the nation's top electronic spying agency and the Pentagon's cybersecurity operations would seem a logical point man for countering Russia's digital intrusions in U.S. election campaigns. But National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command chief Adm. Michael Rogers told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday there is only so much he can do. That is because, according to Rogers, President Trump has not ordered him to go after the Russian attacks at their origin. Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the committee's ranking Democrat, asked Rogers, "Have you been directed to do so, given this strategic threat that faces the United States and the significant consequences you recognize already?" "No, I have not," Rogers replied. But the spy chief pushed back on suggestions that he should seek a presidential signoff. "I am not going to tell the president what he should or should not do," Rogers said when Connecticut Democrat Richard Blumenthal pressed him on whether Trump should approve that authority.

"I'm an operational commander, not a policymaker," he added. "That's the challenge for me as a military commander." Rogers agreed with Blumenthal's estimation that Russian cyber operatives continue to attack the U.S. with impunity and that Washington's response has fallen short. "It hasn't changed the calculus, is my sense," the spy chief told Blumenthal. "It certainly hasn't generated the change in behavior that I think we all know we need."

3 of 126 comments (clear)

  1. Going after attacks at origin is risky... by Koreantoast · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But Rogers also made clear that he had not been granted what he called "the day-to-day authority" to disrupt Russian hacking operations at their point of origin.

    To be fair, the range of actions to go after attacks "at their origin" in Russia would probably be a high risk no matter who was president, especially if it turns out the source is a Russian government agency. Admiral Rogers put it best near the end of the article:

    Even if he were granted authority to act, Rogers questioned during the Senate hearing whether his agencies' capabilities would be the best or only response to those attacks.

    "Be mindful of falling in the trap that just because someone comes at us in cyber that we have to default to immediately going back and doing the exact same thing," he warned. "I've always believed we need to step back and think a little bit more broadly about it and just don't default — it's because of that, you know, that I have not done that to date."

  2. Re:Going after Russia, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    wow, just more of the conservative voter fraud narrative in a feedback loop. That "evidence", which doesn't exist, is being pushed by a conservative voter fraud "investigative" group.

    Sorry, but the fact that little boy Donnie Trump is butt hurt that most Americans actually despise him isn't going to change the fact that there is very little to no voter fraud in existence in America.

  3. Re:We'd have to respond by danbert8 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Come on, you mean the president that laughed at his opponent when the idea of Russia being a geopolitical threat came up? The president that was captured on a hot mic telling Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he will have “more flexibility” after the election?

    The Democrats are accusing Republicans of siding with Russia... That's a knee slapper right there.

    Please note, I'm not a Trump supporter or even a Republican supporter. This shit you just can't make up.

    --
    Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?