Slashdot Mirror


In Boston: Election-Hacking War Game Bypasses Election Systems (securityledger.com)

Slashdot reader Actually, I do RTFA remains wary of a new "blockchain-powered mobile voting app" being used by the state of West Virginia to collect ballots from overseas absentee voters.

But meanwhile, Slashdot reader chicksdaddy notes an election hacking exercise conducted with city employees and local FBI officers in Boston focused on attempts to disrupt a hypothetical election in "Nolandia" by simply clogging highways and sowing chaos. From Security Ledger: The day started with snarled traffic and a suspicious outage of the 9-1-1 emergency call center that has put the public and first responders on edge. Already, the city's police force was taxed keeping tabs on protests tied to a meeting of the International Monetary Fund. By afternoon, the federal Emergency Alert System (EAS) was warning Nolandia residents of massive natural gas leaks in neighborhoods in the north and west part of the city, prompting officials to order evacuations of the affected areas.

Later, bomb threats called in to local television stations shut down a bridge linking the northern and southern halves of the city -- a major artery for vehicles. The EAS warning turns out to have been false -- no gas leaks are detected, nor is any bomb found on the bridge. Later in the day, cyber attack s on a smart traffic light deployment in Nolandia snarl traffic further and sow chaos during the evening commute... This is election hacking 2018 style: a highly successful operation in which no voting machines or voting infrastructure were compromised, attacked or even targeted.

The cybersecurity company that created the exercise said they "wanted to expand that scope and demonstrate that the threat landscape is actually much broader...."

43 comments

  1. That isn't election hacking by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To hack an election it has to go unnoticed. Any real government would reschedule the election in this scenario.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    1. Re:That isn't election hacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " Any real government would reschedule the election in this scenario." ...depending on whether or not they liked the results.

    2. Re:That isn't election hacking by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To hack an election it has to go unnoticed.

      We have proof otherwise. A significant number of people wouldn't care if an election was hacked as long as the other side lost.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:That isn't election hacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I don't see this being overly important except to scare people (more) about stupid election issues.

      Such methods would be much more worthwhile being used to rob banks. Get all the cops on one side of the city, and start tearing up banks where they aren't.

    4. Re:That isn't election hacking by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Any real government would reschedule the election in this scenario.

      Do you mean like how the 2000 Florida vote was redone because off the clearly defective ballots?

      Can you provide an example of an American election ever being redone because of weather, or traffic conditions?

      Also, what is a "real" government?

    5. Re:That isn't election hacking by sjames · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but the thing that passes for a government in the U.S. would probably just let the Supreme Court pick a winner.

    6. Re:That isn't election hacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any real government

      You mean any authenticious guvmint.

    7. Re:That isn't election hacking by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Except for the US. For federal elections much of these elections have dates that can't move. There's one and only one shot. For congress the states would have to appoint temporary positions. For president, as we've seen in the past there's a long drawn out arm-wrestling tournament between the lawyers and eventually the Supreme Count make a mistake and steps into the mess. A re-do is a perfectly good idea, only you'd have to change a lot of laws to allow that.

    8. Re:That isn't election hacking by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      It's okay as long as we're the only ones doing it...

      https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0...

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  2. Or if election results are important by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    you would research and target accordingly. Create traffic bottlenecks, attack the networks in the area, call in bomb threats to polling stations in districts that mattered.

    On the other hand, major metropolitan areas are = more (numerically) meaningful in state/national elections than small localities.

    If altering results of local elections are their aim, then it's probably pretty simple...

    1. Re:Or if election results are important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep - for Boston all you need to do is attach LEDs to batteries, and you'll shut down the entire city as they search for bombers.

      Who cares what Boston has to say about "cyberattacks" against our elections? They're clearly incompetent.

  3. Not realistic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if you are serious about election hacking prevention you would focus on the likely source of hacking and not randomly pick unrelated sources of disturbances. Hackers would not use such inefficient means. They should ask some hacker they already busted what is the most likely attack vector

  4. The media has been "hacking" elections forever by petes_PoV · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If by hacking an election we mean manipulating the result to favour or disadvantage one political view or another, then that is the meat and potatoes of privately owned media organisations.

    It makes little difference whether the "hacking" is done on social media by extra-national agents being paid for their efforts, or by proprietors setting an editorial policy that advocates some themes and disparages others. People criticise FAKE NEWS and social media for feeding people articles they are predisposed to agree with. Which is exactly what the media does. We watch a particular channel's news broadcasts because we think it accurately represents reality. Or we read a particular newspaper because we think it is unbiased - which just means we are in accord with its politics.

    You can even see articles that dissuade people from voting by suggesting that their party is comfortably ahead, so there's no need to go out in the rain. Or that one candidate or another did a bad thing and is therefore undeserving of support. All of this is manipulation. It is no different to "hack" the voters as it is to hack the voting machines. The outcome is the same.

    That one is done in plain sight and the other is performed surreptitiously only reinforces the view that if the crime is big enough, it is excused.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:The media has been "hacking" elections forever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kind of like how we deride other countries because you can bribe officials with a box of cigars or similar to speed up things. Over here the bribing is waaay worse - on an industrial scale even. It's just called lobbying and therefore acceptable. Though it is far more in depth than stupid bribes at the courthouse.

    2. Re:The media has been "hacking" elections forever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Liberal hacked elections for 100 years to bring about insane left wing society. Now that we have a worldwide awakening of real moral courage the left is going insane to try to protect their preferred feminists, black and mexican gangs, open boarders, homosexual deviants, and the like. Its too late now though because we've taken our country back and we are not to let go again.

    3. Re:The media has been "hacking" elections forever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep crying, nazi meth faggots. Infowars will buy those tears.

    4. Re: The media has been "hacking" elections forever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The message at above was brought to you by the Committee to Reelect Donald Trump in 2020. Remember - Democrats are deranged, mean-spirited wingnuts whose idea of political debate is hurling childish insults.

      Compared to Democrats President Trump is grown up, kind hearted, and a serious intellectual!

      Vote TRUMP in 2020 - for common decency!

  5. Seems like an easy one to resolve by holophrastic · · Score: 2

    don't have everyone vote on the same day. simply have each county, or each alphabetically-prefixed last name vote on a different day over a period of a month.

    We already have advanced voting. Simply make that the norm.

    Done.

    1. Re:Seems like an easy one to resolve by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Or just do what Oregon has done, and use mail-in ballots for everyone.

      In California, voting by mail is optional, but about 70% of voters do so.

    2. Re:Seems like an easy one to resolve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absentee ballots have a significantly higher rate of fraud than in-person voting. Check out the Ben Cooper (from Virginia) or Ruth Robinson (Kentucky) cases for examples where thousands of absentee ballots were stolen, faked, or people bribed/threatened to vote a certain way. Dozens of people convicted on thousands of felony charges.

      The rate is low, but still higher than in-person fraud. If you want election integrity enough to oppose electronic voting machines, then you should certainly oppose universal mail-in voting as well. Election day holiday is the right way to go.

    3. Re:Seems like an easy one to resolve by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      Umm, I don't think that mailboxes are particularly difficult to defeat. A cup of coffee can do it.

    4. Re:Seems like an easy one to resolve by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Mail in ballots are great. Makes it easy to verify that my family, employees and congregation are voting the correct way, plus my son, the mailman can also make sure those mail in ballots from the wrong type of people get lost.
      None of that bullshit about secret ballots or just having to show up at the polling place and vote.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    5. Re:Seems like an easy one to resolve by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      You'd need a lot of Starbucks to throw most elections.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    6. Re:Seems like an easy one to resolve by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      How many congregations do you suppose it would take to throw an election? Sorry, but while this could happen, it's much less of a threat than other nation states odds of hacking electronic votes.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    7. Re:Seems like an easy one to resolve by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Pen and paper, with the whole process watched seems the safest. There's still problems from non-independent groups choosing the election districts to banning/making harder for certain groups to vote, not to mention combining a bunch of elections into one to make it more complex and harder for new parties to appear at lower levels.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  6. Election officials relying on blockchain? by hey! · · Score: 1

    Oy. Never hand an ignoramus a golden hammer.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  7. No, an American government wouldn't by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    Common sense is all but dead in American governments and whatever idiot excuses are floated will have half the voters strongly supporting it and spend years resenting if the "other side" forces them to act sensibly.

    Especially if a republican victory could be over turned; they don't care about anything they profess to anymore it's 100% pure tribal bullshit. I'm not saying the other side is perfect; sadly, I have to always point that out because Americans also have an inability to hold complex thoughts.

    1. Re:No, an American government wouldn't by Kaenneth · · Score: 2

      When an election is so close that such minor tampering changes the outcome, it doesn't really matter who wins.

    2. Re:No, an American government wouldn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it still mattered a lot

    3. Re:No, an American government wouldn't by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      It's disturbing that people actually believe that.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    4. Re:No, an American government wouldn't by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      I wish people would quit tossing out "common sense" as if it's at all common. People disagree. People have different cultures. People have different opinions. There is no such thing as common sense.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  8. Remote voting is incompatible with security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A foundational requirement of secret ballots is that a voter cannot disclose their vote to someone else. "Show me your ballot to prove you voted for X or you'll be beaten/disowned/fired/evicted/excommunicated/etc." has an extremely long history. Vote buying like this was common in the U.S. during the depression, so it's just beyond living memory.

    Now, if such abuses are rare to the point of insignificance then it's worth bending the rule in favour of participation by people unable to visit a voting booth, but it must be done carefully and for a small fraction of the voting base or the abuses will come right back.

    1. Re:Remote voting is incompatible with security by BobSteinVisiBone · · Score: 1

      A foundational requirement of secret ballots is that a voter cannot disclose their vote to someone else.

      This is very insightful and true. But there's another distortion risked by staggered voting days. Later voters would have the advantage of knowing early votes. This could skew turnout in close elections. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2...

      Imagine later-day districts happen to be more Republican. Close elections would spur Republicans to vote who would otherwise have abstained. Democrat abstainers in early-day districts would have missed this spur because they had less information that the election was going to be close. So later-day votes would count slightly more.

      Perhaps staggered voting days could work if somehow exit poll reporting could be suppressed. You know, without breaking the constitution or physics.

      --
      Bob Stein, http://bobste.in
  9. But! Haxx0rz! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dey r haxxin!

  10. WV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Speaking as someone who has lived in WV all my life. West Virginians are too dumb for this.

  11. Another example of an indirect attack by 1SQ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This example of attacking an election indirectly by targeting its support network reminded me of a Feb 2018 report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies and their hypothetical scenario shared by Bruce Schneier on Aug 27th:
    The scope and detail of the attack, not to mention its sheer audacity, had earned the grudging respect of the secretary. Years of worry about a possible Chinese "Assassin's Mace" -- a silver bullet super-weapon capable of disabling key parts of the American military -- turned out to be focused on the wrong thing. The cyber attacks varied. Sailors stationed at the 7th Fleet' s homeport in Japan awoke one day to find their financial accounts, and those of their dependents, empty. Checking, savings, retirement funds: simply gone. The Marines based on Okinawa were under virtual siege by the populace, whose simmering resentment at their presence had boiled over after a YouTube video posted under the account of a Marine stationed there had gone viral. The video featured a dozen Marines drunkenly gang-raping two teenaged Okinawan girls. The video was vivid, the girls' cries heart-wrenching the cheers of Marines sickening And all of it fake. The National Security Agency's initial analysis of the video had uncovered digital fingerprints showing that it was a computer-assisted lie, and could prove that the Marine's account under which it had been posted was hacked. But the damage had been done. There was the commanding officer of Edwards Air Force Base whose Internet browser history had been posted on the squadron's Facebook page. His command turned on him as a pervert; his weak protestations that he had not visited most of the posted links could not counter his admission that he had, in fact, trafficked some of them. Lies mixed with the truth. Soldiers at Fort Sill were at each other's throats thanks to a series of text messages that allegedly unearthed an adultery ring on base. The variations elsewhere were endless. Marines suddenly owed hundreds of thousands of dollars on credit lines they had never opened; sailors received death threats on their Twitter feeds; spouses and female service members had private pictures of themselves plastered across the Internet; older service members received notifications about cancerous conditions discovered in their latest physical. Leadership was not exempt. Under the hashtag # PACOMMUSTGO a dozen women allegedly described harassment by the commander of Pacific command. Editorial writers demanded that, under the administration's "zero tolerance" policy, he step aside while Congress held hearings. There was not an American service member or dependent whose life had not been digitally turned upside down. In response, the secretary had declared "an operational pause," directing units to stand down until things were sorted out. Then, China had made its move, flooding the South China Sea with its conventional forces, enforcing a sea and air identification zone there, and blockading Taiwan. But the secretary could only respond weakly with a few air patrols and diversions of ships already at sea. Word was coming in through back channels that the Taiwanese government, suddenly stripped of its most ardent defender, was already considering capitulation.

    1. Re:Another example of an indirect attack by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      If only Okinawa sailors didn't have a proven track record of raping local girls. Fun fact: I dare you to look at the race of the accused sailors.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Another example of an indirect attack by BobSteinVisiBone · · Score: 1

      Absolutely chilling. Underscores how badly we need networks we can trust. And news we can trust. And governments we can trust.

      --
      Bob Stein, http://bobste.in
  12. No provision for that in the US Constitution by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    Which means that Federal results would be almost impossible to correct with a new election

  13. Fascinating story by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    Thank you

  14. widespread election fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Widespread election fraud is the ONLY reason universally-loathed candidate Hillary Clinton "won" the popular vote.