Slashdot Mirror


Were Russian Hackers Deterred From Interfering In America's Election? (omaha.com)

"Despite probing and trolling, a Russian cyberattack is the dog that did not bark in Tuesday's midterm elections," writes national security columnist Eli Lake. This is the assessment of the Department of Homeland Security, which says there were no signs of a coordinated campaign to disrupt U.S. voting. This welcome news raises a relevant and important question: Were cyber adversaries actually deterred from infiltrating voter databases and changing election results...?

In September the White House unveiled a new policy aimed at deterring Russia, China, Iran and North Korea from hacking U.S. computer networks in general and the midterms in particular. National security adviser John Bolton acknowledged as much last week when he said the U.S. government was undertaking "offensive cyber operations" aimed at "defending the integrity of our electoral process." There aren't many details. Reportedly this entailed sending texts, pop-ups, emails and direct messages warning Russian trolls and military hackers not to disrupt the midterms. U.S. officials tell me much more is going on that remains classified. It is part of a new approach from the Trump administration that purports to unleash U.S. Cyber Command to hack the hackers back, to fight them in their networks as opposed to America's.

Bolton has said the policy reverses previous restrictions on military hackers to disrupt the networks from which rival powers attack the U.S. Sometimes this is called "persistent engagement" or "defend forward." And it represents a shift in the broader U.S. approach to engaging adversaries in cyberspace.... The difference now is that America's cyber warriors will routinely try to disrupt cyberattacks before they begin... The object of cyberdeterrence is not to get an adversary to never use cyberweapons. It's to prevent attacks of certain critical systems such as voter registration databases, electrical grids and missile command-and-control systems. The theory, at least, is to force adversaries to devote resources they would otherwise use to attack the U.S. to better secure their own networks.

Jason Healey, a historian of cyber conflicts at Columbia University's School for International and Public Affairs, asks "How much of cyberspace will survive the war?" warning that "persistent engagement" could lead to a dangerous miscalculation by an adversarial nation-state -- or even worse, a spiral of escalation, with other state's following America's lead, changing the open Internet into more of a battleground.

240 comments

  1. Uh-huh by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Funny

    National security adviser John Bolton acknowledged as much last week when he said the U.S. government was undertaking "offensive cyber operations" aimed at "defending the integrity of our electoral process." There aren't many details. Reportedly this entailed sending texts, pop-ups, emails and direct messages warning Russian trolls and military hackers not to disrupt the midterms.

    Clearly, Russian trolls' and military hackers' personal kryptonite is US government pop-ups and direct warning messages.... Just the one question: why did we wait until this election cycle to break out the big guns?

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Uh-huh by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Clearly, Russian trolls' and military hackers' personal kryptonite is US government pop-ups and direct warning messages

      I imagine a text to a burner phone you think is secure would scare most of people. And since Russia is starting to play shadow war assassination games, they might worry about being targeted.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:Uh-huh by Nutria · · Score: 1

      You clearly overlooked the quote U.S. officials tell me much more is going on that remains classified.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    3. Re:Uh-huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Election officials said were not ready last time even though they received multiple warnings from the government

    4. Re:Uh-huh by rmdingler · · Score: 2

      Clearly, Russian trolls' and military hackers' personal kryptonite is US government pop-ups and direct warning messages

      I imagine a text to a burner phone you think is secure would scare most of people. And since Russia is starting to play shadow war assassination games, they might worry about being targeted.

      Perhaps, if the target were within the jurisdiction of US authorities, but the interference is at the very least State-approved and quite likely State-sponsored... just as similar programs in the US, China, and all the rest of the nations sitting on the UN Security Council and even many of those who do not.

      On the plus side, it's an improvement over thousands of years of seeking advantage through conventional warfare. This is modern day influence peddling... winning the hearts and minds with minimal body bags returning your sons home.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    5. Re:Uh-huh by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      You clearly overlooked the quote U.S. officials tell me much more is going on that remains classified.

      Whenever the governors tell you there's more afoot than they are able to reveal because classified,aka:National Security, you can rest assured it's very much like the Saudis explaining Khashoggi's death as an interrogation accident, I mean a rogue operatives escapade, er, um, shit, we don't know what happened, but it definitely wasn't the fault of the Crown Prince.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    6. Re:Uh-huh by ravenshrike · · Score: 2

      You'd have to ask Obama. However the answer would be that the establishment thought it could never lose and taking a hardline stance would mean that Hillary couldn't whip out another reset button after the election since the first worked so well.

    7. Re:Uh-huh by Nutria · · Score: 1

      While that's a definite possibility, Secret Operations do actually happen.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    8. Re:Uh-huh by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      And since Russia is starting to play shadow war assassination games,

      Perhaps, if the target were within the jurisdiction of US authorities

      Russia took out some people who thought they were safe in the UK. I'm not so sure the US would take them out, but I'm not sure I would bet my life against it.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    9. Re:Uh-huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      National security adviser John Bolton acknowledged as much last week when he said the U.S. government was undertaking "offensive cyber operations" aimed at "defending the integrity of our electoral process." There aren't many details. Reportedly this entailed sending texts, pop-ups, emails and direct messages warning Russian trolls and military hackers not to disrupt the midterms.

      Clearly, Russian trolls' and military hackers' personal kryptonite is US government pop-ups and direct warning messages.... Just the one question: why did we wait until this election cycle to break out the big guns?

      Well, first, they didn’t have to. The damage has been done. Second, I think they suspect that American voters are spooked and wound up, like tiny yappy dogs, ready to piss themselves if someone were to just jump out of the shadows and yell, “boo!” They know that the best, and least expected thing to do is NOTHING. Because we’re expecting them to do something, they’re doing the UNexpected: nothing. Don’t count on that to continue indefinitely. OR... they’re seeming to be doing nothing and what they’re doing is either so subtle that no one notices, or they’re quietly positioning their pieces in anticipation of future action.

      Of course, there is also the fact that American dark money is doing far more damage to democracy than the Russians are capable of doing without risking provocation of either conventional or nuclear retaliation. This money helps both corporate “democratic” (hahaha) candidates, (who are bought and paid for just as much as Republicans,) and equally wretched Republican candidates. The confusion sewn by Russians is a drop in the bucket compared to the tsunami of harm that money being allowed in American politics, (basically legalized bribery,) is doing.

    10. Re: Uh-huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      State mandated responses to last meddling. Success was guaranteed. No numbers or facts reported. Think about that for a minute.

      Of course the official pressure on social media corps had nuthin to do with anything, and we don't deserve any facts.

    11. Re:Uh-huh by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      Maybe Trump can't afford to pay them THIS time. Maybe the CIA re-routed their attacks into a honeypot. Maybe Russia likes how things are going, so no need to stir the pot.

    12. Re:Uh-huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone actually think that Bolton isn't a psychopath?
      That dude clearly doesn't put any sort of value to human life.

      How in the world could anyone think that it is possible to have a reasonable discussion based on anything that asshole says?

    13. Re: Uh-huh by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      I imagine a text to a burner phone you think is secure would scare most of people.

      Well, of course... because the first thing that an opposing force does after identifying your phone is warn you that they've done so.

    14. Re: Uh-huh by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      If it's a warning shot, sure.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  2. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clearly, no.

    1. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And why would they be deterred as long as Americans keep buying their services.

  3. No need this time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dims had it all:
    - Fake news collusion
    - Ballot stuffing
    - Illegal votes

  4. We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by AbRASiON · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The far left and the media have been beating this drum for multiple years.

    If one were to take all the claims at face value, you would think that there's Russians in the bloody toaster. They're everywhere! Doing all the bad things, they ran the election, they hacked servers, "they" are every single account on social media that doesn't mean heavily left.

    If you disagree with anything, you're not real, probably a Russian bot! Or a Nazi, clearly!

    They wonder why people are voting differently to how they actually poll publically...
    As an ex far lefty, they're getting downright embarrassing.

    Posting from Moscow,.... Obviously.

    1. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Dorianny · · Score: 0, Troll

      Never knew our Intelligence agencies were part of the "far left" and whatever this "media" the right always talks about is

    2. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a black man I agree.

    3. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Funny how things change. In my youth, it was the right that was playing the scary Russian threat card. Remember McCarthy?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by reboot246 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indeed. You'd think the American left would have much more in common with the former Communists in Russia than anybody on the right.

      The Democrats didn't really need any Russian help this time. They're quite capable of stealing elections all by themselves, as we are witnessing right now in Florida. Oh, look we just "found" some more ballots in the supply closet! And here are some more in the trunk of this car!

    5. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Z80a · · Score: 3, Informative

      If i was the russian government trying to push the republicans, i would just secretly fund the antifa.
      Those boys do wonders to ruin the reputation of the democrats.

    6. Re: We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brennan is a Wahabist.

    7. Re: We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's a communist actually

    8. Re: We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://mobile.twitter.com/mattgaetz/status/1061097579356807168?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1061097579356807168&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fnews%2F2018-11-10%2Fmystery-broward-ballots-shuffled-trucks-rep-matt-gaetz-forcibly-removed-while

    9. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've never noticed that CNN and most other media outlets, as well as most of the comedy shows on these days do nothing but rage against Trump non-stop? They have no other material, it seems. I've seen a few ads for that samantha bee show and every single clip they showed in every ad was some hate-on-Trump skip. Every one. These people are seriously deranged to be so consumed by one individual who honestly doesn't wield THAT much power.

    10. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Opportunist · · Score: 0

      The US has no left.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re: We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's actually Trump's lover.

    12. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Antifa has nothing to do with Democrats, you're being a moron. Antifa are anti nazis. The only reason they'd ever be "with Democrats" is on the specific issue of Trump directly supporting white supremacism like the faggot traitor he is.

    13. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Dorianny · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Is the GOP really so incompetent that they would have elections stolen in a State they control the Governor's office the Secretary of State and Florida’s Chief Election Officer posts? Maybe they should invite Putin to come lead the GOP directly

    14. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are so sick of the NON-APK bogeyman.

      Are you APK? No, you are not. Are you posting about the hosts file engine? No, you are not.

      Nothing else matters. No other knowledge is relevant to this discussion or any other discussion, on any site/service.

      So silence yourself and make way for the only legitimate poster on Slashdot! APK!

      ALL HAIL APK!

    15. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The far left and the media have been beating this drum for multiple years.

      The Russian government had a preference for Trump and a loathing of Hillary as she pointed out their corruption. This is well known established fact.

      What people forget, or gloss over, is their goal was not a happy productive America under Trump. No, they did more than simply support Trump or attack Hillary. They were inflaming tensions throughout the country. They were doing what they could to tear us apart.

      The most likely reason we saw less this election than the last is there was no need to fan any particular fire to continue to have us tear ourselves to pieces. We were doing just fine on our own with the great orange one in charge. Trump and his republican allies are marching us right down the well worn road to Authoritarianism and many, such as in the religious right are perfectly fine with that as long as they think they are on the path to have their morals forced on everyone else. Seriously, does anyone really think it is better, when instead of Jews or Muslims we target Mexican's for our convenientent scapegoat?

      The biggest lesson we have yet to learn is, "It is not okay just because your doing it for a cause. Wrong is wrong. Doing an evil action for your religion, your party, your family or whatever reason you come up with is Still an evil action."

      That Russian's helped manipulate our last presidential election was horrible. That republicans stood by and quietly smiled for the most part while it occurred because it benefited them was treasonous to the the ideas America stands for. That America failed to see through so much of it was also horrible.

    16. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Z80a · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's the beauty, they glue to the democrats like weird headcrabs and then go to the streets and do all sorts of vandalism, violence and general thuggery, and this paint the dems with a bad picture, and those can't disavow the antifa because it will call em nazis until they yield.

    17. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      You'd think the American left would have much more in common with the former Communists in Russia than anybody on the right

      Yeah, that Putin is such a hippie.

    18. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The difference now is that Russia doesn't have to put people on the ground in the US, they can do it all over the internet, up to and including organizaing events that Americans unwittingly attend. The scale is also completely different, with their reach being to millions of people via social media.

      Fortunately it does look like social media companies are starting to get on top of this and it's working. Or maybe the Russians just didn't think it was worth putting too much effort into this election, because it was already divisive enough and any of the likely results would have suited their ends.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    19. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's still the right, it is the status quo party that needs an enemy to stay in control.

    20. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      Haven't you heard? Anything you don't like hearing about your side is a false flag.

    21. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They ARE the nazis.

    22. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by gtall · · Score: 1

      That and having their lapdog in the Oval Office means they do not have to try hard to screw up the U.S.

    23. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. You'd think the American left would have much more in common with the former Communists in Russia than anybody on the right.

      That might have been true under Lenin.

      After Russia transitioned into a warmongering kleptocracy the American right appears to feel more in tune with it.

    24. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If i was the russian government trying to push the republicans, i would just secretly fund the antifa.
      Those boys do wonders to ruin the reputation of the democrats.

      Ineffective.
      It will only make antifa stronger and it might deter neo-nazis from showing up.
      Antifa might even use the funding to recruit more people rather than doing anything that gets reported on.

      It is better to fund organizations reporting on antifa, or even organizations just making shit about antifa up, that guarantees that people who fear antifa will hear about it.
      You don't need actual actions from antifa if you can just grab some picture of some masked vandals in whatever country and claim that it is antifa in the US.
      People who weren't there won't know the difference and you will get a stronger response without funding people who might oppose you.

      In fact, that is the approach the Russian government took.

      Heck, they wouldn't even need antifa to exist, they only need people to believe they do.

    25. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you think that CNN and other media outlets are US intelligence agencies, I have some surprising news for you about who the deranged party is in this conversation.

    26. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It obviously wasn't in your youth or you would remember it wasn't McCarthy that did that.
      Back then it was HUAC *House of UnAmerican Actvities Committee", McCarthy was in the Senate. McCarthy's list, that he kept private, only contained State Department employees. The DNC Senate Majority Leaders subpoenaed his list and made it public, not McCarthy.
      HUAC meanwhile was run by the DNC in the House.

      It was much like the DNC is working today. Funny how 1 party seems to be on the wrong side of every single issue historically.
      Slavery
      Women's right to vote
      Black's right to vote
      Civil rights act

      They continue with their BS to this day.

    27. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Quantum+gravity · · Score: 1

      It is not about left vs right. Russia is sowing discord and distrust in democracy. Russia has been interfering in many countries not just the US, but also Germany, France, Britain, Norway and more. Russia funds far-right parties like National Front in France, supports the anti EU UKIP party in the UK and the left-wing Spanish Podemos party that has a favorable view of Russia, and lots more. Now the 2016 election was also about Putin not liking Clinton since Bill supported Yeltsin.

    28. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everytime some US citizen writes about some imaginary "far left" in their country.... You have two right-wing parties! One criminally pro corporate power, the other one so far off the charts that science-denial and blatant racism is completely normal now.

    29. Re: We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But doing evil things for money is fully OK, as long as nobody indicts you ?

      We knew, moneychangers.

    30. Re: We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New York wants Stupid Whitey to hate his Russian brothers and like the Mohammedists of Riad. Yeah. That makes sense for NY. Riad pays so nicely.

    31. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Ogive17 · · Score: 2

      Just curious - are the US military and intelligence services part of the far left?

      I'm not denying things were sensationalized but it seems like the response to this was to basically deny it's happening at all.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    32. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Livius · · Score: 2

      The possibility of Russian interference certainly shouldn't be ignored, but since 2016 it's just been an excuse for the Democrats to avoid asking themselves hard questions about how they alienated so many voters.

      Seriously, they lost to Donald Trump! If that's not a wake-up call I don't know what is.

    33. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by mrclevesque · · Score: 1

      If Omnicom has Colgate and Crest as customers do we then claim they are trying to sow confusion, no, it's simply business as usual.

    34. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by DigressivePoser · · Score: 1

      Is the GOP really so incompetent that they would have elections stolen in a State they control the Governor's office the Secretary of State and Florida’s Chief Election Officer posts?

      Broward county has had a long history of incompetence with their "Supervisor of Elections" persons. From incompetence to outright illegal vote counting processes. The GOP was watching closely and sounded the alarm. So the answer to your question is no.

    35. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      The US has no left.

      A sentiment that the US's lefties LOVE to repeat, in a routine attempt to make their far lefty ideas sound somehow more reasonable. "Sure, we think there should be a $32 trillion government takeover of all health care, but that's a reasonable, center-right position, because there is no left here in the US." Or, "We think there should be no borders, and that the law enforcement agency tasked with capturing felons illegally present in the country should be abolished - but that's not some nonsensical far-lefty notion, because there is no left in the US!" Or maybe, "Obviously the people who risk everything they have to start a business and hire people shouldn't be allowed to earn more than a certain amount of money, no matter how successful their company becomes. Because if they grow a business large enough, it's obvious that they are evil corporatists and making more than twice what their entry-level loading dock worker makes should be illegal. This, though, isn't some lefty notion meant to punish entrepreneurs for daring to think that taking successful risks might result in rewards, because there is no left in this country."

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    36. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Is the GOP really so incompetent that they would have elections stolen in a State they control the Governor's office the Secretary of State and Florida’s Chief Election Officer posts?

      Spoken like someone who is, oddly, pretending not to know that such things are - in almost every practical way that impacts the way elections are conducted - run at the county level. And in the FL counties that are the recurring problems, we have Democrats to blame. And they HAVE been blamed, and caught, multiple times. But the local Democrats like the results of their corruption, so keep putting the same people or their ilk right back in charge. That's exactly what's going on in Broward, right now. It's only being scrutinized BECAUSE the GOP is making sure it all gets sunlight on it, but the Dems are still trying desperately to foot-drag and obfuscate.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    37. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Z80a · · Score: 1

      I don't think punching trash cans, setting fire to cars and breaking and looting are very effective ways to fight the republicans.
      Also getting their asses wrecked by the actual far-righters, but that's actually irrelevant, as you can't punch the nazism out of a person.

    38. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can't punch the nazism out of a person.

      No, but you can blow their empty heads off, which is exactly what's coming if you and your asshole friends keep pushing.

    39. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Didn't worked with communism, didn't worked with the jews, will not work with Nazism as well.

    40. Re: We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will you deny that the media and the agencies are but branches of the same Deep State?

    41. Re: We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Euroweenie has self-identified. Thank you.

    42. Re: We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Clearly hes a Russian Troll.

    43. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100% while everyone is looking for Russian boogiemen, the democrats committed massive voter fraud and election rigging in places like florida, NYC etc.

    44. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you know that the woman responsible for managing those elections has already been charged and convicted of rigging elections... wtf is going on

    45. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, there is no far left idea raised by anyone in the US, the Democrats are Centre Right, the Republicans Far Right, hell the US Communist Party is a Centre party with left leaning symbology

    46. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is that the people in the Communist Party in the US (you know, the ones who ACTUALLY CALL THEMSELVES communists) are center-right?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    47. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Antifa in the street "I killed a Nazi. Everyone will praise me."
      Antifa in cuffs "I will explain to them what I did."
      Antifa in the dock "People will see that I did the right thing."
      Antifa in the witness stand "I am justified."
      Antifa in the death row cell "I am on the right side of history."
      Antifa in the electric chair "Wait a minute, my fantasy isn't going the way I wanted it to."

    48. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, BUT . . . voter fraud is NOT widespread, yet this keeps happening, and it's almost always with perfectly legal alternative ballot options.

      The Florida Republican Party (let's treat it like it's own militant entity like the Darwin-challenging "Florida Man") has been pretty militant about voter suppression; amendment 4 restored the largest bloc of voters over anything else in recent history.

      Taking it from a "stupid, not malicious" standpoint, there's a definite trend of laziness in counting the ballots in Florida, which has been helping out the incumbents . . .

      If they don't get it right this year, we should definitely build a wall to prevent Floridians from infecting the rest of the populace :/

    49. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, honest and reasoned debate. Beautiful!

      Sooner we all quit barking and start talking the better.

      Yeah, florida's a steaming mess. Something the left and right can agree on.

      back to the OT:

      Nah, it's not that they didn't do it they're just getting good at it.

      (my view? the russians help trump because he's bought. they got zero reason to help dems, we're effing useless at the moment)

    50. Re:We are so sick of the Russian boogeyman. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      And now a party that represents that positions? Because unless there is one, you can have any opinion you want, if nobody is there to represent you, you may as well not exist in our political world.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. Were Florida Election Officials Deterred? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously not. People are so fixated on external influences that they can't be bothered to look at Florida election officials defying court orders.

  6. Not necessary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have already achieved the goal of helping the most divisive jerk on the planet become POTUS. Now they just have to sit back and watch the US implode in partisan hatred as they slowly fan the flames. After all it is Canada's forest industry that is causing the fires in Malibu and the dreaded "dems" that are responsible for all that is wrong in the US. With the insane divisive statements coming almost daily from POTUS, the Russians can just sit back and laugh, no more damaging work left to do. POTUS is doing it all by himself.

    1. Re: Not necessary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do we know YOU are not a Chinese operative ?

    2. Re: Not necessary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He forgot the attacks on the press, sometimes physical.

  7. No... by um.yup. · · Score: 0

    ...not if any of these volunteers have anything to say about it:
    https://themodernmodem.wordpre...

  8. Why is the fricking hell are... by Nutria · · Score: 1

    "missile command-and-control systems on the public internet?

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    1. Re:Why is the fricking hell are... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Internet was a originally a missile command-and-control system.

  9. Of course they were! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is obvious that the Russians were soundly defeated on the field of Internet Battle! What more proof do you need than the fact that the Democrats performed average in the elections?

    Without the help of the Russians, the Republicans could have never won any of those seats, or the 900 state seats, in the first place.

    1. Re: Of course they were! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your "democracy" always yields the same results ?

  10. Remember, No Russian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GOP-led voter suppression and disenfranchisement means Russian hackers didn't need to do the dirty work this time around. We will see them return in 2020.

    1. Re:Remember, No Russian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You loonies still going on about your delusions of voter suppression? For a group that always accuses others of conspiracy theories, you sure have doozies of your own. It's funny to watch dems cry about gerrymandering like a broken record even in a senate election.

    2. Re:Remember, No Russian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  11. Dems are stealing the election in Broward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But we're supposed to pretend like it's the Russians who are undermining our democracy.

  12. leading ladies taking riskier roles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in the moms we trust. we know who they're aligned with..

  13. Motivation by Gavagai80 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Russia had no significant motivation to hack the midterm elections. They're not republicans. They supported Trump to a degree as a practical matter because they have a degree of hold over him. Their ad buys have mostly been centered around stirring up hatred between Americans via conspiracy theories, not about supporting one party or the other. A split government is really the best for them. All that matters is that we keep attacking each other until we're not longer a threat to them.

    To be clear, I don't begrudge Russia for it considering how much worse the CIA has done around the world. It's not like they're going after an innocent nation. What Russia is doing is simply trying to weaken a nation which has insisted on making a mission of prying satellite states out of Russia's sphere of influence and promoting democracy to Russia itself. If the USA didn't make a career of threatening Russia, it wouldn't be targeted.

    --
    This space intentionally left blank
    1. Re:Motivation by rmdingler · · Score: 2

      We should all hail the day that nations dispatch their tribalism and TLAs like America's CIA, Russia's KGB, Britain's MI6, France's DGSE, & ad infinitum are unnecessary in a perfect world of international cooperation.

      If the USA didn't make a career of threatening Russia, it wouldn't be targeted.

      Hmmm... Like when, during the Kennedy administration, the US threatened Russia when they deployed ballistic missiles in Cuba?

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    2. Re:Motivation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually Kennedy did when he deployed missiles to turkey and they retaliated with cuban missiles, but lets not let facts stand in the way of politics.

    3. Re:Motivation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Like when, during the Kennedy administration, the US threatened Russia when they deployed ballistic missiles in Cuba?

      Exactly like that, actually. Those missiles were in response to American missiles in Turkey.
      The whole point of deploying to Cuba was as a bargaining chip for the removal of the missiles in Turkey, which is exactly how the ordeal played out.

      As a general rule, citing history works better when you actually know the history.

    4. Re:Motivation by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      The Left has done a great job stirring up hate without any help from "those dirty foreigners". Did you hear just the other day they mobbed and vandalized a journalist's house while his terrified wife cowered in the pantry? How does this unite us? As for conspiracy theories, you mean the one about how the Democrats rigged the primaries to keep Bernie out? Or the one about how they Democrats ordered the media to cover Trump? And the media obeyed? Those conspiracy theories?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    5. Re:Motivation by fatwilbur · · Score: 1

      I don't think the sum of evidence shows Russia had any interest in supporting Trump. There has been plenty of anti-Trump fervor generated but it only started once the anti-Hillary campaign wasn't the primary objective anymore. I say this not to support Trump but as the most simple and logical explanation of all the information we have been seen. The reason it seems like Trump is soft on Russia is that he doesn't see them as a threat, unlike everyone in the political class which he was not a part of. It's quite clear from Trump's previous actions he see them (for better or worse) as an economic opportunity instead.

      What seemed quite clear was that the "Russians" (we still have been given no solid proof of this) had two objectives: #1 damage the reputation of Hillary Clinton and #2 stoke existing social tensions. Again, Trump only benefited from #1 because he was Hillary's opponent, not because they supported him. One of the primary strategies of this group is to create extreme disdain for US leadership and it's working like a charm. Neither Hillary nor Trump deserve much of the hate that is spewed forth at them, but it's easy to see the campaign to discredit Hillary (whom they likely expected to win) shifted quickly to Trump.

    6. Re:Motivation by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      To be clear, I don't begrudge Russia for it considering how much worse the CIA has done around the world. It's not like they're going after an innocent nation.

      It's true, the US has done wrong things many times in the belief it was for the greater good, whatever those in power at the time thought that to be. Still, that is no excuse and we need to do better for the sake of humanity and not just our own skins.

      What Russia is doing is simply trying to weaken a nation which has insisted on making a mission of prying satellite states out of Russia's sphere of influence and promoting democracy to Russia itself.

      The fact that you think the promotion of democracy is a threatening action is quite telling. Russia actually was a fragile democracy when Putin was first elected. Since then he turned it right back into an authoritarian nation. All nations and people should be free to determine who controls their own nation which is not without it's own complications.

      If the USA didn't make a career of threatening Russia, it wouldn't be targeted.

      The USA is not a threat to Russia, however the USA is a threat to those that seek to control Russia for their own enrichment. That is why Putin is against us, not because we are threatening to claim their resources. Also, let us not forget that Putin has made several aggressive move, seeking to expand his power and influence for what we can only be assumed to be without bounds. He also seeks to interfere with elections in all democratic nations (Europe is pretty sick of it) and destabilize them in an attempt to prevent the spread of legitimate democracies.

      Putin isn't just bad for his own people but for people in democracies around the globe.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    7. Re:Motivation by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      The Left has done a great job stirring up hate without any help from "those dirty foreigners". Did you hear just the other day they mobbed and vandalized a journalist's house while his terrified wife cowered in the pantry? How does this unite us?

      There is no doubt that the anarchists who brand themselves as Antifa commit criminal acts. For doing so, they should be prosecuted for their offenses. The rule of law is very important and is something we should all agree on. That's exactly why the investigation into Russian interference in 2016 needs to be protected.

      As for conspiracy theories, you mean the one about how the Democrats rigged the primaries to keep Bernie out?

      "Rigged" or not, Hillary won the popular vote which nullifies any sway the superdelegates had. Do note that party reforms have stripped superdelegates of their power so that a disconnect between voters and superdelegates cannot happen in future primaries.

      Or the one about how they Democrats ordered the media to cover Trump? And the media obeyed? Those conspiracy theories?

      Ordered them? LOLWUT?

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    8. Re:Motivation by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      I don't think the sum of evidence shows Russia had any interest in supporting Trump.

      You also aren't an intelligence analyst with full access to all the raw information. You only get bit and pieces, most of which is preprocessed, just like the rest of us. Your view on this matter is of no consequence.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    9. Re: Motivation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's true, ... has done wrong things many times in the belief it was for the greater good, whatever those in power at the time thought that to be. "

      Said the Nazi generals as they stood before the court at Nuremberg ...

    10. Re:Motivation by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

      Putin is Yeltsin's chosen heir and Yeltsin was elected using heavy US PR support. There is no way he could actually be in any way anti-democratic(that is anti-US), those corrupt US politicians just used Putin as a fall guy for their failure to execute the decision to make Hilary the President. It would work just fine if some Bernie Sanders supporters didn't vote Trump in protest. Election outcome doesn't matter much because relative outsiders like Bernie can be kept out via party decision and nobody will vote non-libdem, but illusion of democracy must be kept for propriety's sake.

    11. Re:Motivation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bad comparison, the Russia we deal with today is not the same USSR that Kennedy dealt with. The people in Russia overthrew that government or did you miss all that?

    12. Re:Motivation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On Nov.1, 2016 the FBI cleared President Trump of any connections to Russia.
      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-fbi-says-no-direct-ties-between-russia-donald-trumps-campaign/

      So all this investigation into that is nothing but a scam/misdirection to keep the people divided.

      When Hillary agreed to fund the Democratic party because they were bankrupt she was given the nomination over Bernie, and quite frankly Bernie had a better chance of winning than Hillary did.

    13. Re:Motivation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The FBI does and they said there was no connection, this means your views have no bearing in reality.
      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-fbi-says-no-direct-ties-between-russia-donald-trumps-campaign/

    14. Re:Motivation by gtall · · Score: 1

      Yeah, threatening Russia with Democracy is surely loosing the Hounds of Hells on them.

    15. Re:Motivation by gtall · · Score: 1

      Nope, the day that happens is the day these nations make radical missteps because they have no insight into what the others are doing. Spying is good for us.

    16. Re:Motivation by gtall · · Score: 0

      So all those investments the Russians made in Trump prior to the election through the 2000's had no bearing on getting any sort of return for their money.

    17. Re:Motivation by gtall · · Score: 1

      Yeltsin also is on the record as ruing the day he supported Putin.

    18. Re:Motivation by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

      Was it after or before he died?

    19. Re:Motivation by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Russia had no significant motivation to hack the midterm elections. They're not republicans. They supported Trump to a degree as a practical matter because they have a degree of hold over him.

      To the degree that they support Trump, they have a motive to keep Republicans in power. Republicans have shown that they'll protect Trump regardless of what he does.

      Further, the current incarnation of the Republican party has shown itself to be pro-authoritarianism, pro-isolationism, anti-trade, and anti-liberalism*. All of that is good for Putin.

      * To be clear, I'm not just saying they're not liberal, I'm saying they're opposed to Liberalism. Being pro-liberalism has, until recently, been a normal part of being an American conservative.

    20. Re:Motivation by Quantum+gravity · · Score: 1

      You are right that Russian purpose is not to support one party. Russia want to sow discord and distrust in democracy. Russian meddling the US 2016 presidential elections was partially motivated by Yeltsin's dislike of Clinton since Bill supported Yeltsin. And Putin has often accused the CIA of sabotaging Russian elections. A former US ambassador to Russia gave 50 million USD to civil society assistance in Russia 2012 which is talked about in Russia as evidence of US interference. Putin plays on popular anti-US sentiment and conspiracy theories.

      Russia has been meddling in elections since 2004 in up to 27 nations. Here are some examples

      1. France 2017 presidential elections
      2. Mexican 2018 presidential election
      3. Austria 2017 elections, where far-right Putin supported Freedom Party got in
      4. German 2017 elections, with interference reminiscent of Russian interference in the US elections
      5. UK 2107 and probably 2015 elections
    21. Re:Motivation by Quantum+gravity · · Score: 1

      Yeltsin's dislike => Putin's dislike

    22. Re:Motivation by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      There is no way he could actually be in any way anti-democratic(that is anti-US), those corrupt US politicians just used Putin as a fall guy for their failure to execute the decision to make Hilary the President.

      LOL! Right, because Putin's "70 at 70" re-election objective doesn't exist and it was a totally fair election with no ballot stuffing at all. What planet are you from?

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    23. Re:Motivation by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

      There is no need for ballot stuffing. Any elections of such scale are merely publicity circus, and this applies to all countries, not only Russia. People don't have enough information on who to vote for, and have no say over which choices end up in ballots in the first place. Media decide what information they will have and consequently how will they vote and pretty much all media in Russia is US-controlled or -influenced.

    24. Re:Motivation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you actually read any of those "leaked" emails?

      Democrats "co-ordinating" with the media means feeding them stories and giving them tips. Who doesn't know everyone does that?

      Who doesn't make lists of potential friends among the media?

      And to your third "leak", or home video as we used to call it - good grief, so the journalist is an asshole. What's that supposed to prove?

      Trump played the media like a cheap kazoo. The depressing part is - he's still doing it today, and the media shows no sign of wising up. Look at the "redefining sexes" brouhaha: a quiet policy document gets blown into a huge issue that reminds Trump voters of everything they hate about Democrats, just a couple of weeks before the midterms. Trump himself didn't have to say a word - the media gave him all the publicity he wanted, absolutely gratis.

    25. Re:Motivation by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      pretty much all media in Russia is US-controlled or -influenced.

      LOL! Yeah, that's why reporters that a critical of Putin keep "falling" out of windows. A more likely scenario is that Putin is a brutal authoritarian who chafes at the prospect of exposure.

      There is no need for ballot stuffing. Any elections of such scale are merely publicity circus, and this applies to all countries, not only Russia. People don't have enough information on who to vote for, and have no say over which choices end up in ballots in the first place.

      The US has primaries which decide who's on the ballot. Don't confuse the US with Russia where Putin runs disinformation campaigns to keep people off the ballot.

      Sure, there is a segment of the US population who has been susceptible to disinformation from dishonest "news" outlets which is why we need better laws to keep the news truthful. Currently efforts to pass such laws are being blocked by the party that benefits from these disinformation efforts.

      However, to say all people are being disinformed is just stupid because there are so many separate efforts by people to get real information out to the public that it could never really be stopped in even a slightly free nation. This is why Putin's ballot stuffing is needed, to suppress those who voted for another candidate as their efforts would inspire more people to take part in democracy.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    26. Re:Motivation by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      The rule of law is very important and is something we should all agree on. That's exactly why the investigation into Russian interference in 2016 needs to be protected.

      Uh huh... Please, pull the other one..

      Hillary won the popular vote which nullifies any sway the superdelegates had.

      Without paper ballots (or at least a paper trail), you won't ever get me to believe that.

      Do note that party reforms have stripped superdelegates of their power

      LOL Totally superficial. They just can't vote in the first round. But really, there's no such thing as superdelegate 'reform'. They have to be abolished completely.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    27. Re:Motivation by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

      Maybe there's a real effort but you don't participate in it definitely.

    28. Re:Motivation by johnsie · · Score: 1

      Russia would benefit from an ineffective/weak US government. Divide and conquer is what they require. Either that or make the US alienate allies by electing a hyper-nationalist reality tv star like trump.

    29. Re: Motivation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Russian people are on record rueing the day the supported Yeltsin in power.

    30. Re:Motivation by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      You really believe all that? That's funny...

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    31. Re:Motivation by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Don't confuse the US with Russia where Putin runs disinformation campaigns to keep people off the ballot.

      *cough* DNC

      we need better laws to keep the news truthful

      Excuse me? No, we need to keep all channels open, regardless what you think of their content.

      You're really on the warpath here, aren't you?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  14. Wait wait wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is 2016 and Obama is in control, he tells Putin to quit it yet the Russians influenced the election.

    Fast forward to 2018 and Trump is in power, and no influence from the Russians.

    So - either it never happened, or everyone is lying.

    Door #2 yep.

    1. Re:Wait wait wait by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1

      Or Door #3; the Russians did nothing productive other than manufacturing hate and discontent by lying to EVERYONE.

    2. Re: Wait wait wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean they even outdid Americans at their own game. Props to Putin!

  15. No. But why bother interfering? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    The US is divided like I wasn't since the civil war. Why bother investing any more effort? Every AAA-gunner will tell you, when the enemy plane is already coming down in flames you can stop shooting.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:No. But why bother interfering? by gtall · · Score: 1

      In the run up to WWII, the Republicans were adamant about not entering the war on the side of the Allies. The country was very much split at the time as to whether it was a "wise" thing to do. You must also have not lived through the 60's. Blacks in the U.S. were marching and whites were choosing sides. Wallace was campaigning on racism, much worse than Trump although I think Trump's is more insidious given the stealth methods he and the Republicans go to hide it. Nixon ran on a Southern strategy to energize white fear. Reagan and Bush Sr. were no better, Bush Sr. ran the Willie Horton ads just prior to the election.

      The U.S. has never been fully unified. Even after WWI and WWII, after blacks have fought and died for the U.S., Jim Crow refused to die. Elements of that are still with us as the Administration attempts to boot any one not a full citizen from fighting for the U.S. in a bid to gain citizenship.

    2. Re:No. But why bother interfering? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      There has always been division before elections. What's "new" is that the country doesn't find a common ground again after.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  16. Not just the far left by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    the entire American Intelligence community is beating this drum. There's no one outside the right wing that isn't saying that Russia interfered with our last election, and virtually everyone (again everyone outside the right wing) says the interference was largely successful.

    We're a weaker and more divided nation since the last election. That our President had an advert that multiple networks refused to run this last election speaks volumes to how how much of a mess things are right now.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Not just the far left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yet despite all these claims, the only "evidence" is accusations against a handful of facebook trolls. Remember when Mueller leveled an indictment against that company that didn't even exist at the time of the supposed "interference"? Remember how he panicked when they called his bluff and said they'd see him court, and he tried to delay since he had sweet fuck-all?

      The media and Hollywood are masters of making fringe opinions seem like they're mainstream. If you want to throw an accusation like "division" at anyone, go point your finger at them. Start thinking for yourself for a change, instead of just regurgitating their programming.

    2. Re: Not just the far left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's good you recognize network's programming. Now step out of yer American bubble programming.

    3. Re:Not just the far left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The FBI under Obama stated there were no ties between Russia and our President BEFORE the took place that started this scam.
      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-fbi-says-no-direct-ties-between-russia-donald-trumps-campaign/

      This "so-called Trump dossier" was investigated under Muller and it can not be verified.
      https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-russia-dossier-robert-mueller-investigation/

      All this crying about Russia hacking our election, well the fact is the way the election system is setup it can not be hacked especially the voting booth/machines that are not connected to a network in the first place (and they are never ever connected to the Internet, that is against Federal Law same as a Utility), plus let's not forget that the President was elected by "Electoral Vote" and you will never ever hack it.

      The problem is the Democrats refuse to accept they actually lost the election because they submitted to a evil woman that nobody in their right mind would vote for after all the things she did against the American people and the country. They backed ISIS in Libya's civil war for crying out loud.

      If they were worried about getting hacked they would have not switched from a paper ballots to machine ballots in the first place.

  17. They weren't deterred by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because there were no fucking "hacks" to begin with. At best a misinformation campaign by buying ads. Not a whole lot different than the misinformation campaigns that the US mass media commits without having to buy ads, at least if true there was some balance to the misinformation that the masses were fed.

  18. No proof by manu0601 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First we are said without proof that Russians made the 2016 presidential elections. Then we are told without proof that they were stopped from influencing the 2018 midterm elections.

    Alternative explanation: Russians try to influence all US elections with negligible impact, and democrats lost in 2016 because they chose the wrong candidate.

    1. Re:No proof by kenwd0elq · · Score: 2

      Your "alternative explanation" is almost certainly correct. The Russians excel at only two things; vodka and psyops. They spawn hate and discontent by lying to both parties, and trying to aggravate divisions. I'm sure they're deliriously happy with their recent successes.

    2. Re:No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only proof you need is wheither the Democrats win or lose. Lose, then the Russians messed with the election. If the democrats win, then we stopped them.

    3. Re:No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The NY Times has done more to " aggravate divisions" in America than any piddly Russian ad buy on Facebook...

    4. Re: No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Russians excel at putting humankind into space. It's self evident that you excel at bullshit.

    5. Re:No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, we were told they influenced the 2016 elections. We were told they didn't hack the 2018 midterms. They could have easily done the exact same thing in both. As parent said, they try to influence all US elections, but there's absolutely no reason to assume it was 'not to negligible impact'. Certainly no one's been able to say they didn't influence 2018. For all we know, splitting the house off was their goal to create government paralysis and more partisan divisions.

    6. Re:No proof by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It was only without proof if you shut your eyes, put your fingers in your ears and started singing "la la la la" as loudly as possible.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:No proof by gtall · · Score: 0

      BS. There is plenty of proof, you just choose to ignore it or claim the news organizations reporting it are "bias". I won't google it for you.

    8. Re:No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      List it.
      The only people who said they had proof, Crowdstrike, recanted and are unwilling to make that claim anymore when it looked like they would have to make the claim under oath in court.
      Muller indicted a Russian company that didn't exist at the time. Another company he indicted came to defend themselves and Muller REFUSED to let them see the evidence against them (is that how court works? Your guilty but you can't see evidence to defend yourself)
      Muller then indicted Russian individuals (learning from his indicting company mistake) and Putin said he would turn them over if he saw proof they had done it, Muller once again REFUSED.

      So from the current track record, the only people who said they have proof so far changed their stance when faced with legal consequences for lying under oath. Muller has yet to show a single shred of evidence yet despite indicting multiple people, who have come to defend themselves.

      You seem to be the idiot making stuff up.

    9. Re:No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This time the democrats are just stuffing the boxes and cheating properly... See boward county.... again.

    10. Re:No proof by nine-times · · Score: 1

      The Democrats choosing the wrong candidate and Russians having an impact are not mutually exclusive. It could be (and is likely the case) that the Russians had an impact, but it was a relatively small impact, only swaying a few percent of the vote.

      However, they'd really only have to sway a small percentage of the vote-- a few thousand out of over 120 million-- to change the outcome of the election. Given the numbers at play, it's almost certain that the outcome would be different if not for Russian interference.

      But then you could say the same about a bunch of stuff. The outcome would probably have been different if Comey hadn't announced reopening the investigation right before the election. The outcome might have been different if Clinton hadn't given her "basket of deplorables" speech. At a certain point, we start going down the rabbit hole of talking about the butterfly effect, and it becomes unclear what we're arguing about.

      Let's posit that they didn't succeed in having an effect on the 2016 election. Does that mean that we shouldn't try to stop them from trying again in the future? Does that mean we shouldn't investigate the spies who broke various laws in an attempt to violate our elections and undermine our government?

    11. Re:No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The FOX has done more to " aggravate divisions" in America than any piddly Russian ad buy on Facebook...

      Fixed that for you. Those guys have been taking lying to an art form for decades to the point I have family and friends who use them exclusively and actively ignore facts that disagree with them because Fox "News" and News Commentators tell them differently or give them crafted half truths devoid of important context to elude to a lie.

      Look how many of them still think Trump didn't fire Comey over Russia even though Trump is on camera admitting.
      Look how many think Trump will drain the swamp when he even admitted, again on camera, on his Thank You Tour after winning he never meant it.

      Look at how many think cutting taxes on the rich creates jobs when all data says otherwise or that living wages kills jobs against the data.
      Look at how many think Medicare for All would bankrupt us and will gladly mention the 32 trillion dollar estimate but not realize that that is still cheaper than what it replaces and keep talking about Death Panels trying to go against it when Insurance companies are Death Panels themselves with a history of reinforcing that fact.

      Sorry, but to point out the NY Times and not Fox as an example is about like trying to point to the guy who hit and killed a single person for murder but ignoring the guy who shot up a church, school, public event and killed dozens to hundreds. The difference in severity is just that big between the two with Fox being the worst offender BY FAR on TV.

    12. Re:No proof by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      It was only without proof if you shut your eyes, put your fingers in your ears and started singing "la la la la" as loudly as possible.

      And here you are, like clockwork, making sure that you toss out some lazy ad hominem at the person who said that, and providing exactly zero evidence. Because there is none.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    13. Re:No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, there is none. A few hundred thousand comments or $1M in ads is not even 1% of the total ad spend during 2016 or the total communications between people on Facebook during that election and would be totally drowned out in the information flood.

      You are a lazy liar.

    14. Re:No proof by johnsie · · Score: 1

      Twitter, Reddit and Facebook all admit having Russian trolls abusing their sites and advertising tools. Literally thousands of fake accounts. A simple Google search would have disclosed that. But hey, if your head is still stuck up your ass then you probably wont be able to read those company statements. No proof, other than the social media sites actually admitting it.

    15. Re:No proof by johnsie · · Score: 1

      Of course that depends completely on how effective those posts and ads were. Once upon a time there was a man called psy who posted a single music video on Youtube. Since then he's had 3,236,477,105 views. The whole thing with the Russian trolling was that genuine Americans were fooled into liking and sharing, making them go viral.

    16. Re:No proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First we are said without proof that Russians made the 2016 presidential elections. Then we are told without proof that they were stopped from influencing the 2018 midterm elections.

      Alternative explanation: Russians try to influence all US elections with negligible impact, and democrats lost in 2016 because they chose the wrong candidate.

      Um, someone orange was saying it before votes even were cast . . . but then it came out in his favor.

      I think the motivation in 2016 was to give Hillary a good shaking, but they underestimated our potential for screwing ourselves over. Now they're perceiving the US as weak, but it's in a completely different way, so I think their long-term gameplan has changed.

      I think "spreading chaos" has been the intent for some time . . . they just got what they asked for.

  19. HAAHAHHAHAAHHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously? The super Russians capable of giving Trump the White House just magically stop hacking US at the same time Democrats won some seats?

    SERIOUSLY?!

    Whatever you guys are smoking, good lord, give me a taste. Because your credibility has gone from zero to negative.

    1. Re:HAAHAHHAHAAHHA by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1

      Super Russians? Who managed to sink the only floating drydock capable of refurbishing their decrepit and corroding "aircraft carrier", the Kuznetsov? Well, at least the American plot to sink the Kuznetsov when they scuttled the floating drydock didn't ENTIRELY succeed. THOSE "super Russians"?

      The Russians never hacked the election; they just told Hillary that they HAD, after she lost. The only thing the Russians have ever done well was vodka and psychological warfare. And you, you abysmal AC, are either one of them or a dupe.

    2. Re:HAAHAHHAHAAHHA by gtall · · Score: 1

      What the fuck does a dry dock have to do with elections? You spent too much time under a crystal observing the interconnection of all things.

    3. Re: HAAHAHHAHAAHHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes Adolf, "Untermenschen".

  20. THIS election is perfectly valid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even though 4 states are about to see their results overturned as Democrat majority precincts continue to mysteriously find uncounted ballot days after the election and in enough numbers to overturn the counts.

    Or in Florida where Broward County ignored a court order to allow parties from both sides to see the current counts (which are also changing results)

    Naaah - THIS time the elections and results are perfectly accurate and valid and you will accept them citizen.

    1. Re:THIS election is perfectly valid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can almost set your watch by it. Close election? The dems will "find" some extra boxes of ballots which have a far more dem-slanted vote count than any other source of votes that came in. But oh no, it's not suspicious in the least, don't ask any questions or look into it, because that's racist! Instead, just take our word for it that the gop is gerrymandering and suppressing voters.

  21. No Election Manipulation, Just Spreading Disconent by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure that Russia - which has never abandoned their goal to rebuild the Soviet Union - has no particular interest in any candidate, but desires to cause the maximum in hate, discontent. and confusion. They don't even have to DO anything; just CLAIM that they did.

    And members of both parties, but the Democrats especially, are digging as deep a hole as they can. They think that they can make partisan gains by destroying the OTHER party more than they are damaging their own.

  22. I'm sure the shift in policy by Idimmu+Xul · · Score: 1

    stopped agents entrenched in the USA from renting out VMs and dedicated servers to tunnel attacks through locally.

    The same policies probably acted as a much better IDS too, stopped payloads in their tracks as they brushed up against the small print getting routed to /dev/null

    --
    The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
  23. Russia by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Was super expert last time but not expert this time?
    Time to look for another cyber story?

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  24. nope, not 'deterred'.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they can just get in from the inside now... it's easier that way.

  25. As much as trump pisses me off, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I appreciate that we finally have someone who pushes back.

  26. All we have to fear ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

    ... is America itself.

    I'm a 72 year old retired IT guy and it's all I can do to minimize my goddam footprint on this goddam Internet.

    I'm not afraid of obvious threats. What scares me is the boiling frog.

    Advertisers are the water and we are the frogs.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:All we have to fear ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a 72 year old retired IT guy

      I have a 10 year experience with Java in 1998.

    2. Re:All we have to fear ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1Informative
      This.
      (No modding points, sorry)

    3. Re:All we have to fear ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      +1 Courtesy

      Thank you.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    4. Re:All we have to fear ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I have a 6 year experience with BASICA in 1978.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    5. Re:All we have to fear ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, of course, Chris. Tell us more.

    6. Re:All we have to fear ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      OK.

      I got my first computer, a Radio Shack TRS-80 in February 1978.

      Radio Shack had no clue as to what all it could do. The technology was so new, no one was aware of the versatility and possibilities and permutations a Z80 could deliver if manipulated.

      I wrote articles for 80-Microcomputing and Kilobaud magazines.

      That's how far back I go.

      I helped Mobil Oil bring in the first network. That was some major shit because it was a paradigm shift all the way down. I enjoyed the shit out of learning something so radical. The users saw the potential but peed down both legs at the disruption.

      That goddam network could stay up only about a day and a half. Reminded me of the scene in Ten Commandments when the crowd bitched, "We would be better off as slaves in Egypt!!!" or "Let's get rid of this fucking goddam network!!!."

      Mobil got a fractional T1 and tied Beaumont to Dallas to Reston and back. The first servers were 3Com. The boxes had no monitors or keyboards. The only way in was an OS/2 desktop connected by Ethernet.

      Riding above all that was a Unix box that could do everything that no other box could do.

      Then BBS and Compuserve emerged. Like Google of today, it was a saving grace for all things technical. AOL showed up and so did the kids. People wanted to see their typing show up in a room where there were a bunch of people, so mostly, it was, "Me, too." Prodigy was an anemic competitor to AOL.

      These were the dial-up days. Dial-up had a theoretical limit of 56kbs and a practical limit of 48kbs and we would brag if we got a solid 22kbs.

      We didn't realize that we were at the embryonic stage of social media. All of the "portals" had primitive banner ads and ads inserted into the conversational stream but is wasn't all that annoying and there wasn't much money involved.

      So, we had moved from stand alone computers to locally connected computers to wider area connected computers.

      --

      The Internet died on the day is was born, we just didn't know it yet. As we all rushed about chasing rabbit holes and clumps of people became regular visitors to the same sites, advertising agencies, working with Internet sites, informed businesses that, "we have your eyeballs right here."

      We're fucked and that gum is not gonna come off our tennis shoe.

      Advertising, as bad as it fucks us up, is negligible compared to the next revenue stream. This is a devastating one:

      The Internet companies who collect information for the advertisers discovered that THAT information was worth 1,000 times more than targeted ads.

      Now we have data prostitution. You and I are giving away a valuable commodity and asking nothing in return and the collectors are marking that shit way up.

      It gets worse.

      Government agencies that are prohibited from gathering data on its citizens can say, "OK. We didn't spy or tap or intercept. The citizen data we have, we got it off the shelf at a big box store that sells that shit to any one, be they foreign or domestic."

      Capitalism killed the Internet the day the Internet was born.

      Thanks for being a Chris mega fan.

      At another time, I'll discuss the security problems that are embedded in the DNA of the Internet.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  27. Re: Serious more efficient native answer... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You misunderstood my question (and I am not sure about DNS requiring drivers, but ok). You answered about third party DNS, my question was why not host a custom apk DNS recursor? Then anyone can use that without installing unsigned stuff on their machine, which is absolutely the correct move to take for anyone interested in not getting fucked by some random software.

    Doing that will make your name as a cyber security professional. Ranting about how people should install your questionable software will not.

  28. Trump didn't win this time by Jarwulf · · Score: 2

    So that means there was no interference. Just like nobody ever interfered with our elections in all of history and fake news didn't exist until 2016.

    1. Re:Trump didn't win this time by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 3, Informative

      2016 was the watershed year when the mainstream media finally dropped the mask and came out as full-throated political partisans. They openly supported the most corrupt candidate for President in American history. Their treatment of Trump was unprecedented in its hostility. The media live in an echo chamber where they think that they are loved and adored by the population. They believe they are the final authority on truth and that we, their grateful audience, should believe everything they tell us.

      "The Times completely missed the story, and misled its readers in the process." Source: New York Times.

      Wikileaks detailing how the Democrats are coordinating with the media. Organization after organization, CNN, McClatchy, Time, WSJ, the list goes on and on. How do any of these people still have jobs after being exposed like this?

      Look at all these respected journalists express surprise, dismay, and a total lack of understanding that Hillary lost. They even admit it: "I genuinely do not understand America."

      CBS's John Dickerson: Donald Trump Didn't Ruin the Press's Reputation, We Did That Ourselves

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Trump didn't win this time by serviscope_minor · · Score: 0

      2016 was the watershed year when the mainstream media finally dropped the mask and came out as full-throated political partisans. They openly supported the most corrupt candidate for President in American history.

      You must be talking about Fox News (the most popular mainstream media channel) supporting Trump. Though I think it's a bit of a stretch t osay they dropped the pretense in 2016, they've been wildly partisan for years.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:Trump didn't win this time by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      You neither addressed nor refuted any of my arguments or citations. You just used that favorite tool of the Left - whataboutism.

      Whataboutism is a propaganda technique first used by the Soviet Union, in its dealings with the Western world.[1] When Cold War criticisms were levelled at the Soviet Union, the response would be "What about..." followed by the naming of an event in the Western world.[2][3] It represents a case of tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy),[4] a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly refuting or disproving the opponent's initial argument.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    4. Re:Trump didn't win this time by serviscope_minor · · Score: 0

      You neither addressed nor refuted any of my arguments or citations.

      Yes I did: you keep referring to the "mainstream media" as some left biased thing completely ignoring Fox News as a right biased on and the most popular news channel.

      The mainstream media isn't biased against you. Some of it is, some of it is biased in your direction. But the persecution narrative is much better when that's not the case, so better keep forgetting about Fox.

      Whataboutism is a propaganda technique first used by the Soviet Union

      Well according to you, "whataboutism" is refuting one of your points with inconvenient facts.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    5. Re:Trump didn't win this time by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      you keep referring to the "mainstream media" as some left biased thing completely ignoring Fox News as a right biased on and the most popular news channel

      And YOU are carefully using a BS metric (comparing one cable outlet to other cable outlets and seeing that only a couple of them periodically get better ratings or larger audiences than FNC ... but pretending you're not aware that the number of cable outlets and broadcast outlets and print outlets and web properties that ALL passionately work for the other team wildly outnumber FNC and collectively have an enormously larger audience and impact). FNC is popular with the small portion of the overall media audience that it has because it is essentially the only outlet that bothers to in any way push back against the non-stop Dem-powered agenda and talking points of essentially the entire rest (and huge majority) of the media outlets. The mystery here is why you think anyone reading this is too dumb to understand that, or why you think that you'll score rhetorical points by pretending that you're so dumb you don't understand it. Who is YOUR audience that you think they're that dumb, or that you think you'll persuade them in to agreeing with you by pretending that you're that dumb? Baffling.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    6. Re:Trump didn't win this time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The media mostly supported the second-most corrupt candidate. The most corrupt candidate spent his time dissing the media.

    7. Re:Trump didn't win this time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FNC is popular with the small portion of the overall media audience that it has because it is essentially the only outlet that bothers to in any way push back against the non-stop Dem-powered agenda

      So you admit Faux "News" is biased. Then you try to claim F"N"C is popular with a small number of dumbasses who need to be told what to think. Why then does their propaganda hold 7 of the top 10 spots in total viewership? (Protip: Google "most watched political shows")

      You cry about a liberal agenda in the media, and then you turn around and watch F"N"C? You do realize that whole bias-in-the-media thing is also an F"N"C propaganda point, don't you?

      I can't imagine why you would watch that drivel, Shitcone. Perhaps that chamber has a nice echo to it?

    8. Re:Trump didn't win this time by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      So you admit Faux "News" is biased.

      No, I'm reminding you that the vast majority of the media is highly biased to the left and strongly support one party. You're calling Fox "biased" because they aren't following along.

      Then you try to claim F"N"C is popular with a small number of dumbasses who need to be told what to think.

      Quote where I said that. You have terrible reading comprehension skills.

      You cry about a liberal agenda in the media, and then you turn around and watch F"N"C?

      You have no idea what I watch. But please, continue to sling around your usual lazy, childish ad hominem in a lame attempt to avoid the subject matter. Thanks for being so consistent about it.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    9. Re:Trump didn't win this time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've given you a beat-down before, Shitcone. Stop trying to pretend you're not a Fox-Bot. You regurgitate every last bit of propaganda they feed you. Your head is so far up Tucker Carlson's ass that you forgot what color the sun is.

      Suck it up, buttercup. We're ripping your incompetent shitgibbon out of office.

  29. Beepski - Bopski - Boopski by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Beepski - Bopski - Boopski

  30. No: I do use DNS (despite you thinking I don't) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Why? They're inefficient & VULNERABLE as hell PLUS they're already out there - but there's no GUI hosts engine in Linux!

    NONE in Windows that do ALL that mine does (e.g. tld/gtld validity check (that also stops port filter rumor errors in hosts they can't do afaik) &/or HARDCODED FAVORITE that yes, resolve FASTER (file in Linux IS default 1st check & that IS hosts + Windows = same (all BSD IP stack derived after all)).

    * I long ago established 'security know-how' - lookup "HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP" on ANY search engine! Top ones = me.

    APK

    P.S.=> My ware's audited by Steven Burn of Malwarebytes (who hosts + recommends it https://forum.hosts-file.net/v...

    Only other person I've EVER let see my work to stop EFast Chrome malicious dopplegangers (trolls here THREATENED me they would make, right on /., IF I ever released it - too bad - someone MIGHT improve it otherwise)... apk

  31. Hey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We are tired of hearing about Russian interference and American elections.

    Signed, The Rest Of The World.

    1. Re: Hey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PS.: We stopped believing American bullshit decades ago.

  32. Best way to make Russians not pay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All you gota do is find Russian troops in Syria. Ask Russian government if their troops are in that location. They will say no. That is when you drop a 2 kiloton warhead in the middle of nowhere. Keep doing it until they stop lying.

    1. Re: Best way to make Russians not pay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everybody knows wher Al Tanf is. No need to send location, Russian Sarmat and Kalibr missile SMESH yor boys in Syria. Papa Putin gonna make yor boys humble, make them run back home in pieces.

  33. Code signing is a joke w/ PROOF... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Code signing is a joke https://www.helpnetsecurity.co... I do something BETTER https://it.slashdot.org/commen... even /.ers recognized as EXCELLENT (& can't be stolen + abused like code signing STUPIDITY).

    APK

    P.S.=> This post & my other ones https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... should put this & YOU to rest (away rather) easily https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... with facts... apk

    1. Re: Code signing is a joke w/ PROOF... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow the stupidity is strong with this one

  34. The curious incident of the dog in the night by Deep+Esophagus · · Score: 1
    Mr. Lake needs to go back and re-read his Sherlock Holmes. The dog that didn't bark in the night was an important clue leading to the identity of the killer, not an indication that nothing happened.

    Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): "Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?"
    Holmes: "To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time."
    Gregory: "The dog did nothing in the night-time."
    Holmes: "That was the curious incident.

  35. Re: No: I do use DNS (despite you thinking I don't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Again, you dodged the question. I am starting to think that you are insane and not actually someone to trust with the security of my personal machine, let alone my company systems.

  36. Re:IMPERSONATING me AGAIN? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ALL HAIL APK

    To hell with those who oppose you! They are all Luddite cows! Moooooooooo

    APK APK APK

  37. Educate yourself, moron... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: APK Hosts File Engine 3.0++ 64-bit for Linux/BSD h t t p : / / a p k . i t - m a t e . c o . u k / A P K H o s t s F i l e E n g i n e F o r L i n u x . z i p

    Yields more security/speed/reliability/anonymity vs. any 1 solution (99% of threats use hostnames vs. IP address most firewalls use) more efficiently/FASTER + NATIVELY 4 less!

    Vs. "Bolt on 'MoAr' illogic-logic" slowing u hosts speed u up 2 ways: Adblocks + Hardcode fav. sites u spend most time @ vs. competition loaded w/ security bugs (DNS/AntiVir) + overheads slowing u (messagepass 'souled-out' to advertisers easily detected & blocked addons + firewall filtering drivers) & their complexity leads to exploit!

    * ONLY 1 of its kind in GUI 4 Linux/BSD & supports port filters!

    APK

    P.S.=> Protects vs. all speculative execution exploits + scripts/trackers (faster vs. NoScript @ kernelmode level)/ads/DNS request tracking + redirect poisoned or downed DNS/botnets/malware/malcript/email malicious payloads... apk

  38. apk is the moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why did you sink to personal attacks? And why must people use hosts files instead of a nice DNS recursor? Perhaps it is because you have no fucking clue how anything works and so you learned early in your career what a hosts file is?

  39. I didn't post that: Impersonators did... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: It's probably YOU unidentifiable ac & you're done on code signing https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... & DNS vs. hosts https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...

    * I never EVER tried to "force hosts down anyone's throat' - up to you but YOU championed "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth" & I've "been there/done that" AGES ago as I showed you WITH proof.

    APK

    P.S.=> No, I KNOW that by now (after what's in those links) that YOU know very little vs. me - after all RESULTS are my friend (as well as /.ers LIKING/USING/PRAISE my work too s://search.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12826443&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=57555741 you've done BETTER? PROVE it (I suspect you can't & it's WHY you STALK ME by UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous posts probing me for WEAKNESS & finding NONE, lol))... apk

    1. Re: I didn't post that: Impersonators did... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I am trying to help you. What is stopping you from introducing a good DNS service instead of telling people to install shit?

  40. Foreign nations have infiltrated our media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    While CNN and Fox have USians fighting ourselves, China and Mexico are laughing their asses off.

    Your enemy is not the racist republican nor the communist libtard. It is the media, controlled by vested foreign interests that has you hating your fellow citizen. Republicans are not racist, nor are liberal lazy drug users living off the government. Hate those that want you to hate your fellow countrymen. Ask yourself who is to gain from division.

    Everytime you rage against those lazy liberals or those racist republican, China and Mexico gooble up your future.

    Dont be like the Native American that fought amongst themselves while the Europeans took over America. UNITE and fight with your fellow citizens to resist the foreign invaders.

    Its either that or teach your daughters to speak Chinese or Spanish so they can make a feeble living in a Mexican or Chinese brothel.

    1. Re:Foreign nations have infiltrated our media by gtall · · Score: 1

      "CNN and Fox" have viewerships in the low millions. The U.S. has over 300 million people. Find another strawman.

    2. Re:Foreign nations have infiltrated our media by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      While CNN and Fox have USians fighting ourselves, China and Mexico are laughing their asses off.

      Um... a bit perhaps but they also have their own problems. Mexico has a lot of domestic problems to contend with. And China, they've been doing very well, with careful state planning with very long term goals in mind except as it the problem with such systems, the recent not-quite-dictator decided he's actually rather be ruler for life.

      That's the blessing and curse of democracies: they're wildly inefficient. A directed dictatorship can be much more efficient with the right person in charge, but it can very efficiently dig itself into a deep hole when the person in charge simply wants to enrich themselves. Could go either way for China at this point.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re: Foreign nations have infiltrated our media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only 1 foreign nation has infiltrated your media, Israel.

  41. What else should they do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    .. when there's a racist fascist in the White House?

    1. Re:What else should they do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Vote in 2 more years?

  42. This will improve US cyber-security a ton by WaywardGeek · · Score: 1

    Because the only way to defend a network is to think like an attacker, and far better, be an attacker. Every time we PWN an adversary, someone will ask, "Would that have worked against us?" And the answer will be, "Yeah, they've PWNed us for years with that."

    --
    Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
  43. All retard APK's security measures are a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All of retard APK's security measures are a joke. Hosts is trivially circumvented since you can't block all hosts from a domain even ignoring all the undiscovered malware hosting domains. The retarded size check that you do with every function call. Your continually setting of permissions in users space on a file every half second. This ignores the bloat in your code as it took you over 14,000 lines to write a file aggregator.

  44. When you do BETTER than this? Talk... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you do BETTER than this? THEN talk https://search.slashdot.org/co... & that's only a TINY FRACTION of what I could put out vs. your 'talk' talker...

    * Your DNS bs SHOT DOWN IN FLAMES (tracking & security issues kill it) https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...

    (Code signing I did an even BETTER JOB @ BLOWING YOU AWAY chump, lol https://www.helpnetsecurity.co... )

    APK

    P.S.=> Get this thru your butthurt head - you're NOT in my league (& don't even TRY "advice me" until you SHOW you are), period - I don't take advice from INFERIOR talkers, only DOERS (see this, it'll do you good https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... w/ this "by analogy" as it's a HERO of mine in life (great person graced by God) https://www.youtube.com/watch?... & that's WHY, imHo, God does folks like Marcus Allen (they're out there))... apk

  45. No Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Democrats won the house so they don't nneed to blsme Russians or funny "misinformation" memes.
    Democracy and the Republic is a farce, hoping it's gotten rrid of soon!

  46. drop the propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    These are the publicly known US intelligence agencies:
    Twenty-Fifth Air Force
    Army Intelligence and Security Command
    Central Intelligence Agency
    Coast Guard Intelligence
    Defense Intelligence Agency
    Dept of Energy Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence
    Homeland Security Department Office of Intelligence and Analysis
    State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research
    Treasury Department Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence
    Drug Enforcement Administration Office of National Security Intelligence
    Federal Bureau of Investigation Intelligence Branch
    Marine Corps Intelligence Activity
    National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
    National Reconnaissance Office
    National Security Agency
    Office of Naval Intelligence

    Just how many of these were actually investigating "Russian Hacking" of Hillary's e-mail servers, John Podesta's Gmail account, or Russian clickbait ads on Facebook???

    Here's the answer: NONE. John Brennan (the actual communist that Barack Obama made into the head of the CIA) and his pals Clapper and Comey were all deeply anti-Trump and fully comitted to getting Hillary elected (and their continued job security) and THEY started speading the word that "all seventeen intelligence agencies agreed". In testimony under oath before congress over a year ago, however, Comey admitted that what really happened was that non of those agencies dissented from the claim made by these three POLITICAL APPOINTEES.

    The NRO spends its time on watching other countries with spy satellites. Naval intelligence spends its resources watching the Russian and Chinese navies. Coast Guard intel spends its resources watching for seaborne drug and human smiggling activities. Treasury intel watches for international currency fraud activity (like North Korea counterfirring US currency), and so forth. All those agencies are NOT wasting time watching Facebook and anybody claiming they are is doing the same thing as Trump when he says he has "the biggest brain" (political hyperbole and carnival barking).

  47. There's really no need for farther intrusions ... by LostMonk · · Score: 1

    The Russians have no need for farther intrusions. They successfully installed their trojan horse in 2016 and it's been working brilliantly obstructing, jamming, overturning and breaking administration systems ever since.

  48. follow the money by Tom · · Score: 1

    The list of people interested in the election results is very, very long. Russia certainly is on that list somewhere, but most likely not near the top. There are many others more interested and more motivated to play around.

    Russians can be assumed to not be totally stupid. As such they would understand how much theatre US politics is and how little it actually matters who sits in what chair, a few special chairs exempted. Too many decisions are made behind the scenes anyways, but non-elected officials. Too many decisions are influenced by money and lobbyists.

    If I were tasked with influencing politics in Washington, hacking an election would be among the last things on my mind. Buying out or planting my people in some of the large lobbying organisations would be much, much higher. And bribing politicians with pictures of that whore they met, or that gay adventure they had would be far above buying Facebook ads.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  49. I'm shocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The GOP administration continues to claim that millions of illegal immigrants voted in 2016 without any evidence to back up the claim

    The GOP administration continues to claim that millions of Democrats voted multiple times in 2016 without any evidence to back up the claim

    The GOP administration continues to claim that dead large numbers of dead people voted in 2016 without any evidence to back up the claim

    Why would we trust anything they say about this or any other election?

  50. Has it ever really happened? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Were cyber adversaries actually deterred from infiltrating voter databases and changing election results...?"

    Is there any proof of that ever actually happening? I know there have been some stories that machines were hack-able, or they were hacked at for demonstration purposes at cons, but is there any instances where it was shown that they were hacked "in the wild" and that hack was anywhere near effecting the results of an election? I have little doubt that the odd machine here and there has been hacked in the past, but widespread hacking would likely leave one heck of a lot of proof. The manipulation that does seem to have occurred is that of trying to influence the voters using false and deceptive viral campaigns, this is done both domestically (birther "controversy", "fact" that schoolkids are in more danger than soldiers in warzones, etc) and internationally (hacking the DNC servers for dirt).

  51. Huh? Did you even bother to google by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    See here. Heck, the wikipedia artcile has tons of sources.

    And if you think a national election where the winning candidate lost the popular vote by 3 million and won the electoral collect by about 100,000 votes wasn't impacted by a wide scale campaign from an ex-KGB guy who specialized in information warfare, well, I don't even know if I should call that naive. There needs to be a stronger word for it. Perhaps something German?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Huh? Did you even bother to google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just looked at https://medium.com/@ushadrons/this-space-is-a-repository-for-content-from-the-russian-social-media-account-americafirst-a4081efeb761

      And all I can say: More power to them, being Russia or not.

      Same stuff you can find on RT.COM: Th effing truth in the face of the crazy lies straight out of NY and London Money Districts.

  52. Impeach! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Impeach that whiny little bitch!!!!

  53. We didn't defend ourselves by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    because nobody expected Trump to win except 538 and a few folks on the far left sounding the gone (notably Secular Talk on Youtube) because of how pissed off the working class was.

    Trump was a failed business man (albeit a successful actor). This came out in numerous lawsuits, notably when he sued a journalist who (rightly as it turned out) pointed out that Trump wasn't a billionaire. He had a mountain of lawsuits against him and had made a career of using his brand to sell cheap merchandise and defraud people with his phony school. He had a raft of sex scandals and was running with the party of family values. Finally he had decades of mob ties he wouldn't want drugged out into the light and was likely to run a self destructive campaign.

    Trump won because the Dems ignored the working class (same reason Brexit passed). Hilary bought into the "Blue Wall". Meanwhile Trump ran as a left wing populist. That said, the election was close. Damn close. The Dems ignored that. The Russians didn't. The watched the polls and threw in for Trump. It's likely they were a deciding factor.

    Don't get me wrong, getting a president as bad as Trump is a total and complete breakdown of this country's systems. But that wasn't lost on the Russians. This time around folks are taking that shit seriously.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  54. Re:There's really no need for farther intrusions . by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    Oh, please. Just like YOU and everyone else, the Russians thought that the Clintons would be returning to power. Their entire motivation was to stir the pot and create an angry cultural/media landscape to diminish the effectiveness of the incoming Hillary administration. This is their playbook in countries all around the world, and has been since Soviet days. They didn't start spending a handful of cash more seriously until AFTER the election was over, when they did some immediate hard changes in their tone and direction ... because they were just as shocked that the Clintons they actually wanted (weakly) in power lost despite all of the structural, financial, and media advantages they assumed - just like you and everyone else - would be unstoppable. Your TDS is preventing you from any sort of rational processing of events.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  55. Cambridge Analytica and the Obama campaign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Were not Russian trolls. It was anybody who could access the metadata within Facebook of who was connected to whom. That was the atomic bomb of information campaigning. And take note of when it was bad all of a sudden - when it was against Democrats.

  56. No, comrades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We got exactly what we wanted.

  57. its obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if your side (in whatever) loses, the other side cheated.
    if your side wins, it was an honest competition.

    hasn't it always been that way among those who can't handle the results? those who are too weak to be a fair sport?

    --XYZZY--

  58. Shhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't wake them up from their NY-programmed dream of Russian Untermensch 2.0.

    The more they consider Russia some sort of Nigeria, the better for Russia and a less unipolar world.

  59. Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Little guys will be sent to the slammer for a decade, if they send a Top Secret email over their private account.

    You say it should have ZERO consequences if the person in question is member of the Clinton dynasty and in hock to Soros, Rothschild and Goldmann-Sachs.

    This rottenness has been voted against.

    Now look at these supervillian Russki Messages:

    https://medium.com/@ushadrons/this-space-is-a-repository-for-content-from-the-russian-social-media-account-americafirst-a4081efeb761

    (Funny how common sense has become "divisive". The logic of Uljanov and his relatives, who now inhabit NY)

  60. Facts I used too much for you? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Obviously yes, as CODE SIGNING gets STOLEN & ABUSED in malware https://www.helpnetsecurity.co... period - you lose.

    APK

    P.S.=> My method https://it.slashdot.org/commen... CAN'T be stolen & abused thus - gosh I wonder - which is the MORE SECURE METHOD? apk

  61. Real SECURITY PROS & more disagree w/ you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "classic Windows hosts trick to block the Coinhive or Crypto-Loot domains" - https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/a-new-player-joins-coinhive-on-the-browser-cryptojacking-scene/ - BLEEPING COMPUTER

    ZD NET http://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-use-a-hosts-file-to-improve-your-internet-experience/ "Hosts files really shine by letting you block ads, spyware sites, malware sites, & tracking sites"

    SANS ("A related approach to the DNS issue is to create a hosts file on each system that sends requests for spyware to some place else" hosts by myself & RAMU right @ START of "malware explosion" mid 2005 on) https://isc.sans.edu/forums/di...

    Aryeh Goretsky/ESET/NOD32: hosts = good security https://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=7442373&amp.cid=49747129/

    Oliver Day (SYMANTEC/SECURITYFOCUS) http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491/

    Spybot S&D uses hosts.

    APK

    P.S.=> Malwarebytes' hpHosts hosts & RECOMMENDS my program forum.hosts-file.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4290

  62. MoneyShit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are essentially saying that the people should vote for the interests of the 1% elitists who run finance and the large corporations. They should vote for the woman who helps Google to buy Motorola, extract the patents and ship all the Moto jobs to China.

    Thank god the American Republic works as designed and corrects this Gigantomanic shite.

  63. REAL SECURITY RESULTS disagree w/ you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It's working: Neville... it's working!" See subject & results from the past 2-3 months https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... & https://it.slashdot.org/commen... + https://it.slashdot.org/commen... + https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://search.slashdot.org/co... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... that's only recently while I've been on Linux (few months now only) & 100's of times vs. MANY other botnets/malwares etc. in the past circa 2006-early 2018 while I was on Windows: CONCRETE VISIBLE UNDENIABLE REALITY (see those links as proof).

    P.S.=> ... & that's ONLY what /. reported on (there are FAR more)... apk

  64. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just look at

    https://medium.com/@ushadrons/this-space-is-a-repository-for-content-from-the-russian-social-media-account-americafirst-a4081efeb761

    If it is actually from Russia, they do every human a great service. Because all they do is sponsor common sense as opposed to the rabid Marxist craziness of "we do not need borders, just make our country the third world" and "Mohammedists are just like us".

    Aussming for one second Russia tipped the scale for Trump - then they also tipped the scale for the continued existence of the United States instead of a One World, One Nation, Third World Communist-Mohammedist Dystopia.

  65. Re: The simple answer: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Russians are at bay and the Dems can return to their usual election stealing practices. Good, business as usual.

  66. Re: The simple answer: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly! Bullshit is today's obvious big seller! People that vote for democrats OR republicans are assholes! And they're fucking up the world for the rest of us! How do we protect ourselves?!

  67. IMPERSONATING me AGAIN? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Hope you're RIGHT (considering I'm only sure hosts stop portsmash vs. Spectre/Meltdown) https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

    I pity c6gunner caught impersonating me (his name's the submitter signing "APK") https://linux.slashdot.org/com...

    * He tried to INSULT me & so I made him a COMPLETELY FAIR CHALLENGE he couldn't meet or beat by showing me he's done better work in the past prior to his impersonating me there.

    (You shouldn't throw stones when you live in a glass house boys - especially vs. me: RIGHT, ZIP? https://developers.slashdot.or... )

    APK

    P.S.=> Hosts stop portsmash (by blocking download sources of its mailcious exes doing it) https://it.slashdot.org/commen... not Spectre/Meltdown AFAIK @ least - & YOU FAIL THIS PORTFILTERING TEST liar https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... (my program won't allow that error) so cut your lies as you IMPERSONATE me you pitiful loser... apk

  68. Serious more efficient native answer... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DNS requires larger rules tables & dns wildcards CAN cause false positives & DNS = moving parts for exploit (kaminsky redirect poisoning flaw OR DNSChanger) + uses more resources (has drivers iirc hosts don't require as the IP stack itself uses hosts as a built-in filter - hosts even have THAT over firewalls (require layered filtering driver) + has complexity that often LEADS to EXPLOITATION.

    * More "moving parts" != GOOD engineering.

    APK

    P.S.=> There's a patch for DNS - 99% of ISP DNS don't use it!

    You don't think I don't use DNS - I DO (OpenDNS as a defense in depth SUPPLEMENT to hosts & they ARE patched vs. kaminsky + filter vs. threats)!

    I know WHERE I spend most time & I resolve those places faster LOCALLY via hosts by keeping my 100 fav sites @ TOP of hosts resolving FASTER from local RAM as kernelmode diskcaching subsystems come in & it AVOIDS DNS REQUEST TRACKING LOGS TOO (bonus/anonymity) - & CHINA COPIED THIS FROM ME https://theregister.co.uk/2017...

  69. Re: The simple answer: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In other countries? Is that a joke? You mean like how most of the planet (albeit mostly third world shitholes) is run by non-Caucasians.

    You are either too funn for me to understand or too stupid.

  70. Why bother? by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

    Do you bother kneecapping someone whose head you just blew off?

  71. Put another way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... how often do you beat your wife?