Trump's America

Government Report on Russian Cyberattacks and their motives

Features assessments from the FBI, CIA, and NSA.

Of note:

We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment.

CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.

Russia’s intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets associated with both major US political parties.

[SIZE=10pt]We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence (General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data [/SIZE]

obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.

[SIZE=10pt]Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of multiple US state or local electoral boards. [/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]DHS assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying.[/SIZE]
Click to expand...
Why it matters moving forward:

[SIZE=10pt]We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes. [/SIZE]
Click to expand...
I mean, hostile foreign powers are always going to want to meddle if they can. The fact that Russia had this large an effect via a simple phishing scheme is troublesome for our cybersecurity efforts and we should expect Russia will try to do the very same in four years to protect their puppet.

Fascinating reading for those interested in what happened. I'm braced for the wave of denialism from Trump allies.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dudeguyy said:
Government Report on Russian Cyberattacks and their motives

Features assessments from the FBI, CIA, and NSA.

Of note:

We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment.

CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.

Russia’s intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets associated with both major US political parties.

We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence (General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data

obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.

Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of multiple US state or local electoral boards. [SIZE=10pt]DHS assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying.[/SIZE]
Click to expand...
Why it matters moving forward:

[SIZE=10pt]We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes. [/SIZE]
Click to expand...
I mean, hostile foreign powers are always going to want to meddle if they can. The fact that Russia had this large an effect via a simple phishing scheme is troublesome for our cybersecurity efforts and we should expect Russia will try to do the very same in four years to protect their puppet.

Fascinating reading for those interested in what happened. I'm braced for the wave of denialism from Trump allies.
Click to expand...
I'm curious of your's and other's opinions on this Russian cyber attack and our election. I feel like I'm missing some important aspect of all the brouhaha. I just don't quite understand what profound effect this really has, other than of course we don't want the Russians meddling in our affairs. But, the way I see it, all they did was help make voters aware of certain truthful shortcomings of HRC and the Dem party. The key here to me is that all they did was release some information that may not have been made known otherwise. It kind of seems to me that people are flipping out because they discovered the truth. So it is clear, this is what I think in bullet points.

1- It is bad and shouldn't be tolerated that the Russians hacked anything in this country. We need to take steps to prevent similar occurrences in the future and we need to let Russia know, in no uncertain terms, that it is not okay.

2- It is particularly troubling that Russia felt the need to try to influence our election. But the fact they did it by simply making truths known to American voters makes it seem far less concerning to me.

3- Trump is a dbag for denying and or downplaying this Russian meddling. But he is a dbag about most everything so that is to be expected.

4- About the most disturbing thing I find about this is that Trump's reaction was to question the authenticity of our own intelligence agencies.

Am I missing something that I should be outraged about? It seems most people are up in arms and beside themselves about them "influencing" our election. Why exactly should I be extremely upset that information was released for public consumption? It's not like they tampered with vote counts or anything. You stated "The fact that Russia had this large an effect via a simple phishing scheme..." What do you mean by "large effect"?

 
By large effect, I simply mean Russian efforts largely controlled the narratives in the election because they pushed Wikileaks stuff and talking points that A) dominated the headlines in the media and B) were immediately picked up and run with by Trump.

FWIW, I think Podesta comes out like a chump in all of this for having fallen for a phishing scheme in the first place. I don't reckon that's different from most of our politicians, though - most of them are older folks who are probably rather novice in regards to cybersecurity.

I agree with all of your points, JJ. I'm particularly concerned about Trump's arrogance in talking down our intelligence officials - I'm more than a little worried that he's going to try to overhaul the agencies to try to silence dissent and turn them into more subservient organizations that he can bend to his whim. Shoot, reports say that he chased Woolsey, a former CIA director and one of the few broadly respected minds advising him, out of his team by essentially ignoring the guy. Let's just say I'm extremely concerned with the implications there.

What I think is most important is two fold: First, I think Putin, Assange, and Trump have cultivated an environment of false transparency with this whole ordeal. A curtain has selectively been peeled back on one party creating the illusion they're the only ones who operate like this. I'm unhappy about the implication that whatever hides behind door number 2 for the GOP is any better, because I don't think it is. I tend to think they're a lot more underhanded and sneaky in the way they operate, but the focus is currently on the Dems. Whether or not one thinks they deserve to be scrutinized is certainly up for debate. But right now I see a bunch of people running around feeling like crusaders for truth when they've been handed a very carefully contrived, controlled mountain of evidence that is devoid of the other side of the equation.

This spins off into my other concern: Russia is doing this merely to further their own ambitions, right? Reports say that they tried to hack the RNC but failed. But we don't know what they have and what they don't; we only know what they DID. So perhaps they did acquire information on the GOP or Trump and are just sitting on it. If they don't have any now, I guarantee you they'll try to get some soon. I'm worried about the implications if they do get dirt on Trump and affect his decision-making with it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dudeguyy said:
By large effect, I simply mean Russian efforts largely controlled the narratives in the election because they pushed Wikileaks stuff and talking points that A) dominated the headlines in the media and B) were immediately picked up and run with by Trump.

FWIW, I think Pedesta comes out like a chump in all of this for having fallen for a phishing scheme in the first place. I don't reckon that's different from most of our politicians, though - most of them are older folks who are probably rather novice in regards to cybersecurity.

I agree with all of your points, JJ. I'm particularly concerned about Trump's arrogance in talking down our intelligence officials - I'm more than a little worried that he's going to try to overhaul the agencies to try to silence dissent and turn them into more subservient organizations that he can bend to his whim. Shoot, reports say that he chased Woolsey, a former CIA director and one of the few broadly respected minds advising him, out of his team by essentially ignoring the guy. Let's just say I'm extremely concerned with the implications there.

What I think is most important is two fold: First, I think Putin, Assange, and Trump have cultivated an environment of false transparency with this whole ordeal. A curtain has selectively been peeled back on one party creating the illusion they're the only ones who operate like this. I'm unhappy about the implication that whatever hides behind door number 2 for the GOP is any better, because I don't think it is. I tend to think they're a lot more underhanded and sneaky in the way they operate, but the focus is currently on the Dems. Whether or not one thinks they deserve to be scrutinized is certainly up for debate. But right now I see a bunch of people running around feeling like crusaders for truth when they've been handed a very carefully contrived, controlled mountain of evidence that is devoid of the other side of the equation.

This spins off into my other concern: Russia is doing this merely to further their own ambitions, right? Reports say that they tried to hack the RNC but failed. But we don't know what they have and what they don't; we only know what they DID. So perhaps they did acquire information on the GOP or Trump and are just sitting on it. If they don't have any now, I guarantee you they'll try to get some soon. I'm worried about the implications if they do get dirt on Trump and affect his decision-making with it.
Click to expand...
I agree with all of this. Well stated.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Many many interesting things here. I'm sure Donnie will discredit it because it came from CNN, but I found their descriptions and details pretty precise and clear without any opinions coming through.

What I found most intriguing, is that this is what Reid wrote the letter about ... and that the FBI agent overseas that had the info shared with him went straight to McCain instead of any other route is telling I think. Not many that can be trusted to do the right thing right now.

 
NM11046 said:
Many many interesting things here. I'm sure Donnie will discredit it because it came from CNN, but I found their descriptions and details pretty precise and clear without any opinions coming through.

What I found most intriguing, is that this is what Reid wrote the letter about ... and that the FBI agent overseas that had the info shared with him went straight to McCain instead of any other route is telling I think. Not many that can be trusted to do the right thing right now.
Click to expand...
Apparently Comey thought it was appropriate to sit on THIS info while sending a letter on old Clinton emails from Weiner's laptop to Chaffetz, who may be the biggest partisan hack in Congress outside of Mitch McConnell.

I cannot put into words how monumentally stupid I think that was.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top