Top-Secret NSA Report Details Russian Hacking Effort Days Before 2016 Election

[Miles Archer]

TOP-SECRET NSA REPORT DETAILS RUSSIAN HACKING EFFORT DAYS BEFORE 2016 ELECTION

https://theintercept.com/2017/06/05/top-secret-nsa-report-details-russian-hacking-effort-days-before-2016-election/

RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE executed a cyberattack on at least one U.S. voting software supplier and sent spear-phishing emails to more than 100 local election officials just days before last November’s presidential election, according to a highly classified intelligence report obtained by The Intercept.

The top-secret National Security Agency document, which was provided anonymously to The Intercept and independently authenticated, analyzes intelligence very recently acquired by the agency about a months-long Russian intelligence cyber effort against elements of the U.S. election and voting infrastructure. The report, dated May 5, 2017, is the most detailed U.S. government account of Russian interference in the election that has yet come to light.

While the document provides a rare window into the NSA’s understanding of the mechanics of Russian hacking, it does not show the underlying “raw” intelligence on which the analysis is based. A U.S. intelligence officer who declined to be identified cautioned against drawing too big a conclusion from the document because a single analysis is not necessarily definitive.



The report indicates that Russian hacking may have penetrated further into U.S. voting systems than was previously understood. It states unequivocally in its summary statement that it was Russian military intelligence, specifically the Russian General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate, or GRU, that conducted the cyber attacks described in the document:

[dalton99a]

1. Kick.

[gademocrat7]

2. K&R

[Eyeball_Kid]

3. Let's see if the MSM picks this up. Big story.

[democrank]

4. K & R

[spanone]

5. K&R...

[still_one]

6. That is interesting that this is coming from the Intercept, a publication Greenwald is

involved with

It wasn't that long ago where greenwald was expressing skepticism regarding Russian involvement

I wonder if he has evolved?

[malaise]

7. Huge

Even Putin knows they know hence the interview

[janterry]

8. confirmed by CBS news

I put this in the other thread, too

Link to tweet

[Miles Archer]

10. Thank you for that...

...I had some doubts when posting it about the legitimacy (based on my lack of familiarity with the Intercept), but if CBS is confirming with it, that's great.

[janterry]

21. Makes me understand

all of chump's protestations. He kept saying, but I won and the Russians (or whomever) didn't influence my winning.


Well, even if they didn't hack the equipment successfully - Chump has been briefed on this.............so he was trying to defend himself against claims that the hacking 'made' him President.

[renate]

31. WOW

I remember when people who said "If Russia was hacking the DNC why wouldn't they hack voting systems" were called conspiracy theorists.

Those guys are good. I would assume that if they tried to hack the election infrastructure, they succeeded.

So if this really is true--not just that the attempt was made but that it succeeded--is there any way to overstate how huge it is that the democratic process of the United States of America, used to elect (who used to be) the most powerful person in the world, was hacked?

What happens now?

[janterry]

33. pbs newshour

talking about this, now

[renate]

35. thanks!

I'm happy it's on yet another MSM outlet.

I was worried that it was so huge and epic and unbelievable that it would be just another "oh that crazy 2016 election" story--and maybe it will end up that way--but at least the news is getting out there.

[beachbum bob]

9. Beware of fake news...that's how Dan Rather and his report on GWB was

Rendered useless....

[Bernardo de La Paz]

22. Yeah. I think that was the truth released but fake document so GWB escaped consequences. . . nt

[MrPurple]

40. I'm not sure if they've ever definitively established exactly what happened there

I think the consensus was that a Democrat forged a document which reported true things about Bush's air national guard issues, but I don't think it was ever definitively proven and there was a question of whether Rather was being set up for a take down. That's the style of a Karl Rove ploy, except that he probably wouldn't have put out material that was so close to the truth.

[Scurrilous]

11. K&R

[TheFrenchRazor]

12. and yet many here believe our voting machines are absolutely secure and tamper-proof. nt

[Alice11111]

15. Since choosing voting machines is left to the states, we

don't just have 1 problem to fix, but many. Really, only those w paper ballet backups, and a backup recount by hand, monitored by preselected people are secure.

[YCHDT]

32. its not the voting machines, its worse ... voter roles that are easy to hack

[Igel]

38. And yet the attack doesn't need to be successful.

And the voting machines aren't updated constantly from the desktop computers that employees use for email.

Now, if I could access politician bios on those e-slates that we use here, or the optical scanners we used elsewhere, you'd have a point. But the official canvassing computers aren't typically wired tightly to the internet or used for a lot of email. There's also no word on how successful the attacks were. It's not like getting jumped by somebody: even if you take out the assailant, you're still attacked. These attacks consist of emails that are, with very few and yet notable exceptions, innocuous.

Spear-phishing and spoof attacks are not to be taken lightly, but they're also about as dangerous as a box of rat poison sitting on a shelf. If you leave the poison alone, if you don't open it and shove the crap into your mouth, it's harmless. It doesn't jump off the shelf and ram itself down your throat. My personal email address hit the phishers' lists years ago. The current scam is that my Amazon order was successfully cancelled. "What? No, I wanted that turnip twaddler! I must immediately click on the link that says 'Amazon account' but which hovering over with my cursor says is actually Im-a-hacker-please-install-my-ransomware-you-dickhead.ru!!" I deleted perhaps a half dozen of that particular scam today. Then there's the google email that didn't get sent through or messages needing my immediate attention; there are various Fedex or UPS shipments that need me to click on a link that'll install malware on my computer. Etc. Oddly, I feel no compulsion to click on those. It really is like rat poison: You keep the crap out of the hands of children and pets, and it's perfectly safe to have on the shelf. Sadly, when it comes to computers, too many people in positions of authority, too many people who think they know better, fall under the category "children and pets".

[Blue_Tires]

13. How did Greenwald allow this to be printed?

He still maintains Russia didn't hack anyone and it's all Hillary sour grapes... Kinda late to be jumping on the bandwagon now, isn't it??

Answer me this: Why would someone who was legitimately anti-Trump/Russia go to the U.S. version of RussiaToday? Especially when there are thousands of other outlets he/she could have gone to? Outlets who have already been tearing down Kremlingate since January?

I'm gonna laugh my ass off if the source ends up being connected to Moscow, because the timing of this story reeks...

[freemay20]

36. help!

lol Sorry

Are you saying you think this may be a Russian fake news plant?

Trying to follow the implications of who did the leaking, to whom she leaked, timing, etc.

Thanks.

[Blue_Tires]

39. I'm just saying something doesn't smell right....

[LiberalLovinLug]

49. Because he is a journalist with integrity

Because there was a smoking gun to back up the story.

He never said Russia did NOT hack the American election. He only dared to issue warnings about American media jumping on the current hot story bandwagon, jumping over each other to get on the first fold. That we have to be careful to make sure we have the truth before it is published otherwise it can backfire, or be used to dismiss any new development. See: Dan Rather.

An excerpt of an example of this on an interview with Amy Goodman:

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/5/glenn_greenwald_mainstream_us_media_is

"With the story that I just talked about over the weekend of the—of how Putin had wanted to steal the heat from Vermonters to make them suffer in the winter, Brent Staples, who works for The New York Times editorial page, went on Twitter and said, "Our friend Putin has invaded the U.S. electric grid." And when that story collapsed and The Washington Post retracted it, he did something even worse: He just went and quietly deleted his tweet a day later, as though it never happened, and also failed to tell his 30,000 followers that what he had just told them the day before, that caused them to run around and share with all their friends on Facebook and Twitter that this has happened, was in fact a complete fiction."

[Blue_Tires]

52. Greenwald repeatedly said there was NO EVIDENCE RU meddled with election

and the whole thing was a Cold War 2.0 witch hunt to smokescreen the fact that HRC was the worst candidate EVER who ran the worst race EVER....

Go search his twitter feed, by all means... I'd do it myself but I'm blocked...

At least Staples deletes his tweets when they're exposed as bullshit, which is more than Greenwald ever fucking did... He blocked me for daring to point that out.

And I know it's been a slow week and you're just trying to wind me up with that "journalist of integrity" thing to see if I bite... Please, just stop -- I already shot that blimp down years ago... You know it and I know it. You do realize your "journalist of integrity" just hung his whistleblower source out to dry, right?

[LiberalLovinLug]

53. Sometimes I think we have gone so far from actual journalism that it is hard to take when we see it

Greenwald only stated that no direct evidence has ever come out that Russia was behind the DNC hacks. But that it is certainly possible. Do you have it? But if that happened, then the NSA would have known about it and would have proof. The NSA has not shared that proof. So either they are covering up for Trump, or they don't have it. (it may still come out)

I so admire real journalists that do not just hop on the bandwagon and actually ask unanswered questions that some gloss over. Now that there is a feeding frenzy on Russia and Putin by the popular networks, it is so easy to pile on and insinuate unproven (even if highly suspected) allegations as fact as many now in the MSM are doing. It is so important, especially after the Dan Rather debacle to be absolutely right first. That is all the Trumpublicans need, one story that is proven false in order to justify their whole platform and election win. And if it is the MSM that is guilty, they will have no leg to stand on and will whimper into the corner licking their wounds.

This kind of devoted adherence to scrutiny and follow up is what earned him the Pulitzer Prize. If a journalist is hated by some on the left and the right, you know he must be doing something right.

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/heres-the-public-evidence-russia-hacked-the-dnc-its-not-enough/

And no, he never said it is a "smokescreen the fact that HRC was the worst candidate EVER". That is your projection. And it is a totally different topic if she was the best candidate to go against Trump.

[Blue_Tires]

54. Thanks, but not playing tonight, sorry...

I'm short on time and I'm short on patience and we've already re-hashed this before, have we not? My previous statements and posts on this matter did not expire, nor have they been disproven by you or any other DUer...

I do wish you'd take my advice and dive into Greenwald's twitter feed history instead of linking to debunked Intercept pieces... Only there will you find the 'real' Glenn...

[LiberalLovinLug]

55. I'm not responding to your posts to change your mind

You are obviously quite set in your leanings.
It is just for anyone else that may be steered by such a baseless character assassination when there are so few real journalists out there not afraid to speak truth to power....and not concerned with readers that only want to hear all their own beliefs confirmed, from either the right or the left.
Have a nice day.

[Hortensis]

14. No surprise that they tried. Notably, though, our own

(and by that I mean Democratic Party and HRC-campaign-aligned) investigations did not reveal that this particular way of subverting the election might have succeeded.

[loyalsister]

42. There is no information on the direction

To assume this is about hurting Hilary based on this report is a mistake. It could have been random or intended to go against the GOP.

[Hortensis]

43. The Kremlin interfered with local races also via

social media mainly, and in those cases they also worked against Democratic Party candidates exclusively.

We have every reason to believe Putin's worked to remove the one party from power that is still principled, strong and functioning. The one that caused him severe problems under Obama and promised to winch the screws down on his ambition even more.

And that he tried to help transfer that power to the other party, the one too destroyed by corruption to adequately oppose him even without whatever hold he has on rump and others.

[loyalsister]

44. Who is "we"?

The NSA or people making assumptions here? The more progressives push this narrative, without strong smoking gun evidence, the more support 45's lies about voter fraud gets.

[orangecrush]

16. Kick

How much more do they need?

[AntiFascist]

17. K&R! n/t

[musette_sf]

18. K&R

[BadgerMom]

19. K/R

God forbid we should draw conclusions. It's only as plain as nose on my face. I am sick to death of cautionary statements. Effing take action, dammit! It's our democracy to lose.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

23. Move too fast and tRump will escape impeachment and remain Republican President. . . . nt

[bdamomma]

47. exactly

the congress didn't do crap when Bush was in and had started a war with Iraq, but this jerk we have now is dismantling the country and the Constitution and our planet, how much more evidence do they need.

[Amaryllis]

20. This is not new. Some was even in MSM before election:

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/story/news/2017/01/23/russians-suspected-hacking-local-dems/96965824/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/24/russians-suspected-hacking-wisconsin-dems/97023222/

http://crooksandliars.com/2017/01/according-declassified-report-russians

http://fortune.com/2016/10/01/hackers-targeted-election-systems/

http://abcnews.go.com/US/russian-hackers-targeted-half-states-voter-registration-systems/story?id=42435822

[mountain grammy]

34. I think this story is not related to your links.

This is a follow up from another thread. they arrested the leaker.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10141791935

[citizen blues]

24. PARTY BE DAMNED! NOT ONE SAID A DAMN THING!

The Republicans were not the only ones being briefed on this. Democrats were too, so Democrats own part of this as well. They were too worried about being accused of partisan politics to say anything, so instead, they stood by and watched the country they took an oath to defend be attacked.

DAMN PARTISAN POLITICS! This is an issue of NATIONAL SECURITY! Sitting SILENTLY on the sidelines with your thumb up your ass doesn't mean you are any less COMPLICIT! Every single one of the "Gang of 8" who received briefings about the hacking should be held accountable!

We've got A LOT of work ahead of us!

[sandensea]

28. Exactly.

These news, while welcome, are coming a good seven months late at least - and long after anyone can do anything about it.

[bdamomma]

46. we need to go to paper ballots

it's not like this is going away anytime soon. Repigs like to steal elections.

[Goodheart]

25. MSNBC - Greta Susteren is leading off with this story!

[Miles Archer]

26. Must be breaking her heart

Must be breaking a lot of hearts. Can't wait to see how this week plays out.

[YCHDT]

27. Yeah, and it looks like NSA has confirmed the leak !!!

[Goodheart]

29. Yep... the leaker has been arrested

[MFM008]

30. They got in

They got way in.
Trying now to discourage those leakers.
To late you bloated pig corpse.

[SunSeeker]

37. K & R for exposure.

[MrPurple]

41. The fact that leaker was arrested should give this story more legs

If the leaker hadn't been arrested, the MSM might not have picked up the story as quickly. I kind of wondered why they leaked it to only Greenwald and also not Washington Post/NY Times.

[Dopers_Greed]

48. Millennials' lack of trust for the "The Media"

So they pick their alternative sources that they trust.

The Far-Right goes for InfoWars and Breitbart.

"Progressives" (not DU, but a lot of my friends on social media) go for Greenwald and opinion blog posts likely made by Russians.

The leaker was likely a Greenwald fan.

[LiberalLovinLug]

50. I'm a DUer and I respect Greenwald a lot, and I'm sure I'm not the only one

The leeker trusted Greenwald's paper for its credibility and with the assurance that they wouldn't bury it. There is good reason to be suspicious of our MSM.

To compare Infowars and Brietbart to The Intercept is ridiculous. Or please source any stories on The Intercept that are 'fake news'.

[bdamomma]

45. K&R

crap, how much more evidence do they need. We got the facts!!!

[L. Coyote]

51. Nothing to see here, move along.

Reality Winner versus Reality Loser. Trump's Lies Revealed by Leak.