Microsoft: Iranian Hackers Targeted a 2020 Presidential Campaign (zdnet.com) 100
Microsoft disclosed today that Iranian state-sponsored hackers tried to hack into email accounts belonging to current and former US government officials, and members of a 2020 US presidential campaign. From a report: The attacks have taken place "in a 30-day period between August and September," Tom Burt, Corporate Vice President, Customer Security & Trust at Microsoft, said today. Microsoft's Threat Intelligence Center (MSTIC) linked the attacks to a group the company calls Phosphorous (other names are APT35, Charming Kitten, and the Ajax Security Team). The group has been linked to Iran's government in reports from multiple cyber-security vendors. Burt said the group operated in different stages. It first made more than 2,700 probes to identify consumer email accounts belonging to specific Microsoft customers. Once the group had a list of high-value targets, it went after 241 of those accounts, which included "accounts are associated with a U.S. presidential campaign, current and former US government officials, journalists covering global politics and prominent Iranians living outside Iran."
Open up the elections... (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe we just need to open up voting in the US elections to people all over the world so that they don't have to go through the hassle of hacking us or buying candidates anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
All the cool countries are doing it!!!
Re: (Score:1)
Hackers gonna Hack.
Is this news anymore?
Re: (Score:1)
TDS-R.
TDS-D describes those who have a strong irrational dislike of Donald Trump.
"All the Nazi Germans doing it!!" (Score:2)
"I'm literally too stupid to understand the ad-populum fallacy. So that must make it OK!"
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Maybe we just need to open up voting in the US elections to people all over the world so that they don't have to go through the hassle of hacking us or buying candidates anymore.
Wouldn't that kind of upset the Israelis? They are currently the only country allowed to openly mess with US elections.
Re: (Score:2)
Right...since when was recognizing a country's past bad behavior being a 'bigot'?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Posters here are consistently hating on Jewish people. Excuse me for not seeing his fucking bull shit as anything else.
Please stop conflating Benjamin Netanyahu's right wing Israeli governments with all Jews.
Re: (Score:2)
People are starting to realize that 109 countries is not a mere coincidence.
You cannot stop that.
racism is a disgrace upon those perpetrating it.
Can someone give me a list of currently known gods or deities that prescribe "hate"?
Re: (Score:2)
And whom to Americans vote for? Why the candidate with the best and most TV ads paid for by their "supporters".
Re: (Score:3)
And whom to Americans vote for? Why the candidate with the best and most TV ads paid for by their "supporters".
I'm an American , and I intentionally don't watch political advertisements because they are shite.
And if i accidentally watch one, (say at a friend or relatives house, or public space) i don't give it any weight.
Advertising is for cereal and cars, not public policy.
We have facts for that.
Re: (Score:2)
And whom to Americans vote for? Why the candidate with the best and most TV ads paid for by their "supporters".
We vote for who is tallest.
Re: (Score:2)
Yet another unfounded accusation concerning Jews. Make it trifecta and link them to Deep State and la Presidente Tweetie's fake news.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Yet another unfounded accusation concerning Jews. Make it trifecta and link them to Deep State and la Presidente Tweetie's fake news.
I think you'll find it is a well founded accusation of corruption against the Government of Israel, not all Israelis and certainly not all Jews. Please try to resist the temptation of conflating discussion of Benjamin Netanyahu's government's corrupt dealings in the US with hatred of all Jews.
Re: (Score:1)
Why not? We already have plenty of Mexicans voting.
Confirmation but not really news (Score:1)
Beyond the 2016 Russian Hoax, I'm sure there are many countries who play outside of their borders.
A modern national campaign better hire a good cyber security professional who can advise on passwords, data compartmentalization, encryption in transit, intrusion detection, etc.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
In a way, we can't blame people for not being informed - there's effort being made to misinform them and it's not everyone who has the spare time (or desk job) to have enough time to get informed.
Re: (Score:1)
At this point though, I feel like a lot of people probably have some stupid idea of only Russia has hackers that do anything to elections. Just because it's the only hacking that many seem to care about the origin of.
Ok, that's just downright untrue. President Trump has been on TV for days now calling for the UK, Australia, the Ukraine and now China to interfere in the 2020 elections by investigating his opponents and he seems to care very equally about all of these cries for help.
Re: (Score:2)
What he's doing is attempting to normalize using foreigners to influence U.S. elections. It makes him feel good.
Re: (Score:2)
What he's doing is attempting to normalize using foreigners to influence U.S. elections. It makes him feel good.
I think he's hoping it gets him out of this. (which will make him feel good)
His entire life he seems to have taken great personal satisfaction with fucking people over.
Re: (Score:2)
Biden isn't going to be Trump's opponent. If this had anything to do with the election more than a year away he would've waited until Biden got the nomination. This is about investigating foreign meddling in the 2016 election. I though you guys wanted that investigated?
Using your logic no candidate could ever be investigated for anything.
Re:Confirmation but not really news (Score:4, Insightful)
Investigations of candidates should not be suggested, or asked for, by the sitting President of the United States. That's a clear conflict of interest.
Even worse, the President should not be asking foreign adversaries to investigate their political rivals. What's to keep the foreign power from just fabricating evidence and handing it over in order to get something they want geopolitically?
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
The investigation was already underway. Who is ultimately in charge of the FBI/DOJ? That would be the President. Executive branch.
How many investigations into Trump did Obama launch? He unleashed the entire intelligence apparatus on him and his campaign. Are you upset about that at all?
Re:Confirmation but not really news (Score:5, Insightful)
How many investigations into Trump did Obama launch?
I confess my ignorance on that subject. Please do provide me with a comprehensive list.
Re: (Score:1)
Comprehensive? Well, that's difficult, since more keep getting discovered.
But so far, we have the fraudulent warrants used to spy on Carter Page (watch for the upcoming Horowitz report), asking the Ukraine to re-open an investigation into Paul Manafort (which has resulted in Ukrainian officials going to jail for "interfering with the US election"), the set-up and false accusations against George Papadopoulos by the FBI, and the set-up and absurd claims against Michael Flynn for breaking an unconstitutional
Re: (Score:3)
Punctuation and spacing, dear AC! They save eyes.
Also, a few second with an internet search engine could have answered all of your 'questions' (actually, revealed your lies, as you deliberately misrepresent and lie about the events and times these things took place).
The first Carter Page FISA warrant was in 2014. Then that investigation ended. Then ANOTHER round of FISA warrants were issued in 2016, after Page was involved in the Trump campaign, for an entirely different 'case'. And Obama was President
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
The investigation was already underway.
That's a lie.
And from your original post:
This is about investigating foreign meddling in the 2016 election.
Also a lie. The CloudStrike stuff is a deranged and well-debunked conspiracy theory.
Re: (Score:1)
CrowdStrike is the security firm that in collaboration with the FBI investigated hacks against the Democrats it in 2016, that were committed by Russia. Trump believes that because CrowdStrike didn't give the server to the FBI, somehow information is being withheld. It is a nonsense conspiracy t
Re:Confirmation but not really news (Score:4, Insightful)
The investigation was already underway. Who is ultimately in charge of the FBI/DOJ? That would be the President. Executive branch.
How many investigations into Trump did Obama launch? He unleashed the entire intelligence apparatus on him and his campaign. Are you upset about that at all?
Again, not going to allow pure unfiltered bullshit to permeate.
"Obama" did not "unleash" the entire intelligence apparatus on trump.
The intelligence community did that all on its on while following credible leads from our trusted allies. /whispers trump is a criminal (and i base that solely on the very words that have come out of his own mouth)
Put it away. And open your eyes.
Re: Confirmation but not really news (Score:2)
Well it's too bad we're stuck with ol Criminal Trumpypants. I wish Hillary, Bill and Obama could be our president together, since THEY NEVER DID ANYTHING SUSPUCIOUS.
Seth Rich *cough* Hatiain Children's Fund *cough* Midnight Ping Pong Parties *cough cough* Russian Uranium Deals *achoo* "Ohhh, 'hand over the secret email server', I thought you said delete everything and walk away Scot free. -Whoops McClinton
Re: (Score:1)
Well, in answer to your question, the answer is the US legal system.
But more simply, the US - including the President and the Attorney General - ask for foreign governments to cooperate with investigations all the time. They even sign treaties on exactly that subject.
When the supposed event took place in a foreign country, government-to-government cooperation is almost essential. And when it implicates senior foreign government officials or programs, as it did in the Ukraine, it takes high-level US govern
Re:Confirmation but not really news (Score:4, Informative)
Reporter: "Have you asked foreign leaders for any corruption investigations that don't involve your political opponents?"
Trump: "You know, we would have to look" (in other words: NO).
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/stat... [twitter.com]
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Everybody in the Establishment is his political opponent. Both parties. And they're pretty much all criminals. That's why he's so dangerous to them.
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody in the Establishment is his political opponent. Both parties. And they're pretty much all criminals. That's why he's so dangerous to them.
Trump calling the establishment criminals is like a trophy wife calling a hooker a gold digger.
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody in the Establishment is his political opponent. Both parties. And they're pretty much all criminals. That's why he's so dangerous to them.
Again wrong. if republicans were his enemy he'd already be long gone. He has committed crimes, and it has been investigated. The only reason his is not in prison is because the DOJ policy pertaining to charging a sitting president with a crime.
Fact is his enemy.
Re: (Score:2)
Reporter: "Have you asked foreign leaders for any corruption investigations that don't involve your political opponents?"
Trump: "You know, we would have to look" (in other words: NO).
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/stat... [twitter.com]
He's a criminal
Re: Confirmation but not really news (Score:2)
So, Trump makes non-secret phone calls, eh? Hmm.. next time he should go in the bathroom with a burner phone, doncha think?
Meanwhile check out what Newt Gingrich said back in 2016 when like 6 people trying to investigate Hilary mysteriously died just in August:
"We have these kind of scenes in there where you begin to realize that there are dangerous things going on in the world."
"I think part of what happens to all of us though is there is so much clutter, but it's all about Hillary and the emails," he sa
Re: (Score:2)
It was investigated. By Mueller, and the US intelligence community. The investigation resulted in the indictment of a bunch of Russians, because Russia did it. The President doesn't believe his own CIA and FBI, and also doesn't believe the results of an inquiry that he, bizarrely, also claims exonerates him.
Now he wants foreign governments to prove that the hacking was a Democratic/Ukrainian plot (which is wasn't) so that he can accuse the Democrats of corruption and collusion during the 2020 election.
"Mr.
Re: Confirmation but not really news (Score:2)
You said "there is no deeper level of corruption than" making a phone call about investigating crimes.
You sure don't want Trump's opponents to have their crimes exposed do you? Yeah.. that's usually a bad idea:
(quote)
By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: August 8, 2016
Shawn Lucas, Process Server for One Source Process, Delivering the Lawsuit Against the Democratic National Committee and Debbie Wasserman Schultz on July 1, 2016
Shawn Lucas, Process Server for One Source Process, Who Delivered the Lawsuit Against
Re: (Score:2)
Biden isn't going to be Trump's opponent. If this had anything to do with the election more than a year away he would've waited until Biden got the nomination. This is about investigating foreign meddling in the 2016 election. I though you guys wanted that investigated?
Using your logic no candidate could ever be investigated for anything.
We don't know how long it would take for the current administration to release any dirt they managed to acquire or "produce".
The current administration began it's 2020 campaign the first day in office?
What other modern president has held a steady stream of campaign rallies through their entire administration? (outside of Germany)
The only reason we even know "any" of this is because a whistle was blown.
You need to open your eyes, seriously , and i say this with all due respect, please consider opinions and f
Re:Confirmation but not really news (Score:5, Informative)
No, there's a push in Congress to make secure all voting...well, there was until Moscow Mitch decided that wasn't necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
No, there's a push in Congress to make secure all voting...well, there was until Moscow Mitch decided that wasn't necessary.
Gee, I wonder why?
Re: (Score:2)
Well played
Hint: If he uses the word "cyber" ... (Score:2)
... he's not good.
Get somebody who refuses to use "hacker" for anything but the Jargon File definition. And never calls himself a hacker or cracker.
Plus points if he has a beard, no tie, and is barefoot.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, publish la Presidenta Tweetie's tax records and we'll get back to you on how badly the Putin's Poodle is owned by the FSB.
Re: (Score:2)
Beyond the 2016 Russian Hoax...
Ahh yes of course. The "Hoax". (capitalized even)
I honestly felt compelled to insult you. But what's the point? You've already taken care of that.
state of security (Score:5, Insightful)
Well with the state of 'cyber' security surrounding US elections, it has been open season for everyone for quite a while. Never mind that one specific party is doing all it can to prevent some groups of people to vote.
Why can't we go back to paper, seems to work OK for a country with close (maybe over) a billion people. Instead congress is ignoring the issue along with may states.
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
"Never mind that one specific party is doing all it can to prevent some groups of people to vote."
Well yeah, if you consider those groups to be illegal aliens and dead people.
Re:state of security (Score:4, Insightful)
There have been studies about vote cheating. It isn't a big problem, more of a vanishing small problem. Hell, even the Orange Boy's committee which investigated the problem came away with squat.
Re:state of security (Score:5, Informative)
Just a week ago, a Democrat and Michigan City government official was charged with altering hundreds of ballots. No one knows EXACTLY how many she altered, plus she is suspected of destroying hundreds (if not thousands) more.
In North Carolina, the Republican candidate faced accusations of ballot harvesting and falsification after thousands of absentee ballots passed through the hands of a political cleaner... and the tallied results from those ballots are drastically different than anywhere else.
In Georgia, dozens of precincts recorded votes more than the number of eligible voters... sometimes more than three times as many votes.
In Detroit, more than 75% of ballot boxes were not properly sealed, tracked, or stored. Almost 60% of precincts recorded fewer votes than were found in the ballot boxes. That's almost 400 precincts. The rest of the state averaged about 15% of precincts with errors, split between over- and under-counts.
In other words, there is plenty of evidence of vote and election fraud. However, the determination of certain governments not to investigate it or prosecute it means that they can then claim "No such thing!", pointing to their own suppression of evidence as proof of no evidence.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And McCrae Dowless was trashing votes in North Carolina. Neither example involves illegal immigrants or dead people.
Black voters are routinely disenfranchised by inadequate funding and old equipment, and their votes are deliberately diluted through gerrymandering.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually an interesting question to many political scientists and sociologists.
The answer generally comes down to two parts. First, FDR/LBJ. During the Great Depression, FDR designated several of the New Deal public works programs specifically for blacks. Overall, it was a tiny fraction of the entire New Deal... but to the blacks that got jobs, it was a huge deal. These programs were a significant and very obvious benefit to the black communities, and they responded by voting for the Democrats fo
Re: (Score:2)
I mentioned North Carolina... you did actually read the post, right? Despite the evidence your present to the contrary?
Nothing you've said has anything to do with the significant evidence that there is plenty of voter and election fraud going on, that governments are choosing to overlook. Your other claims, though unrelated to my previous post, are a little questionable in and of themselves.
For example: "Disenfranchised by inadequate funding" is a funny claim. Even ignoring the fact that you are assigni
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously, someone here thinks telling the truth about stopping illegal votes is flamebait - I guess they don't think their ideas can win fairly, so they need to make it easy for themselves to cheat. Got it, way to increase your credibility. Hilarious that the same people worry about foreign countries influence in the process!
Obviously someone here telling "lies" about stopping illegal votes is bullshit.
Illegal aliens and dead people - Zero evidence
OR
Voter ID rules, limited polling stations, intimidation , the GOP specifically saying on tape that their intention was to limit minority voting.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/... [thedailybeast.com]
https://www.palmbeachpost.com/... [palmbeachpost.com]
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/0... [nytimes.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Your misinformation has no value here.
One side VS another side (Score:2, Interesting)
Am I alone in thinking that these are totally opposing ideas ? Something must not be true here... you can say t
Re:One side VS another side (Score:4, Interesting)
Am I alone in thinking that these are totally opposing ideas ?
Probably not, but that doesn't make you less wrong. Just because the masses are kept in huts doesn't mean the dictatorship isn't going to have Internet access, scientists, engineers, and an electronic warfare unit. If it were just people living in huts without an elite and their cronies, then they'd probably decide not to live in huts anymore.
-1, Flamebait... for calling Slashdot respectable. (Score:2)
Makes sense to me. ;)
No collusion (Score:1)
"Iran, if you're listening..."
Re: No collusion (Score:1)
Now, you're saying that at a big pep rally and it's not meant to be taken seriously, correct?
No collusion (Score:2)
No, you're saying it on the White House lawn, and repeating it several times. Correct?
https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]
Ajax???!!! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Twist: Good guys just wanted to prevent Trump. (Score:2)
I like to imagine the most fun possibilities today.
Fearmongering turns us all into pussies. But not me.
Iranian Hackers are Late (Score:2)
Well, Duh (Score:3)
Well, unless they are complete idiots, every government in the world that CAN do it is trying to hack the campaigns of every politician running for President.
The President of the United States is one of the most power people in the world - with the ability to literally cause the destruction of entire nations. Not figuring out who they are and how they think would be criminally irresponsible to their own nation.
Re: (Score:1)
The article doesn't seem to say if they were hacking Trump or Trump's opponents, so you seem to be injecting your own bias into the conversation.
That said, the president has openly invited foreign governments to hack and investigate opponents. In the notable case where a government was found to be responsible (Russia), he refused to believe the results of the investigation and resisted all efforts to punish them.
If hacking results in zero accountability, it's likely to be done more aggressively. Pretending
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny - Between 50% and 75% of Democrats [yougov.com] respond to surveys stating they think that Russia altered the vote totals through hacking during the 2016 election. The number has varied over the past almost three years, but it's always been above 50% every time it's been asked.
And this despite the fact that there is no evidence of it, and that every time the question has been examined or investigated the answer has been a resounding "NO".
So, if Trump responded to a question asking if Russia "hacked the US el
Re: (Score:2)
That's how I took the whole 2016 Russian thing as well. Trump should still be removed from office, but Russia didn't do anything our own media doesn't try to do, which is influence in ways they think are in their best interests.
Never what may be in our best interest.
In 2020 I don't care which Democrat wins, so long as Congress remains divided. Nothing pleasant comes from either party controlling all of Congress and the Presidency. We got ACA last time and that stupid tax law this time.
What will they do for
I'd be insulted if they didn't (Score:2, Interesting)
Poor Bernie continues to be ignored, despite the fact that he's got more small dollar donors than any of them and matches even Buttigieg's fundraising without doing those swanky $2000/plate dinners they use to get around fundraising limits (you're not donating to Buttigieg's campaign, you're buying a dinner, see, totally different and totally above board).
Re: (Score:2)
now if we can just get them to dig up some dirt on Biden (and now Warren).
Be careful, apparently digging up dirt on Biden is now an impeachable offense.
Poor Bernie continues to be ignored
Bernie is being ignored because he will never be the Democratic nominee and we were all Bernied out in 2016. He's bringing the same ideas voters rejected in 2016. He is, simply put, not newsworthy. He has no path to the Democratic nomination, he cannot win in the general election against Trump, so unless he's willing to run as an independent and literally guarantee Trump's reelection, he is not worth discussing.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the heart attack and double stent implant are newsworthy. And considering the age of many of the candidates -- Bernie (78), Biden (76), Trump (73), Warren (70) -- it brings the health of this ancient crew to the forefront. Or at least the second row, considering all the rest of the noise.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be newsworthy if it wasn't for the fact that the Media has such a Pavlovian response to everything President Trump says that they've forgotten the Democrats are currently running a primary.
Re: (Score:2)
Bernie is being ignored because he will never be the Democratic nominee and we were all Bernied out in 2016. He's bringing the same ideas voters rejected in 2016. He is, simply put, not newsworthy. He has no path to the Democratic nomination, he cannot win in the general election against Trump, so unless he's willing to run as an independent and literally guarantee Trump's reelection, he is not worth discussing.
Bernie sold out his supporters in the 2016 election for either a phantom chance in the 2020 election or knowingly. I think it was knowingly because he cannot be that dumb but either way, for them to support them now would just make them twice fooled. He serves the Democrats by drawing his voters in to support others.
Re: (Score:1)
No escape (Score:1)
I can't figure out (Score:3)
Who in their right mind would want to be an Iranian Hacker?
"oooh, lets hack into the world computers, so we can make everyone cover up all the women like we do, and force women to set themselves on fire because they attended a soccer game. So hot!"
Re: (Score:2)
interesting, thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Who in their right mind would want to be an Iranian Hacker?
"oooh, lets hack into the world computers, so we can make everyone cover up all the women like we do, and force women to set themselves on fire because they attended a soccer game. So hot!"
Maybe so they can see what women look like?
Iran. If you're listening... (Score:2)
News Site (Score:1)