6 ms·

> And given the fact Russia launched a massive cyber attack against the voting system and the DNC Sorry but this is pure speculation ( or fake news if you like

> And given the fact Russia launched a massive cyber attack against the voting system and the DNC Sorry but this is pure speculation ( or fake news if you like the term ) by CNN, MSN and WaPo. Show the proof if you have any.

jbooth 9y ago
http://abcnews.go.com/US/russian-hackers-targeted-half-states-voter-registration-systems/story?id=42435822 http://abcnews.go.com/US/russian-hackers-targeted-half-state... "There's no doubt that some bad actors have been poking around," FBI Director James Comey told lawmakers Wednesday, without offering any more specifics. He acknowledged there have been “some attempted intrusions at voter registration databases” since August, when the FBI issued a bulletin to state governments warning that hackers had infiltrated the Illinois State Board of Elections and tried to breach election systems in Arizona.
maxerickson 9y ago
You have the speculators wrong, it's the assessment of the US intelligence community: https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf
fweespeech 9y ago
> Sorry but this is pure speculation ( or fake news if you like the term ) by CNN, MSN and WaPo. Show the proof if you have any. Are you kidding me? This has been known for months and is in declassified DNI reports. https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf > Cyber Espionage Against US Political Organizations. > The General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU)probably began cyber operations aimed at the US election by March 2016. We assess that the GRU operations resulted in the compromise of the personal e-mail accounts of Democratic Party officials and political figures. By May, the GRU had exfiltrated large volumes of data from the DNC. > Russia’s effort to influence the 2016 US presidential election represented a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations aimed at US elections. We assess the 2016 influence campaign reflected the Kremlin’s recognition of the worldwide effects that mass disclosures of US Government and other private data such as those conducted by WikiLeaks and others have achieved in recent years, and their understanding of the value of orchestrating such disclosures to maximize the impact of compromising information. > We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from its campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts in the United States and worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes. We assess the Russian intelligence services would have seen their election influence campaign as at least a qualified success because of their perceived ability to impact public discussion. > Russian Cyber Intrusions Into State and Local Electoral Boards.Russian intelligence accessed elements of multiple state or local electoral boards. Since early 2014, Russian intelligence has researched US electoral processes and related technology and equipment. > Public Disclosures of Russian Collected Data. > We assess with high confidence that the GRU used > the Guccifer 2.0 persona, DCLeaks.com, and WikiLeaks to release US victim data obtained in > cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets. > Content that we assess was taken from e-mail accounts targeted by the GRU in March 2016 appeared on DCLeaks.com starting in June Btw this is the GRU: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Intelligence_Directorate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Intelligence_Directorate
- azangru 9y ago
  Pardon me, but this is not a satisfying answer to the request "show me the proof". Unless I am missing something, the paragraphs you cite are conclusions made by some authority bodies - based on evidence, perhaps, but without any demonstration of the process how such conclusions have been arrived at or of the evidence itself. Which makes these statements not independently verifyable. They can not therefore be regarded as proof - merely as an opinion.
  - fweespeech 9y ago
    > Pardon me, but this is not a satisfying answer to the request "show me the proof". Unless I am missing something, the paragraphs you cite are conclusions made by some authority bodies - based on evidence, perhaps, but without any demonstration of the process how such conclusions have been arrived at or of the evidence itself. Which makes these statements not independently verifyable. They can not therefore be regarded as proof - merely as an opinion. As you are a Russian, please provide me access to the GRU's classified intelligence and I'll happily enlighten you on what you want to know. No? Well, how delightfully odd that you cannot provide that information. It is almost as if intelligence gathering and the related evidence is frequently kept secret to protect methodology/sources while the end result of that intelligence is all that is made public for decades. I'm curious, can you say anything negative about Putin in relation to his human rights violations? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-crimea-putin-human-rights-abuses-un-accusations-claims-a7421406.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukrain... https://qz.com/336047/an-appalling-list-of-human-rights-abuses-last-year-in-putins-russia/ https://qz.com/336047/an-appalling-list-of-human-rights-abus... http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/international-affairs/318290-another-putin-critic-silenced-as-human-rights-abuses http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/international-affairs/... https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/russia https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/russi...
    - azangru 9y ago
      > As you are a Russian, please provide me access to the GRU's classified intelligence and I'll happily enlighten you on what you want to know. This is wrong (I mean not morally wrong, but rhetorically, or logically wrong) on so many levels that I don't even know how to begin. I guess I'll just leave it at that. I totally agree with your point about intelligence being kept secret. Sadly, this is indeed the case. I do not invite US secret services to reveal their sources. I am only saying that if they choose to keep evidence secret, it is not reasonable then to expect people to believe them. In absence of evidence, there is no way of knowing whether you are being told truth, or deliberate lie, or anything in between. Like someone else in the comment above said, this is essentially a matter of trust. And frankly, secret services do not deserve our blind trust (no-one does, but especially not them, because misinformation is, by definition, part of their trade). Let me be clear: I am not here to defend Russia, or Putin (I am sick and tired of our ossified, unchangeable government, but I prefer not to think about them too much; they are disgusting, like many other politicians, perhaps much more so). I am only trying to defend reason, and critical thinking, and the importance of making valid arguments.
sqeaky 9y ago
Proof will likely never come and those news outlet sources are the intelligence experts saying so. All the intelligence experts say they cannot prove it, all except one group believed it was Russia. Comey was particularly vocal about it. This is the kind of thing we might never get objective proof of, hacking is too easy to cover up or contract out. In cases like this where not acting could be detrimental and we already have an enemy we were acting against attributing malicious activities to them is reasonable. Trying to screw with your enemy's government's transitions of power is a common tactic at least since the early cold war. If you had asked me 5 years ago when relations were better and before Putin got all Ukraine and Syria crazy, I would have said "I don't know, it is too premature to act". But right now Russia feels threatened by us and sees weakness in our elections this makes them hacking us fit too well. With that being as close to proof as we are likely to get it is the information we have to work with.
cirgue 9y ago
In addition to other commenters providing sources for this assertion, there is also the fact that Russia's current strategic doctrine is to disrupt and delegitimize governing institutions of rival states, and Russia considers pretty much everyone a rival. Moscow's operating assumption is that the current international stage is chaotic, resource-poor, and intensely competitive, such that sustainable cooperation between between major powers is not only unlikely, but also that attempts at development or stabilization of an international cooperative order would be potentially catastrophic. This is to say: Russia has a powerful incentive to do everything up to and including manipulating foreign elections, but in the eyes of Putin it is sufficient to be seen to be manipulating foreign elections. Arguably, this has a greater effect on the capacities of his adversaries, because democratic systems don't really work without a general consensus that elections are legitimate. Russia does not want an alliance with a strong US and EU, they want no alliance with a greatly weakened US and EU.
nl 9y ago
There's plenty of actual non-classified evidence. See my comment up thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14620389 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14620389

jbooth 9y ago

http://abcnews.go.com/US/russian-hackers-targeted-half-states-voter-registration-systems/story?id=42435822 http://abcnews.go.com/US/russian-hackers-targeted-half-state... "There's no doubt that some bad actors have been poking around," FBI Director James Comey told lawmakers Wednesday, without offering any more specifics. He acknowledged there have been “some attempted intrusions at voter registration databases” since August, when the FBI issued a bulletin to state governments warning that hackers had infiltrated the Illinois State Board of Elections and tried to breach election systems in Arizona.

maxerickson 9y ago

You have the speculators wrong, it's the assessment of the US intelligence community: https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

fweespeech 9y ago

> Sorry but this is pure speculation ( or fake news if you like the term ) by CNN, MSN and WaPo. Show the proof if you have any. Are you kidding me? This has been known for months and is in declassified DNI reports. https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf > Cyber Espionage Against US Political Organizations. > The General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU)probably began cyber operations aimed at the US election by March 2016. We assess that the GRU operations resulted in the compromise of the personal e-mail accounts of Democratic Party officials and political figures. By May, the GRU had exfiltrated large volumes of data from the DNC. > Russia’s effort to influence the 2016 US presidential election represented a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations aimed at US elections. We assess the 2016 influence campaign reflected the Kremlin’s recognition of the worldwide effects that mass disclosures of US Government and other private data such as those conducted by WikiLeaks and others have achieved in recent years, and their understanding of the value of orchestrating such disclosures to maximize the impact of compromising information. > We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from its campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts in the United States and worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes. We assess the Russian intelligence services would have seen their election influence campaign as at least a qualified success because of their perceived ability to impact public discussion. > Russian Cyber Intrusions Into State and Local Electoral Boards.Russian intelligence accessed elements of multiple state or local electoral boards. Since early 2014, Russian intelligence has researched US electoral processes and related technology and equipment. > Public Disclosures of Russian Collected Data. > We assess with high confidence that the GRU used > the Guccifer 2.0 persona, DCLeaks.com, and WikiLeaks to release US victim data obtained in > cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets. > Content that we assess was taken from e-mail accounts targeted by the GRU in March 2016 appeared on DCLeaks.com starting in June Btw this is the GRU: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Intelligence_Directorate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Intelligence_Directorate

azangru 9y ago
Pardon me, but this is not a satisfying answer to the request "show me the proof". Unless I am missing something, the paragraphs you cite are conclusions made by some authority bodies - based on evidence, perhaps, but without any demonstration of the process how such conclusions have been arrived at or of the evidence itself. Which makes these statements not independently verifyable. They can not therefore be regarded as proof - merely as an opinion.
- fweespeech 9y ago
  > Pardon me, but this is not a satisfying answer to the request "show me the proof". Unless I am missing something, the paragraphs you cite are conclusions made by some authority bodies - based on evidence, perhaps, but without any demonstration of the process how such conclusions have been arrived at or of the evidence itself. Which makes these statements not independently verifyable. They can not therefore be regarded as proof - merely as an opinion. As you are a Russian, please provide me access to the GRU's classified intelligence and I'll happily enlighten you on what you want to know. No? Well, how delightfully odd that you cannot provide that information. It is almost as if intelligence gathering and the related evidence is frequently kept secret to protect methodology/sources while the end result of that intelligence is all that is made public for decades. I'm curious, can you say anything negative about Putin in relation to his human rights violations? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-crimea-putin-human-rights-abuses-un-accusations-claims-a7421406.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukrain... https://qz.com/336047/an-appalling-list-of-human-rights-abuses-last-year-in-putins-russia/ https://qz.com/336047/an-appalling-list-of-human-rights-abus... http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/international-affairs/318290-another-putin-critic-silenced-as-human-rights-abuses http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/international-affairs/... https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/russia https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/russi...
  - azangru 9y ago
    > As you are a Russian, please provide me access to the GRU's classified intelligence and I'll happily enlighten you on what you want to know. This is wrong (I mean not morally wrong, but rhetorically, or logically wrong) on so many levels that I don't even know how to begin. I guess I'll just leave it at that. I totally agree with your point about intelligence being kept secret. Sadly, this is indeed the case. I do not invite US secret services to reveal their sources. I am only saying that if they choose to keep evidence secret, it is not reasonable then to expect people to believe them. In absence of evidence, there is no way of knowing whether you are being told truth, or deliberate lie, or anything in between. Like someone else in the comment above said, this is essentially a matter of trust. And frankly, secret services do not deserve our blind trust (no-one does, but especially not them, because misinformation is, by definition, part of their trade). Let me be clear: I am not here to defend Russia, or Putin (I am sick and tired of our ossified, unchangeable government, but I prefer not to think about them too much; they are disgusting, like many other politicians, perhaps much more so). I am only trying to defend reason, and critical thinking, and the importance of making valid arguments.

sqeaky 9y ago

Proof will likely never come and those news outlet sources are the intelligence experts saying so. All the intelligence experts say they cannot prove it, all except one group believed it was Russia. Comey was particularly vocal about it. This is the kind of thing we might never get objective proof of, hacking is too easy to cover up or contract out. In cases like this where not acting could be detrimental and we already have an enemy we were acting against attributing malicious activities to them is reasonable. Trying to screw with your enemy's government's transitions of power is a common tactic at least since the early cold war. If you had asked me 5 years ago when relations were better and before Putin got all Ukraine and Syria crazy, I would have said "I don't know, it is too premature to act". But right now Russia feels threatened by us and sees weakness in our elections this makes them hacking us fit too well. With that being as close to proof as we are likely to get it is the information we have to work with.

cirgue 9y ago

In addition to other commenters providing sources for this assertion, there is also the fact that Russia's current strategic doctrine is to disrupt and delegitimize governing institutions of rival states, and Russia considers pretty much everyone a rival. Moscow's operating assumption is that the current international stage is chaotic, resource-poor, and intensely competitive, such that sustainable cooperation between between major powers is not only unlikely, but also that attempts at development or stabilization of an international cooperative order would be potentially catastrophic. This is to say: Russia has a powerful incentive to do everything up to and including manipulating foreign elections, but in the eyes of Putin it is sufficient to be seen to be manipulating foreign elections. Arguably, this has a greater effect on the capacities of his adversaries, because democratic systems don't really work without a general consensus that elections are legitimate. Russia does not want an alliance with a strong US and EU, they want no alliance with a greatly weakened US and EU.

nl 9y ago

There's plenty of actual non-classified evidence. See my comment up thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14620389 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14620389