Russian Cyber Hacks on U.S. Electoral System Far Wider Than Previously

>The new details, buttressed by a classified National Security Agency document recently disclosed by the Intercept, show the scope of alleged hacking that federal investigators are scrutinizing as they look into whether Trump campaign officials may have colluded in the efforts. But they also paint a worrisome picture for future elections: The newest portrayal of potentially deep vulnerabilities in the U.S.’s patchwork of voting technologies comes less than a week after former FBI Director James Comey warned Congress that Moscow isn’t done meddling.

>“They’re coming after America,” Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee investigating Russian interference in the election. “They will be back.”

>One of the mysteries about the 2016 presidential election is why Russian intelligence, after gaining access to state and local systems, didn’t try to disrupt the vote. One possibility is that the American warning was effective. Another former senior U.S. official, who asked for anonymity to discuss the classified U.S. probe into pre-election hacking, said a more likely explanation is that several months of hacking failed to give the attackers the access they needed to master America’s disparate voting systems spread across more than 7,000 local jurisdictions.

>Such operations need not change votes to be effective. In fact, the Obama administration believed that the Russians were possibly preparing to delete voter registration information or slow vote tallying in order to undermine confidence in the election. That effort went far beyond the carefully timed release of private communications by individuals and parties.

>One former senior U.S. official expressed concern that the Russians now have three years to build on their knowledge of U.S. voting systems before the next presidential election, and there is every reason to believe they will use what they have learned in future attacks.

>>148907
How do they know it was Russia?

All it ways is investigators found evidence of "cyber intruders"

And then you have the fact that this was apparently impossible like a few months ago

>>148910
>I don't know shit about cyber-forensics, therefore there's no such thing.

>>148920
>I'm going to take the word of everything that aligns with my theories and worldview

>>148928
>all of our and our allies' intelligence agencies saying the same shit
>it's all just a conspiracy theory

The way I see it, there's two conspiracy theories pitted against one another.

On one side, you have Putin putting his finger on the election to hopefully get someone who'd be open to lifting sanctions, and more broadly, cause chaos and distrust in his historical geopolitical adversary. On the other side, you have the conspiracy that our intelligence and the intelligence of multiple European nations is in cahoots to cause WWIII because Clinton's feelings were hurt by the election and now she wants everyone to die.

>>148937
Clapper said no evidence, comeys testimony fell flat, the DNC wouldn't let the FBI even check their servers

>>148920
>>148928
Oh hey, it's like both of you are impossible to prove wrong. Must be nice.

>>148910
they dont.
it could be anyone, and most likely its multiple different unrelated groups.
but russia is the badguy right now so they blame putin for everything, and dont bother consider any other possibilities.

>>148988
They said in the article that they checked Illinois system and found proof, and lists a few sources. What would constitute proof to you, I wonder?

>>148990
I wanna see the proof

>>148990
theres proof that its the same group that tried to get into other voting related systems, but thats it.
nothing about who did it.

like i said, it might be russia, but it could be anyone else.
its pretty damn hard to prove this kind of thing unless you get a direct confession. digital evidence isnt very reliable.

>>148994
And didn't vault 6 prove that anyone could change their signature?

>>148996
there are limits, but a lot can be fabricated,
and a lot of evidence is just worthless.

there are some things you can predict such as what tools they used, and other details.
but tools are bought and sold so identifying exactly who is responsible is unlikely.

usually the most you can do is determine if its the same person,
like in this case the same group hacked into the different voter systems.

but finding the real identity is very hard unless they make a dumb mistake which could reveal personal details.