Entire US political system ‘under attack’ by Russian hacking, experts warn
theguardian.com
Meanwhile, some US commentators on cybersecurity issues have suggested that these attacks are not a surprise but appear to be a new spin on an old strategy
It could have been a cold war drama. The world watched this week as accusationsand counter-accusations were thrown by the American and Russian governmentsabout documents stolen during a hack of the Democratic National Committee andthe email account of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair John Podesta.
The notion that public figures have any right to privacy appears to have been lostin the furore surrounding the story, stolen correspondence being bandied aroundin attempts to influence the outcome of one of the nastiest, most vitriolic USpresidential campaigns in history.
Some have argued that as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton’s emails were fairgame for hacking because had they not been held on a private server, they wouldhave been subject to freedom of information requests and available to the generalpublic.
There may be some truth to that, but it doesn’t change the fact thatcorrespondence between public figures has allegedly been hacked by those actingunder the direction of a foreign government and released for everyone to peruse,with little opportunity for the authors to offer context or even confirm that thecontents of the leaks are accurate.
The hacks have created a dilemma for American voters, according to Rob Guidry,CEO of social media analytics company Sc2 and a former special adviser to USCentral Command. He says voters seem to want the information that has beenleaked by the hackers but don’t feel entirely comfortable with the hacks that havebrought the information to light.
“What I find most intriguing about this is that many establishment outlets –including Fox News – are now actively turning to WikiLeaks and others forinformation that used to be provided by freedom of information requests,” hesaid. “It’s a rather strange turn of events.”
Malcolm Nance, a former naval intelligence officer and author of The Plot to HackAmerica: How Putin’s Cyberspies and WikiLeaks Tried to Steal the 2016 Election,suggests there is a deliberate strategy behind the timing of release of the hackedemails. The latest leaks mix false information with text extracted from real,stolen emails, he said. “This is a slow-roll political attack on the entire politicalinfrastructure of America. It is Watergate – it’s literally Watergate. They did whatNixon couldn’t do.”
The US government is taking a very direct approach in calling out what it says isRussian-directed hacking. That’s significant – according to Richard Stiennon,author of There Will Be Cyberwar – because there is nothing new in what theRussian government has allegedly done in the 2016 election cycle.
“Russian interference with US elections is not ‘heating up’ per se, as much as it’scoming out of the shadows,” says Stiennon, who is also chief strategy officer ofGeorgia-based data security company Blancco Technology Group. “Hacking theDNC and Democratic congressional campaigns and then the leaking of stolenemails is somewhat ham-fisted, but it’s an escalation of Russian disinformationcampaigns,” he said.
Stiennon also warned that one deeply disturbing potential result of these effortscould be to cause Americans to question the validity of the results of theirpresidential election.
“The probing of at least 23 election operations in various US states could lead tomistrust in election results if the election is close – think digital hanging chads,”he said. “The gloves are coming off as the tools of cybercrime are merging withthe tools of information disruption. The blatant attacks on US elections – andpolitical officials – is just one element as continued hacking and doxxing[releasing stolen documents] of US officials and agencies serves to embarrass theObama administration.
“After the elections, the new administration will have to be prepared for evenfurther escalations.”
That leads to the third and final issue: that the US will fight back. No one yetknows what form that response will take, but the words of White House presssecretary Josh Earnest were clear about the administration’s commitment toensuring that the hacks do not go unanswered.
“With regard to a response, we obviously will ensure that a US response isproportional. It is unlikely that our response would be announced in advance,” hesaid.
“It’s certainly possible that the president could choose response options that wenever announce. The president has talked before about the significantcapabilities that the US government has to both defend our systems in the UnitedStates, but also carry out offensive operations in other countries. So there are arange of responses that are available to the president, and he will consider aresponse that’s proportional.”
When the US fights back, internet users will need to watch out for the digitalfallout – particularly if it results in a “tit for tat” battle.
Turn the clock back to 2010 and the Stuxnet worm – a computer virus whoseorigins in branches of the CIA and Mossad were recently chronicled in adocumentary that debuted earlier this year. That worm wasn’t intended toimpact users beyond its original target in Iran, but did.
Where does retaliation begin, and where will it end? |
