back to article US govt straight up accuses Russia of hacking prez election

The Russian government "directed the recent compromises of emails from US persons and institutions," the US Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said on Friday, an accusation that gives formal recognition to a claim previously voiced through unnamed sources. In late July, The …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    And exactly what proof do they have of that, apart from what Clinton of the insecure e-mail says?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @Ivan4 - The proof was

      on those laptops FBI promptly destroyed. Honest! They saw it with their own eyes, you must believe!

    2. oldtaku

      That Russia has this 50 Ruble Comment Army and the US has nothing is one reason they're losing so hard on this.

      1. Oh Homer
        Mushroom

        Re: The "50 Ruble Comment Army"

        Ahem .... as opposed to the Yanks' 200 million dollar comment army?

    3. Pompous Git Silver badge

      And exactly what proof do they have

      Because Russians scrutable. Only (fiendish) Chinese are inscrutable.

    4. Voland's right hand Silver badge
      Devil

      The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

      Russian foreign policy is reciprocal: "You do it to us, we do it to you". USA has been repeatedly asked to stop financing "change of system" in Russia. It told Russia to f*** off. In writing - the letter from the USA state department after Putin asked Bush regarding USA financing being traced to one outright terrorist organization has been declassified and published by the Russians. It was also discussed in several of his interviews. USA said pretty much that - we will finance whoever we bloody please.

      So Russia responding is kind is to be expected. And anticipated.

      USA should have anticipated this. To put it bluntly, if USA is not ready to handle the response in kind it should have avoided participation in "change of regime" games. Yeah, I know, everyone presumes the Bear to be decrepit and toothless and can be baited for fun non-stop. Well it is not - as both USA and Eu are now getting to understand.

      So the USA election will be influenced by the Bear this year. Actively. They asked for it - they got it. Same as Eu disintegration is financed by the bear - he is financing everyone from Le Pen to AFD and Golden Dawn provided that they stay as a thorn in Eu side. Once again - Eu asked for it, was asked to stop and the response was deployed only after the Eu answered "We do as we f*** please".

      P.S. I am wondering what did the Bear "leak" to Wikileaks by the way. Ass ange is the perfect Tool (TM) (C) to do their bidding as he will do anything for publicity.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

        Actually, the financing aspect is slowly growing other legs, or did you think it a coincidence that the Chinese RMB became a reserve currency and, as per October 1st, is included in the IMF's "special drawing rights" basket?

        I saw the first fully public signs of changing economic leverage when China bought energy from Russia and there were no dollars involved but the signs have been there for a long time, enthusiastically suppressed by those who benefit from this totally out of whack approach. US currency needs the dollar to remain an energy and reserve currency or the whole doomsday scenario illustrated in various publications will accelerate (it's already playing out, just very slowly).

        This is also why Brexit was really the wrong move at the wrong time: when this happens, the rest of the world needs to stand together. Isolationists will not be helped, and the already firmly visible Brexit side effects in the UK will not exactly count n the UK's favour when it all hell breaks loose - not a matter of "if", but "when".

        1. druck Silver badge

          Re: The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

          @Yet another EUtard AC.

          I for one am glad we are leaving the isolationist bubble of EU membership, and will be able to resume our position as an independent country at the top table of nations, where we can have a direct influence such matters. As opposed to first having to try to hammer our a common position with 27 other states holding wildly different views, and then let a vast inflexible bureaucracy do the talking for us.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

            and will be able to resume our position as an independent country at the top table of nations

            I am wondering if I should upvote you for humour or downvote for delusions of grandeur. UK's famed engineering ingenuity has all but vanished due to a change to service industry (Dyson may well be the last and there is almost no UK car brand left that isn't actually owned by them evil foreigners, including the posh ones), London City finance is wholly dependent on international trade (and EU citizens) to generate the sort profits it likes hiding offshore, and I hope you didn't miss that the UK doesn't have that many colonies anymore (not that you'd scare them much with the current state of UK's military hardware).

            The UK then opts for a fairly aggressive, hard EU separation instead of trying to fix from within, and any divorcee can tell you that an acrimonious separation gets costly because both sides are no longer interested in reaching an amicable settlement. As a matter of fact, the EU can't even AFFORD to play nice with concessions because then others might leave too. Furthermore, despite what the likes of UKIP have been stating the UK actually NEEDS those foreigners because the UK has a massive skill shortage, and it would be jolly nice to have a market to sell to at not too high a cost. You may also notice that those gazillions the UK would save have already magically vanished, days after the Brexit result was announced.

            Don't get me wrong, I really hope it all goes better than what I can see happening, but I reckon you have a number of VERY rough years ahead of you. Given that the US is running headlong into economic disaster again because it was able to generously redistributes that pain globally, I reckon the timing of Brexit is about as bad as Gordon Brown's chosen moment to sell UK's gold reserve when can-I-please-come-back-into-politics-because-I-really-miss-robbing-the-taxpayers Tony Blair let him loose on the economy.

            But that's my opinion. To be honest I actually hope I'm dead wrong because it means that countless innocent people will again be the victim, which is the bit I don't like very much. The rich just go shopping when it all falls apart, but the average citizen will yet again get it in the neck.

            That could include you.

            1. KBeee

              Re: The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

              "...as bad as Gordon Brown's chosen moment to sell UK's gold reserve when can-I-please-come-back-into-politics-because-I-really-miss-robbing-the-taxpayers Tony Blair let him loose on the economy."

              It was called "Brown Bottom" in gold trading circles

            2. druck Silver badge

              Re: The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

              @AC - the UK's membership of the G7 and UN Security council doesn't count then?

      2. JustNiz

        Re: The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

        >> Russian foreign policy is reciprocal: "You do it to us, we do it to you".

        exactly. Its not only the power games. The USA has the biggest "hacking other governments computers" program in the world. If the US government don't like being hacked then maybe they should stop doing it to others first.

      3. Solmyr ibn Wali Barad

        Re: The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

        Blaming others for one's own deeds isn't necessarily a reciprocity.

        -----

        Ivan Andreyevich Krylov - The Wolf and the Lamb.

        Always are the weak at fault before the strong.

        In history we hear a host of examples,

        But history we are not writing:

        Here is how they tell of it in Fables.

        A Lamb, one sweltering day, came by a stream to drink.

        An lo, calamity had to befall him

        In that a hungry Wolf was scouring about nearby.

        He sees the Lamb and rushes to his prey;

        But, to give the deed the look and sense of law,

        He yells, “How dare you, you rogue, immerse your filthy mug

        In my pure drinking water,

        and cloud it with silt and sand?

        For such impertinence

        I will indeed remove your head!” –

        “His Highness Wolf permitting,

        I will dare submit that I am drinking

        About a hundred paces downstream;

        His wrath is all for naught:

        I cannot possibly pollute his draft of water.” –

        “And thus I lie?!

        You wretch! Such rudeness is unheard of in this world!

        And I remember, too, a couple of summers back,

        You, in this very spot, insulted me!”

        “For goodness’ sake, I am not a year old yet,”

        Pleads the Lamb. “It was your brother, then.”

        “I have no brothers.” “Then some other relative,

        Or someone of your ilk.

        You all, your dogs, and all your shepherds,

        You wish me ill

        And hurt me any time and any way you are able.

        But I will make you pay for all their sins!”

        “Oh, but how am I at fault?” – “Shut up! Enough!

        I’ve no time to sort through your transgressions!

        You are at fault that I am famished,”

        He said – and dragged the Lamb into the woods.

        1. KBeee

          Re: The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

          Mmmmmmmm.... lamb....

      4. Kurt Meyer

        Re: The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

        @ Voland's right hand

        "Russian foreign policy is reciprocal"

        I, for one, am eagerly awaiting your explanation of the reciprocity of Russian/Soviet foreign policy with regard to: Chechnya, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and last but not least, Ukraine.

        After that perhaps you could give your thoughts on the USSR's benevolent guidance of the nations of the Warsaw Pact towards the workers paradise.

      5. Tom Paine Silver badge

        Re: The proof is in the reciprocity of Russian foreign policy

        Russian foreign policy is reciprocal: "You do it to us, we do it to you". USA has been repeatedly asked to stop financing "change of system" in Russia. It told Russia to f*** off. In writing - the letter from the USA state department after Putin asked Bush regarding USA financing being traced to one outright terrorist organization has been declassified and published by the Russians. It was also discussed in several of his interviews. USA said pretty much that - we will finance whoever we bloody please.

        So Russia responding is kind is to be expected. And anticipated.

        If only someone had thought about these issues in advance. OH WAIT

        http://seclists.org/dailydave/2011/q1/26

    5. Oh Homer
      Mushroom

      Wait...

      Did the Yanks just accuse the Ruskies of an attempted regime change operation?

      Oh the irony!

      1. Amos1

        Re: Wait...

        Yeah, really. The Russians are such amateurs. We just wait to see how it turns out and if we don't like it, we overthrow the government and install our own puppets. Because it always turns out so well for us, like Iran in the 50's. <sigh>

    6. Archtech Silver badge

      This is why the world is such a mess

      Wow, 16 "Register" readers believe what Hillary Clinton says. I am impressed.

    7. Tom Paine Silver badge
      FAIL

      If only there was some sort of vast electronic network connecting you with enormous databases that might help to answer your question...

    8. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Hateful Bias

      @Ivan 4 wrote: And exactly what proof do they have of that, apart from what Clinton of the insecure e-mail says?

      I think all the downvotes you received says it all.

      "Proof? We don't have any proof. We don't need any proof! I don't have to show you any stinking proof!!!"

      Why ask for proof when hateful bias wants what it wants.

  2. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
    Megaphone

    USA: We be incomptent, yo!

    "Looks like we have a serious hacking gap. We don't know whether we are secure or not, and either script kiddes or Genetically Engineered Russian Uberhackers who look like Dolph Lundgren wearing a helmet for computer-brain interfaces are hacking us dead. We are not sure which. In spite of putting out the first offensive cyberweapon to uparse the Persians. Or maybe we are just believing our own bullshit that we make the NYT/WaPo print in their front-page informercials. Please halp!!"

    1. a_yank_lurker Silver badge

      Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

      I doubt there is any evidence the Russians are behind the hacks. I tend to suspect that a couple of hackers found out that some states have atrocious cyber security and been hacking away. Also, there are two states were there has known voter registration fraud - Indiana and Virginia. Indiana appears to be state wide. In Virginia, a Democrat operative registered about 20 dead people to vote before being caught. So I would not be surprised if Trump wins there will be round of lawsuits by the donkeys challenging the results in several states because of alleged hacking.

      Many have noted that paper ballots can not be hacked.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

        "Many have noted that paper ballots can not be hacked."

        Which would mean that election results might reflect the will of the people, the ignorant bastids.

      2. Pompous Git Silver badge

        Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

        Many have noted that paper ballots can not be hacked.

        But they can be lost or replaced with incorrect ballot papers.

        WA voters incorrectly given Victorian Senate ballot papers

        1. CanadianMacFan

          Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

          The Americans seem to be able to screw up something as simple as paper ballots. Three words:

          Florida 2000 chads

      3. RIBrsiq
        Holmes

        Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

        >> Many have noted that paper ballots can not be hacked.

        I don't think there's a fear that anyone would directly tamper with the election itself.

        What seems to be happening is an attempt to influence the election. IE, through strategic leaking of selected information someone seems to be doing their best to make the US electorate vote a certain way. In which case the specific technology used to vote will hardly matter, obviously.

        For what it's worth, I think it's a fool's errand, as the US electorate are so polarized and entrenched that facts no longer seem to matter for a very large percentage. They will vote for whoever their party nominated, regardless of absolutely anything. It's crazy and it's scary.

        1. Archtech Silver badge

          Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

          "I don't think there's a fear that anyone would directly tamper with the election itself".

          As it happens, you are wrong about that. There is a very great amount of fear on the part of many well-informed people.

          https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/29/74#subj3.1

          https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/29/69#subj15.1

          https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/29/67#subj3.1

          etc. etc. etc.

          1. Archtech Silver badge

            Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

            Oh, and:

            http://www.purdueexponent.org/campus/article_ec1fe6d4-8bf6-11e6-ac3e-c77a826f28df.html

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

          "What seems to be happening is an attempt to influence the election. "

          Do some research. Do a lot of research in fact. You will be appalled and shocked (or maybe not).

          During the presidential primaries, there is ample evidence that systematic vote fraud happened in districts which used voter machines. Some of anomalies were beyond improbable. The fraud was "hidden" in the larger districts where a small swing gave the highest "bang for the buck".

          There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the coming presidential election will be decided by voting machine fraud. The most likely scenario is Clinton's troops loading her ballots, and anti-Trump Republicans helping her along.

        3. Robert D Bank

          Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

          There is MUCH more danger of vote rigging etc from within the US than from any external party. As Greg Palast has found there is massive electoral fraud going on. There's arbitrary purging of voters on a massive scale, and there's tricks such as certain areas having many ballot stations removed so not all people can get a vote in in time. And there's is some evidence of voting machines either being hacked or memory chips being swapped out etc. And then of course the lobby groups...they pay better than the public so have twice the influence.

          http://www.gregpalast.com/

          And then there's the fact that most people (not just in the US I might add) do not vote based on any rational thought.

          http://www.monbiot.com/2016/10/06/what-we-are/

          Quote:

          'Democracy for Realists, published earlier this year by the social science professors Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels, argues that the “folk theory of democracy” – the idea that citizens make coherent and intelligible policy decisions, on which governments then act – bears no relationship to how it really works. Or could ever work.'

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

            @ Robert D Bank

            Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) has been talking of this irrationality of humans almost non-stop for over a year, while predicting with rather stunning accuracy.

      4. Archtech Silver badge

        Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

        Thirty years or so ago, Cliff Stoll's book "The Cuckoo's Egg" detailed his pursuit of a hacker who penetrated his lab computers. In the process, Stoll had occasion to visit and talk with the system managers of various US government computers, and what he found utterly horrified him. For example, many years after the government has begun using DEC's VAX/VMS, he found many VAXen whose System accounts still had the default password ("Manager"). The most basic system management knowledge - not even security - insisted that this password be changed to something suitably obscure as the very first step once a machine had been installed.

        Stoll, himself an experienced system manager with a good knowledge of security practices, came to the conclusion that any attempt to make government IT secure was completely futile until system managers and other staff understood - and cared about - such basic facts as these.

        1. Roland6 Silver badge

          Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

          Re: "The Cuckoo's Egg" - Whilst systems have changed, many of the practices Stoll mentions are still highly relevant today - and people say IT is a fast moving rapidly changing industry...

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

          Username: FIELD

          Password: SERVICE

      5. Mark 85 Silver badge

        Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

        Many have noted that paper ballots can not be hacked.

        Possibly except there is the graveyard vote and other ways to manipulate them. Voter fraud existed long before computers.

      6. KBeee

        Re: USA: We be incomptent, yo!

        Vote early, vote often

  3. bombastic bob Silver badge
    Pirate

    Obaka is just angry over his "legacy"

    the only reason the fingers are being pointed at Russia is that Obaka's "legacy" is threatened by a Trump presidency, basically rolling back EVERYTHING that Obaka and the Demo-Rats have been trying to shove up our as... down our throats since 2009.

    And so, like most politicians, he "does the sidestep" and points fingers elsewhere, to distract media coverage away from the REAL issues...

    Right now Russia is the current target for finger-pointing. Nevermind that the Demo-Rat-tic national committee, Mrs. Clinton, and "others" were likely cracked by them (that's the accusation anyway), meaning potential blackmail later on, far WORSE than interfering in elections. yeah, no security risk THERE.

    So with the way Russian media has covered Mrs. Clinton, is it any surprise? I think not. Typical 'media matters' style tactics going on here. Obaka is a 'civil unrest' kinda guy, and this plays right into his strategery book.

    [and the anti-Trump "howler monkey" downvotes are a badge of honor, thank you]

    Russia looks out for themselves and their own best interests. If they 'interfere', that's the only reason. Personally, I think helping Trump would help _US_, but that's just my opinion, right?

    1. Bloodbeastterror

      Re: Obaka is just angry over his "legacy"

      Just proves my point about people who scatter random capitalised words throughout their posts - nutcases. Safely ignore.

    2. Kurt Meyer

      Re: Obaka is just angry over his "legacy"

      @ bombastic bob

      Bob, I won't address the opinions expressed in your many posts. I fully support your right to have your say, no matter what your point of view.

      But for goodness sakes, look at the style and composition you use, you're all over the map. SHOUTY CAPITALISATION, 'single quotes', "double quotes", here [brackets], there (parentheses), some _underscores_, and even a little strikeout thrown in for good measure.

      The scattergun approach you use to emphasize your points has the effect of making your words less readable. It is disrupting to the eye of the reader. There is no smooth flow to your text.

      Pick a style for emphasizing your words, and stick with it.

      If you want to get your opinion across to your readers, which seems to me to be the only point of posting in the first place, make it easy for them to follow along.

      One last point, the name twisting, such as "Obaka", or "the Demo-Rats". This makes you look childish, no matter who you support. It looks as though little Billy got a hold of Dad's PC, and is banging out nonsense. Again, this detracts from the smooth flow of your words.

      If you say that "Mr. Obama has been a weak leader" or "Mrs. Clinton is a crook", we'll get that you don't care for them and/or their politics and policies. Please give your readers that much credit.

      Bob, you're an educated man, and unless I miss my guess, no Spring chicken. Use that education, and that experience to make your thoughts and feelings known to your readership in a way that is easy for them to read.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Obaka is just angry over his "legacy"

        FAO Mr Kurt Meyer.

        Your words are wise, your post beautifully constructed, your message constructive, your manner polite.

        And for all those reasons I've downvoted you. :)

        1. Kurt Meyer

          Re: Obaka is just angry over his "legacy"

          @ Ledswinger

          Thanks for the kind words.

        2. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge
          WTF?

          Re: Obaka is just angry over his "legacy"

          "And for all those reasons I've downvoted you. :)"

          Fuck, now I really have no idea whether to up or down vote you Ledswinger...thanks.

      2. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Trollface

        Re: Obaka is just angry over his "legacy"

        "Use that education, and that experience to make your thoughts and feelings "

        I don't do FEELINGS. And last I checked, even EL REG uses capitalization and other, similar techniques, in the headlines and whatnot. It's a technique. I happen to *LIKE* it. That way, you can see the emphasis where I *INTEND* it to be.

        you're welcome. /me not going to change based on the opinions of others. I'm "bombastic bob". You know, "bombastic". I take on that name because it's what I am, and I wear it with pride.

        downvotes, thanks. but "getting personal" like that is just irritating, not 'helpful'. So, *MY* advice to the "helpful" is this: Don't waste your time. k-thx. But it's still fun to read, so I won't mind if you keep doing it. [now I don't have to address this again]

  4. Marketing Hack Silver badge
    Stop

    I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

    But here are some ways out:

    1. Don't let entitled knobs run public affairs on private systems.

    2. Don't game the nominations process in favor of same entitled knobs, and then boast about it on improperly secured email systems

    3.,Don't find zero-days, hoard them while congratulating yourself on how clever you are, and then get alarmed when adversaries do the same thing

    4. If the foundation of your governance is supposed to be democracy, you might want to make sure that the foundation is a solidly constructed one, where pests find it hard to do much damage.

    1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

      Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

      Don't find zero-days, hoard them while congratulating yourself on how clever you are, and then get alarmed when adversaries do the same thing

      To be fair, I wouldn't be surprised if the organisations that do this couldn't give two hoots which party's stooge occupies the white house at any point in time.

    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Big Brother

      Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

      "you might want to make sure that the foundation is a solidly constructed one, where pests find it hard to do much damage."

      sadly, even though the U.S. Constitution TRIES to make it hard for pests to do much damage, the "stacking" of the U.S. Supreme Court with extremely liberal judges essentially overrides any such attempts by "re-interpreting" it whatever way they 'feel'. It's how the liberal-lefties get what they want done. nevermind the majority, nevermind what's right, it's THEIR power grab and they're going to do what they do to grab and maintain as much power and control as they can.

      [it IS the nature of gummints to do this, unfortunately, as elitists seek power and manipulate their way to the top]

      (more howler downvotes, thank you)

      1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        FAIL

        "the "stacking" of the U.S. Supreme Court with extremely liberal judges "

        Perhaps you might like to read some of their judgements over the last 5-10 years.

      2. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

        Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

        "the "stacking" of the U.S. Supreme Court with extremely liberal judges"

        My goodness, if Scalia was a liberal-leftie I dread to imagine your idea of a properly right wing judge.

        1. Kurt Meyer

          Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

          @ Voyna i Mor

          "... I dread to imagine your idea of a properly right wing judge. "

          Roland Freisler? William Stoughton? Andrey Vyshinsky?

          Yes, two of them were employed by nominally "Socialist" governments.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

          Scalia was 1 of 9, and the last true "Constitutionalist" on SCOTUS

      3. Baldy50

        Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

        I think these games are here to stay and increasingly more so, as the Internet grows so will the threats and the temptation for foreign powers to dabble in the affairs of others just because they can, human nature being what it is and all, especially the types of mindset running some organizations within these governments is only to be expected.

        OK! Going off topic, at least that's not illegal yet.

        'sadly, even though the U.S. Constitution TRIES to make it hard for pests to do much damage, the "stacking" of the U.S. Supreme Court with extremely liberal judges essentially overrides any such attempts by "re-interpreting" it whatever way they 'feel'.'

        Since a third of the supreme court, justices are Jewish and the other two-thirds are Catholic I doubt they'd be very Liberal about abortion for example and any woman made pregnant through a rape wouldn't get much sympathy from them.

        1. Tom Paine Silver badge

          Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

          Politicising the judiciary /by design/ is just one of many, many ways the US constitution has clearly outlived it's usefulness and is now in the way of any sort of progress away from a slow descent towards a second civil war. Yeah, it might well take several more decades, but it's coming., mark my words.

      4. ITS Retired
        Facepalm

        Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

        May I remind you that it was a conservative leaning Supreme Court that install George Walker Bush and we ended up with wars that are still ongoing. To say nothing about invading the wrong country.

        A Liberal Supreme Court rightfully would have refuse do hear the case that installed Bush and Al Gore would have won.

        Wala! No 9/11. Russia would be much friendlier;er to us, US, and we, the US, would not now be the worlds #1 terrorist nation, supplying both side in many cases.

        1. Tom Paine Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

          I think you meant "voila!"

      5. Efros
        Thumb Down

        Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

        (more howler downvotes, thank you)

        Count yourself lucky we're limited to only one!

        1. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Happy

          Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

          "Count yourself lucky we're limited to only one!"

          heh, that's good. nice reply.

          [what multiplication factor should I consider when seeing the totals?]

      6. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I can believe that the Russians are intentionally trying to influence/compromise things.

        Indeed Bob.

        "Obamacare" originated in the Senate, yet SCOTUS ruled that it was OK because it was really a tax.

        Sadly, the constitution does not allow tax law to originate in the Senate. Therefore "Obamacare" should have been overthrown on constitutional grounds. Liberal justices have a tendency to piss on the US Constitution - no news there.

    3. RIBrsiq

      @Marketing Hack

      I mostly agree. Except to say that some of the affairs in question are in fact private and thus belong on private servers. Also, government servers and networks are not necessarily any more secure: recall the hack of the Office of Personnel Management systems, a while back.

      What's needed is an emphasise on security across the board. Security should always be a corner stone and never an afterthought, I think. But then again, I might be biased.

      1. Thomas Dial

        Re: @Marketing Hack

        By published reports, the OPM penetration was an inside job, in that it began with use of the credentials from the non-government system of an authorized contractor employed user. That is not an indication that OPM was secure; the fact they were not using two factor authentication for all access is a black mark against them. It does, however, indicate that security is hard and requires attention to an awful lot of detail, and people, especially in large networks like that of OPM.

        The Democratic Party server penetration, on the other hand, appears to have been a straight external exploitation of some combination of built-in and administrator allowed vulnerabilities.

  5. Bloodbeastterror

    Trump to blame... again...

    Isn't it exactly what the baboon explicitly asked the Russians to do - hack the US elections to discover info on Clinton's emails?

  6. tom dial Silver badge

    I hesitated between the downvote and the upvote I finally registered, mainly because the problem is a bit more complex and involves more slackness by the Senate and House of Representatives than the post suggests.

    The President appoints judges and justices with the advice and consent of the Senate, which does not have to approve the nominee. The Senate and House together have passed laws that delivered a lot of power to the executive branch, irrespective of the President who heads it, and the presidents have welcomed it and run with it. The Congress does not have to do that (on paper) but over time have allowed the federal government to take on so many things that their failure to act creates deafening uproar and great indignation that uniformly has caused them to back down. Worse, they have passed laws that delegate to the executive branch legislative powers that, if they were doing their jobs, they would have guarded jealously. They even have allowed, and funded wars, for most of the last 70 years without the constitutionally required declaration of war. As a group they are feckless and spineless.

    The expansive responsibility and power of the federal government does not go unchallenged, and the ensuing litigation dramatically increases the importance of judges at all levels, but most importantly the Supreme Court, and requires increasing politicization of judicial appointments to ensure "correct" decisions. It also explains much about why lefties are so fearful of a President Trump with the capability and presumable willingness to use that power "wrongly" and the Trump supporters are similarly fearful of a Clinton win. The truth is that if either one of them is elected, we are in deep trouble.

    My neighbor has the short version on a yard sign:

    Everybody

    Sucks

    We're Screwed

    2016

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Find Me A Lobbyist To Put In Charge!

    If a nation is going to engage in cyber espionage, then perhaps that nation should secure its own systems first.

    And if a nation is not going to engage in cyber espionage, then perhaps that nation should secure its own systems first.

  8. FuzzyTheBear
    Mushroom

    Rewrite phrase ...

    " could have authorized these activities " in " could have requested these activities to take place in order to interfere with the internal politics of another sovereign nation. "

    I therefore make the observation and propose that WE send them the ball back and hack their servers and publish emails, internal party notes , memos , papers and everything they use the internet for and put it on sites that can be accessed by their population. .. Restart the old shortwave stations , boost power by 100 and broadcast to their population programs where their memos are read live on the air .Give them a notice : stop hacking us or we chop in one foot pieces the cables that links them to the internet from their country and send the pieces back one by one in boxes marked " postage due " to the Kremlin.

    Why play Mr Nice Guy ?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Why play Mr Nice Guy?

      As the rest of the world now knows thanks to Ms. Manning and Mr. Snowden, you never did.

      You will recover your moral right to berate others other their hacking, spying, and interference in others' internal affairs at approximately the same time these two join Martin Luther King on the Mall as the national heroes they are.

      1. Pompous Git Silver badge

        Re: Why play Mr Nice Guy?

        As the rest of the world now knows thanks to Ms. Manning and Mr. Snowden, you never did.

        You will recover your moral right to berate others other their hacking, spying, and interference in others' internal affairs at approximately the same time these two join Martin Luther King on the Mall as the national heroes they are.

        Somewhat apt:

        Redgum: The Drover's Dog

      2. Kurt Meyer

        Re: Why play Mr Nice Guy?

        @ AC

        "... you never did."

        Absolutely right AC, they never did.

    2. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      Re: Rewrite phrase ...

      You missed when the ball went into their court, what you see is returning the ball.

      The Russian election was (quite clumsily) attempted to be influenced by USA by timing the "leak" of Panama papers to it. The papers were very suspiciously missing any all USA usual suspects while containing the key Russian ones as well as a few others here and there "for veracity". That spoiled the desired effect of the leak by the way, because even the opposition press identified the leak as a likely hatchet job trying to influence the elections.

      What do you expect? That an order was not given to lob this one back in the same currency?

      The overall lesson is - cannot stand the heat - get out of the kitchen. Or to be more exact - do not even try to get in.

      1. Sandtitz Silver badge

        Re: Rewrite phrase ... @Voland's

        The papers were very suspiciously missing any all USA usual suspects while containing the key Russian ones as well as a few others here and there "for veracity".

        Others would argue that it was aimed at the Chinese rulers and so forth.

        Wikipedia lists a few reasons why there are not that many US citizens/companies on the list: the "US-Panama Free Trade Agreement", "Shell companies can be created in the United States", "Major international banks based in America tend to have offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands instead", and "US laws like FATCA and the TIEAs of 2010".

        If you think the Panama Papers have been edited to remove US politicians or add Russian counterparts then show us some evidence of this. The fact that the Russians immediately downplayed the Papers as "Putinophobia" without checking the authenticity of these allegations speaks volumes.

      2. Tom Paine Silver badge

        Re: Rewrite phrase ...

        There were very few Americans in the Panama leak because Americans don't NEED to go offshore to avoid or evade tax; there are multiple onshore jurisdictions that offer all the same benefits - lack of transparency and reporting requirements, for instance. See for instance:

        http://www.taxjusticeblog.org/archive/2015/12/what_makes_delaware_an_onshore.php

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/04/05/how-the-u-s-became-one-of-the-worlds-biggest-tax-havens/

        It helps to know what you're talking about before erecting a wild conspiracy theory on foundations of hot air.

    3. Tom Paine Silver badge

      Re: Rewrite phrase ...

      Go for it, knock yourself out. Speak good Russian, do you?

  9. Mark 85 Silver badge

    Who to believe???

    DHS or Troy Hunt? Is it state actors from Russia, China, etc.. or crooks and kids? I'm thinking someone is blowing smoke because they really haven't a clue.

  10. Schultz
    Facepalm

    Evil Russians doing evil ...

    with plausible deniability, of course. Good thing we have the angelic Americans to protect the world. And be assured, they are willing to do anything to protect you. (Including breaking any law, violate human rights and the Geneva convention, ...)

    Call me cynical, but I am still looking for the good side. Sweden - but what about the Assange weirdness? Switzerland - if they wouldn't play safe harbor to all that criminal money. It's a crooked world out there.

    1. Steven Roper

      Re: Evil Russians doing evil ...

      Iceland looks like the best option given the way the world seems to be going,

    2. Archtech Silver badge

      Re: Evil Russians doing evil ...

      "Good thing we have the angelic Americans to protect the world. And be assured, they are willing to do anything to protect you".

      "'It became necessary to destroy the town to save it', a United States major said today".

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%E1%BA%BFn_Tre

      What they did for Ben Tre, they would do for you. Believe it.

    3. Archtech Silver badge

      Re: Evil Russians doing evil ...

      "Call me cynical, but I am still looking for the good side. Sweden - but what about the Assange weirdness? Switzerland - if they wouldn't play safe harbor to all that criminal money".

      Have you considered Russia? 8-)

  11. GrapeBunch Bronze badge

    Look at it from their point of view

    Take the name of a candidate, transliterate it to Russian, then back to English: Tramp. It is impossible to pronounce the name of the other candidate in Russian. If you put the stress where it belongs, on the first syllable, that degrades the sound of the unstressed vowel. So CLIN-tan is about as close as you'll get.

    "We watched the Presidential Debates with much mirth. Comrade Ivan Nikolaevich proposed that each time we laughed, the sinner should propose a toast to one of the 50 glorious States. By the time we got to Ouaioming, Ivan Nikolaevich himself was completely plastered. We were finished the 50 States, but the debate was still going. Suddenly, Boris Andreevich said "Puerto Rico!". By the time we were truly finished toasting, there were 257 glorious States, including our beloved Rodina."

    1. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

      Re: Look at it from their point of view

      "It is impossible to pronounce the name of the other candidate in Russian."

      I'm not totally sure of the point here, because after that much little water I doubt any of them could pronounce Russian names in Russian.

  12. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Joke

    outragesous. A foreign power seeks to influence who wins the US Presidential Election.

    And won't pay honest American ex-politicians, lobbyists (often the same people) and PR people to do so!

    The audacity. The cheek.

    1. Archtech Silver badge

      Re: outragesous. A foreign power seeks to influence who wins the US Presidential Election.

      "The audacity. The cheek".

      Worse still, the parsimony...

  13. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    1. Steven Roper

      It's not so much the Reg, they seem to be as reasonable with their moderation as ever, but there does seem to be a small army of SJWs among the commentards who vigorously downvote any pro-Trump/anti-Clinton commentary, as well as any commentary critical of progressive/liberal/leftist ideology in general. Most of them seemed to turn up around about the time Page and Worstall left, although a few have been here for longer. You'll likely see them all dogpile your post as well as this post with downvotes just for pointing them out.

      Anyway, have an upvote.

      1. heyrick Silver badge

        "any pro-Trump/anti-Clinton commentary"

        I think the problem with the two party system is you can't really berate Clinton without appearing to support Trump (and what sane person would?). There's no sod-the-both-of-them third option. As was mentioned above, it's getting to the point where it won't matter which America picks. They'll be screwed either way. Some choice.

        1. a_yank_lurker Silver badge

          I berate both, Felon more so than Blowhard - do not like either and will vote Libertarian anyway. The problem is many partisans can not stand the truth that their beloved candidate is a POS. With Felon and Blowhard the argument is which smells worse.

        2. Adrian 4 Silver badge

          Not just America. It's been that way in Britain for a decade or two. Maybe Corbyn will break the mould.

      2. GrapeBunch Bronze badge

        Not here, Steven Roper. Yes, I will downvote the rantings of a sloganeering ideologue, but I upvoted thoughtful criticism of Democrat presidents in this very thread.

        One impediment to global discussion is that the word "liberal" (sometimes "Liberal") means different things is different places. Liberal is different in Canada from Australia, the UK, Russia, and especially USA. So when a discussion of a USA topic contains the word "liberal", you kind-of already know that the speaker is a USA-ian, and that he's likely on auto-pilot.

        There are at least two other candidates for President in 2016: Jill Stein of the Green Party, and Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party. You'd think that the Libertarians would have a big following, because both of the major parties stand for Big Government (as evidenced by their records, in their different ways, and despite what they might say about it). Or that the Greens could occupy a vacuum on the Left side of the spectrum. Some say it can never happen (camel and the proverbial eye), but cursorally in 2016, I'd call those candidates and their campaigns "ineffectual", despite both parties having millions of fans, or at least survey voters. This should not be interpreted in any way as support for either of the major parties, nor for their own candidates.

        1. Pompous Git Silver badge

          One impediment to global discussion is that the word "liberal" (sometimes "Liberal") means different things is [sic] different places. Liberal is different in Canada from Australia, the UK, Russia, and especially USA. So when a discussion of a USA topic contains the word "liberal", you kind-of already know that the speaker is a USA-ian, and that he's likely on auto-pilot.

          Obviously the word "is" means different things in different places too. This oddity doesn't appear to be reflected in either the Oxford English Dictionary, or Websters New Twentieth Century Dictionary. Or Chambers for that matter. Where would I find this NewSpeak dictionary whereof you squeak?

          1. Mephistro Silver badge
            Angel

            Congrats, Mr. Git!

            You just caught a typo!!! Well done!

            1. Pompous Git Silver badge

              Re: Congrats, Mr. Git!

              You just caught a typo!!! Well done!

              First, it's "Pompous", not "Mister".

              Second, you may not have noticed but I don't play Grammar Policeman around these parts. However, I threw that in for good measure given that the poster appeared to be deprecating some perfectly good definitions in all of the dictionaries I own, not just the three mentioned.

        2. Steven Roper

          "One impediment to global discussion is that the word "liberal" (sometimes "Liberal") means different things is different places."

          It certainly does. I live in Australia, where we differentiate between "small-l liberals" and the Liberal-with-a-capital-L Party (and by extension the Lib/Nat Coalition) who are anything but. This is why I used the rather clumsy contstruction "progressive/liberal/leftist" to describe the group I'm referring to. I generally use the moniker "SJW" since most people now know exactly what mindset that's referring to, but I'd already used it in the post and wanted another way of putting it.

          Of course, SJWs themselves decry and belittle the use of the term, and claim that it's just an accusation used to shut down debate and stifle rational thought, which is ironic because that's exactly what those people do themselves with their incessant use of -ist, -phobic and related buzzwords like intersectional, microaggressive, privilege and so on. These words are simply shorthand for pseudosocial concepts most people are already familiar with and have been disputed ad nauseam - as is the term "SJW" to describe anyone who uses such words to rationalise discrimination and stereotyping against some groups in society while opposing it against others, and hypocritically calling that discrimination "equality."

        3. Kurt Meyer

          @GrapeBunch

          "So when a discussion of a USA topic contains the word "liberal", you kind-of already know that the speaker is a USA-ian, and that he's likely on auto-pilot."

          Here in the US, the words "conservative" and "liberal" are family-friendly, printable synonyms for "You ignorant Motherfucker".

          1. a_yank_lurker Silver badge

            @Kurt Meyer - lol and how true.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            What you doing over there, witness protection program? ;)

      3. Uncle Slacky Silver badge
        Holmes

        Reality has a liberal bias

        That's "liberal" in the leftpondian sense, of course.

      4. Tom Paine Silver badge

        "SJW" seems to mean roughly "not a sex case". In which case, guilty as charged.

    2. Archtech Silver badge

      And there you go! 8-) Six downvotes already. Where do those people get their "information" about the Flying Reptile, anyway? Most Register readers seem quite well informed about technical matters. Perhaps they are, like the engineers in "Dilbert", too gullible as a result of being used to dealing with people who habitually tell the truth.

    3. Mark 85 Silver badge

      It goes both ways. Slap one candidate and the supporters jump all over you. Slap the other one, even in the same post, and you still get kicked. And usually the kickings come with language I'd expect to see on Facebook, not a tech site.

      I'll be tickled when this election is over and we can go back to beating up MS, Apple, Googe, etc.

  14. Alien Doctor 1.1

    Do the yanks get irony?

    Probably not, they've never involved themselves in the affairs of any other country have they?

  15. a pressbutton
    Big Brother

    Different world views

    The US/EU/UK funds a Russian NGO that may not be fully aligned with the govt in power and that NGO points out that the Russian state could do better in some way.

    In the US/EU/UK this is called politics.

    In Russia this is called something between unwarranted interference in internal affairs and state sponsored terrorism.

    Russia sees the US damage/trash entire countries (panama, cuba, iraq, iran, afghanistan, add your own) to fight the US definition of state sponsored terrorism and no-one really talks about it in a negative manner (in the EU/UK).

    Russia wants some of that.

    Not to condone Russia's actions - or anyone else's

    Just pointing out that they think differently and shouting at them might not solve anything.

    Politely pointing out that deploying poisonous radio-actives in foreign capitals, shooting down passenger jets, annexing foreign countries and attempting to undermine the US election is not nice might get you somewhere in the long term.

    1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      Re: Different world views

      Politely pointing out that deploying poisonous radio-actives in foreign capitals, shooting down passenger jets, annexing foreign countries and attempting to undermine the US election is not nice might get you somewhere in the long term.

      Not likely.

      Now, not financing a band of "freedom fighters" which take primary schools, theatres and maternity wards full of hostages in the first place would have worked. Not telling them to f*ck off (as C*ntoleeza did) when they politely asked to stop would have worked even better. As we did not do either trying any polite talk at this stage is not likely to provide the results we want as it, quite rightfully, will be considered insincere.

    2. JustNiz

      Re: Different world views

      >> Politely pointing out that deploying poisonous radio-actives in foreign capitals, shooting down passenger jets, annexing foreign countries and attempting to undermine the US election is not nice might get you somewhere in the long term.

      This type of retarded thinking is exactly why, in only 75 years, the UK has gone from being a major world power to an insignificant 3rd world country.

    3. Archtech Silver badge

      Re: Different world views

      "Politely pointing out that deploying poisonous radio-actives in foreign capitals, shooting down passenger jets, annexing foreign countries and attempting to undermine the US election is not nice might get you somewhere in the long term".

      I suppose you are suggesting that Russia did any of those things.

      But it didn't. Feel free to break out and join the "reality-based community" any time you like. Continuing to exist in The Matrix is optional.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Different world views

      Politely pointing out that deploying poisonous radio-actives in foreign capitals, shooting down passenger jets, annexing foreign countries and attempting to undermine the US election is not nice might get you somewhere in the long term.

      The tiny little problem with the polite approach is that the Russians then might simply assume that the USAians are looking in a mirror are engaging in a bit of honest reflection.

      I do not know whether the US have ever "deployed" radioactive materials in foreign capitals (although they did their level best to put some into a river supplying drinkung water to a quater-billion people), but they most certainly did mess with their share of civilian airliners, and the current US election candidates are already doing a rather good job at undermining the campaign with no external help at all.

      The point here is that I cannot honestly see how either side in this particular dispute has a moral right to do anything other than shut up and quietly try to get its own house into some semblance of order. Unfortunately, until both Russians and Americans recognize that their current approach to international affairs is only harming their own (and everybody else's) interests, nothing will change.

      1. a pressbutton

        Re: Different world views

        polonium in london

        with fatal consequences

  16. NonSSL-Login

    Pot...

    ...meet kettle.

    Meddling in elections and reigns of powers in foreign countries is only allowed to be done by us. Thinks every country doing the same thing.

    They tried to make the public associate Trump with Russia over the last months and then continue the Russia is Bad mantra. It appears to be part of someone strategy to lose him votes and get Hillary elected.

  17. scrubber
    Mushroom

    At least in the arms race during the cold war there were obvious reasons for not using the weapons, in the tech war they deploy these weapons as soon as they have them, often against their own citizens. Farewell sweet privacy, we barely knew you and now you're gone.

  18. RLWatkins

    Why thank the Russians?

    Poor babies had their system cracked. But why thank the Russians for doing it, when any twelve-year-old script kiddie could have managed the job? I mean, they can't be that sophisticated when the guy who tried to hard-wipe the e-mail had to ask a Reddit board how to go about it. What morons.

  19. Archtech Silver badge

    Our systems are so rock-solid secure that...

    "'Only Russia's senior-most officials' could authorize the exploitation of our weak security..."

    Unless it was some semi-autistic kid in his bedroom in London. Which, based on known history, it could very easily be.

  20. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Are you ready to do something about everything? Or support that which is?

    Whenever/If ever one discovers the true virtualised nature of the realities of one’s media related existence, with ITs current myriad questioning presentations of projects and programs collapsing and destroying sub-prime politically inept and perversely corrupt self-serving narratives, is one furnished with that which is both feared and lauded most in a crazy world disorder ….. advanced intelligence which can lead smartly and differently to planes with systems never before populated and administered to/humanised.

    Coming soon, to a mainline streaming media channel targeting you …… The Future According to Virtual Machine Rulers Regulating Novel Content ….. Immaculate Source Provision.

    Something for the BBC to present/commission? :-) Hmmm? Who is now Creative Director there, now that Alan Yentob has been released?

    Or does the BBC routinely abdicate its responsibility in house ….. “To enrich people's lives with programmes and services that inform, educate and entertain.” [BBC Mission statement] …. “To be the most creative organisation in the world.” [BBC Vision statement] ….. and rely on third party independent media companies/organisation/actors/agents for alternate realities and Greater IntelAIgent Games Play?

    Is that too obvious a rhetorical question?

    1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      They won't go away, you know, when forever morphing into championing phantoms.

      And it is engaging to ponder on who and/or what else would be likely to be interested in providing such a vital service for servers. Another foreign media outlet on important politically sensitive missions? An enlightened aspirational political party in competition or opposition to intellectually challenged status quo organisations? A struggling religious order? A Right Royal Household Division in need of repair and rebuilding to former glories? Millionaires and multi-millionaires and billionaires who wannabe anonymous state and non state actor leaders by remote autonomous proxy? Special forces on secret virtual manoeuvres to secure all vital advantageous positions? El Reg?

      All or any of these can be possible with a custom made role tailored for them to play and employ. And is such what current earthbound systems administrations are presently enthralled with and terrified of?

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

  21. JeffyPoooh Silver badge
    Pint

    Your e-voting future...

    Clinton: 78,487,563 votes

    Trump: 5,895,785,195,425,642,754,895,957,342 votes

    With just a bit of help from his friends.

    Tom Scott's rant on e-voting...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI

  22. zen1

    sigh

    While I must admit I'm no fan of Mr. Putin, I'm going to have to ask for irrefutable proof before I believe any of that. I've voted in 8 presidential elections so far and this the absolute worst of the worst. On behalf of the average American, I'd like to apologize for my country, the actions of the current administration and the two absolute morons who are fighting for the position now.

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Diverse!

    "We have confidence in the overall integrity of our electoral systems," said Johnson. "It is diverse, "

    Well, there you go then.

    I don't want to pin Johnson down, but would it be safe to say it is of many colors and sings Kumbaya?

  24. Tail Up
    Paris Hilton

    Elections? There's a Rule #34 for it.

    And - them both keep a gun under the pillow. Vote, whos one is cocked up all night through?

    Paris, because she's a woman, too.

  25. Ted's Toy

    Government intelligence is an oxymoron. So how can any government have a agency which is intelligent?

    1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Well, now that we've thunk it, what you gonna do about it? Anything for Anyone to be Feared of?

      Government intelligence is an oxymoron. So how can any government have a agency which is intelligent? ... Ted's Toy

      Are governments then, with agency supplies of intelligence, simply self-serving fraudsters perpetuating a myth that they impart/import and export knowledge to build better worlds with?

      In a smarter world with new orderly world orders, would it be tolerated and allowed to survive and fester discontent and server to madness and mayhem with Clouds Hosting Advanced Operating Systems, or would CHAOS collapse and destroy its funding sysadmins and supply roots?

  26. mhenriday
    Boffin

    Clarity, above all !

    «Asked by The Register to provide further information about how the DHS reached this conclusion, DHS spokesperson Scott McConnell declined to elaborate, referring back to the issued statement.

    The DHS and DNI caution that they are not now in a position to attribute attacks directed at election-related systems to the Russian government, despite the agencies' claim that most of those attacks have come from servers operated by a Russian company.»

    That settles it then - we know those dastardly Rooskies did it, but we can't attribute it to anybody. Thank you, Ms Clinton, for enlightening us....

    Henri

  27. Aodhhan Bronze badge

    Wait...wait, wait.

    So, the US Government states Russia is trying to interfere in elections by hacking into systems; yet it has no problem with a bunch of other governments purchasing favors and God knows what else, by sending a bunch of money to the Clinton's via their foundation?

    ...and second. The only way to be sure with HIGH CONFIDENCE a group or government is attacking you, is to have access inside their network to witness what is going on, by whom, and under what control or (likely classified) documents or other official message/voice traffic stating the fact.

    Either way, it's hypocritical.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019