How they did it: GRU hackers vs. US elections

In a press briefing just two weeks ago, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced that the grand jury assembled by Special Counsel Robert Mueller had returned an indictment against 12 officers of Russia’s Main Intelligence Directorate of the Russian General Staff (better known as Glavnoye razvedyvatel’noye upravleniye, or GRU). The indictment was for conducting “active cyber operations with the intent of interfering in the 2016 presidential election.”

[…]

The allegations are backed up by data collected from service provider logs, Bitcoin transaction tracing, and additional forensics. The DOJ also relied on information collected by US (and likely foreign) intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Reading between the lines, the indictment reveals that the Mueller team and other US investigators likely gained access to things like Twitter direct messages and hosting company business records and logs, and they obtained or directly monitored email messages associated with the GRU (and possibly WikiLeaks). It also appears that the investigation ultimately had some level of access to internal activities of two GRU offices.

[…]

Yet, after a summit meeting with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin just days following the indictment, Trump publicly expressed doubt that Russia was involved. The president has said that Putin strongly denied any interference in the election – even as the United States’ own director of national Iintelligence, Dan Coats, reiterated the conclusion that Russia was responsible for the attacks. With such rhetoric, Trump has continued to send mixed messages about the findings of his own intelligence and law enforcement teams, while seeming to put more stock in Putin’s insistence that the Russian government had nothing to do with any of this.

After digging into this latest indictment, the evidence suggests Trump may not have made a very good call on this matter. But his blaming of the victims of the attacks for failing to have good enough security, while misguided, does strike on a certain truth: the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and DCC were poorly prepared for this sort of attack, failed to learn lessons from history, and ignored advice from some very knowledgeable third parties they enlisted for help.

A detailed look at how Russia attacked the United States election process. Sadly, this being the internet, we probably won’t be able to keep the discussion focused on the technical process, but can we all promise to at least try? Regardless of political affiliation, all of us should be worried about the election process of the most powerful country on earth being this easily manipulated by external forces.

43 Comments

  1. 2018-07-27 10:07 pm
    • 2018-07-27 10:33 pm
    • 2018-07-28 7:22 am
      • 2018-07-28 4:46 pm
  2. 2018-07-27 10:49 pm
    • 2018-07-28 6:23 am
    • 2018-07-28 3:27 pm
      • 2018-07-28 4:19 pm
        • 2018-07-28 8:11 pm
          • 2018-08-01 11:36 am
    • 2018-07-31 7:27 pm
  3. 2018-07-27 11:57 pm
    • 2018-07-28 7:15 am
      • 2018-07-28 8:45 am
        • 2018-08-01 11:58 am
      • 2018-07-28 10:46 pm
        • 2018-07-29 3:55 pm
          • 2018-07-29 9:05 pm
          • 2018-07-31 1:29 am
          • 2018-07-31 3:53 am
          • 2018-07-31 5:12 pm
          • 2018-08-01 7:10 am
          • 2018-08-01 12:15 pm
          • 2018-08-01 11:46 am
      • 2018-07-29 2:18 pm
        • 2018-07-29 9:38 pm
          • 2018-08-01 12:05 pm
  4. 2018-07-28 12:56 am
  5. 2018-07-28 8:31 am
    • 2018-07-28 2:56 pm
      • 2018-07-29 10:31 am
        • 2018-07-29 9:39 pm
  6. 2018-07-28 10:29 am
  7. 2018-07-28 1:52 pm
    • 2018-08-01 11:49 am
  8. 2018-07-28 3:43 pm
    • 2018-07-29 10:32 am
  9. 2018-07-29 6:05 pm
  10. 2018-07-30 5:55 am
  11. 2018-07-30 11:58 am
  12. 2018-07-30 12:40 pm
  13. 2018-07-30 2:26 pm
  14. 2018-07-30 11:56 pm