Snowden speculates leak of NSA spying tools is tied to Russian DNC hack

Former NSA security scientist concurs "Equation Group" expose connected to DNC leak.

Read the whole story

 

[SixDegrees]

Dave Aitel, an offensive security expert...

Is he really that offensive, or is that just a personal opinion?

 

[peipas]

Ninhalem[/url]":tjbldkyg]So he's a scientist now? Thought he was just a former NSA technician.

The article was referring to the title of Dave Aitel, not Snowden.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to leave to take my dog Snowden to the vet.

 

[Coriolanus]

When the Russian government seems willing to interfere with US elections and to flaunt their ability to attack US agencies - I'm really left at a loss - what is the proportional response here? Clearly, economic sanctions haven't been all that terribly effective at deterring Russian malfeasance. What's left is there? Block Russian banks from the SWIFT interbank messaging system? That kind of response can have crippling ramification to the world economy.

 

[potato44819]

Coriolanus[/url]":322mbpgo]When the Russian government seems willing to interfere with US elections and to flaunt their ability to attack US agencies - I'm really left at a loss - what is the proportional response here? Clearly, economic sanctions haven't been all that terribly effective at deterring Russian malfeasance. What's left is there? Block Russian banks from the SWIFT interbank messaging system? That kind of response can have crippling ramification to the world economy.

We really should just dump SWIFT regardless. It's a shitty, bug-ridden system abused on an hourly basis.

 

[TheBytemaster]

Why does this feel like part of the backstory for a cyberpunk-themed spy thriller movie?

I can only imagine what the future will be like when things like the recent DARPA patching/hacking AI contest become everyday fixtures in high-security applications. And how much that will make this kind of attribution even more important.

 

[potato44819]

TheBytemaster[/url]":30uc5lxe]Why does this feel like part of the background for a cyberpunk-themed spy thriller movie?

I can only imagine what the future will be like when things like the recent DARPA patching/hacking AI contest become everyday fixtures in high-security applications. And how much that will make this kind of attribution even more important.

Whatever you do, stay away from Snow Crash.

 

[Justin Credible]

Careful what you say Snowden, you may find yourself persona non grata in Russia...

 

[Vincent294]

BatCrapCrazy[/url]":3e4rpitq]Careful what you say Snowden, you may find yourself persona non grata in Russia...

He's said a lot already if you've seen his Twitter. As long as he doesn't try to lead an uprising he could probably mock Putin's **** length and be kept out of pure spite. Hey, Snowden, my password's longer than yours. (Probably not, but makes for a good joke, right?)

 

[jgee43]

I know that Snowden is something of a cult hero in privacy and security circles these days, but why do we care what Snowden thinks? I'm much more inclined to believe Snowden because of Aitel, not the other way around.

In fact, if it were just Snowden talking, I'd take the opinion of the average Ars poster as about the same value as his. Agree or disagree with his status as an American hero or a traitor (or whatever in between), Snowden's actual security expertise isn't something that would make me stand up and say, "Whoa, I'd better pay attention to this."

 

[lewax00]

Ninhalem[/url]":1datswqu]So he's a scientist now? Thought he was just a former NSA technician.

The article was referring to the title of Dave Aitel, not Snowden.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to leave to take my dog Snowden to the vet.

To be fair, the article's subtitle does seem to be referring to Snowden, when read with the title.

 

[Novae DeArx]

I think the most intriguing part of this is the implication that the NSA has been materially influencing elections... But it's an open question as to which elections, which countries, which years.

A quick Google tells me that a large number of major countries use some form of electronic voting; I can't help but imagine that they'd be bloody furious if there was proof we'd been directly forcing a vote for a desired candidate (although it would explain some of the countries where parties that nobody seemed to like got elected).

Not to put on the tinfoil hat, but I also distinctly remember how intensely the exit polling numbers in the Hillary vs Bernie primaries varied from the actual results. Not saying anything, but it's interesting that this came to light right afterward.

 

[Wisetrader]

The media coverage (including Ars) seems biased as there is moral outrage that Russia would dare to cyber-interfere in US politics, yet at the same time the implication that US government itself, via the Equation Group, has been covertly doing exactly that in other nation's affairs, is pretty much glossed over

 

[Oz7]

High level US political officials seemed quite upset about the DNC hacks, which no doubt resulted in a covert response, which this is then likely a counter-response to.
(...)
No team of "hackers" would want to piss off Equation Group this much. That's the kind of cojones that only come from having a nation state protecting you.

One wonders what the counter-counter-response of the equation group is going to be? Or for that matter, what was their initial covert response? It's not like the Russians have an election that can be tampered with a la the current one in the US. There seems to be an asymmetry where one side is acting covertly and the other responding overtly.

Assuming Equation group is really US govt, I'd say Go USA. Tampering with an election by hacking one political party in the way it happened is despicable.

 

[gizmotoy]

jgee43[/url]":3kx3451q]I know that Snowden is something of a cult hero in privacy and security circles these days, but why do we care what Snowden thinks? I'm much more inclined to believe Snowden because of Aitel, not the other way around.

In fact, if it were just Snowden talking, I'd take the opinion of the average Ars poster as about the same value as his. Agree or disagree with his status as an American hero or a traitor (or whatever in between), Snowden's actual security expertise isn't something that would make me stand up and say, "Whoa, I'd better pay attention to this."

Probably because Snowden makes a nice headline and gets clicks. Snowden draws them in, Aitel provides the real information.

Seems like a reasonable way to both draw attention and provide real weight to the article, IMO.

 

[Big Wang]

Coriolanus[/url]":1byi788k]When the Russian government seems willing to interfere with US elections and to flaunt their ability to attack US agencies - I'm really left at a loss - what is the proportional response here? Clearly, economic sanctions haven't been all that terribly effective at deterring Russian malfeasance. What's left is there? Block Russian banks from the SWIFT interbank messaging system? That kind of response can have crippling ramification to the world economy.

considering the record of American government regarding spying on foreign nationals and officials as well as interfering with internal politics of foreign countries, I'd say Russia still has a long way to go to catch up with us.

 

[JustQuestions]

Novae DeArx[/url]":2fc9vchd]I think the most intriguing part of this is the implication that the NSA has been materially influencing elections... But it's an open question as to which elections, which countries, which years.

A quick Google tells me that a large number of major countries use some form of electronic voting; I can't help but imagine that they'd be bloody furious if there was proof we'd been directly forcing a vote for a desired candidate (although it would explain some of the countries where parties that nobody seemed to like got elected).

Not to put on the tinfoil hat, but I also distinctly remember how intensely the exit polling numbers in the Hillary vs Bernie varied from the actual results. Not saying anything, but it's interesting that this came to light right afterward.

A lot of us are convinced that election fraud has been happening in the USA for a long while.

There are two main genres of it:

A). The passive aggressive kind. This is like your 65 year old who has been a registered Democrat for 35 years and works at a voting booth during election season. They do everything they can to discourage the younger types from voting who may vote for Bernie. They hassle, they act like you shouldn't belong there, they mess up your stuff, read your information wrong, give you incorrect information, etc etc.

At a higher level, you could even talk about "trap" parties, like the American Independent registration debacle that happened in California.

Stuff in A) we can summarize as being in a legal gray area mostly. Some of it is legal, other stuff is only "slightly illegal." People get called out for stuff in A) every single election year, but nothing ever happens.

B). The direct kind. Miscounting votes, editing people's registration status, or direct hacking of results. This is the Serious Shit. If anybody gets outright caught doing this, we're talking about jail time.

However, we lack the oversight to detect shit happening in B), which is one of the reasons that I am convinced that it is happening. If there is no accountability, abuse is a given.

 

[pluckedkiwi]

Coriolanus[/url]":3ejqh8sc]When the Russian government seems willing to interfere with US elections and to flaunt their ability to attack US agencies - I'm really left at a loss - what is the proportional response here? Clearly, economic sanctions haven't been all that terribly effective at deterring Russian malfeasance. What's left is there? Block Russian banks from the SWIFT interbank messaging system? That kind of response can have crippling ramification to the world economy.

It is awfully difficult to stand up at the UN and call for increasing sanctions because some other country 'manipulated' the situation by exposing the truth (in a country supposedly all about transparency yet devoted to the opposite). They may have gotten that data through less than honorable means, but the US government does the same and far worse, so a little hypocritical to complain about it.

 

[Jackattak]

JustQuestions[/url]":2whe7gaf]

Novae DeArx[/url]":2whe7gaf]I think the most intriguing part of this is the implication that the NSA has been materially influencing elections... But it's an open question as to which elections, which countries, which years.

A quick Google tells me that a large number of major countries use some form of electronic voting; I can't help but imagine that they'd be bloody furious if there was proof we'd been directly forcing a vote for a desired candidate (although it would explain some of the countries where parties that nobody seemed to like got elected).

Not to put on the tinfoil hat, but I also distinctly remember how intensely the exit polling numbers in the Hillary vs Bernie varied from the actual results. Not saying anything, but it's interesting that this came to light right afterward.

A lot of us are convinced that election fraud has been happening in the USA for a long while.

There are two main genres of it:

A). The passive aggressive kind. This is like your 65 year old who has been a registered Democrat for 35 years and works at a voting booth during election season. They do everything they can to discourage the younger types from voting who may vote for Bernie. They hassle, they act like you shouldn't belong there, they mess up your stuff, read your information wrong, give you incorrect information, etc etc.

At a higher level, you could even talk about "trap" parties, like the American Independent registration debacle that happened in California.

Stuff in A) we can summarize as being in a legal gray area mostly. Some of it is legal, other stuff is only "slightly illegal." People get called out for stuff in A) every single election year, but nothing ever happens.

B). The direct kind. Miscounting votes, editing people's registration status, or direct hacking of results. This is the Serious Shit. If anybody gets outright caught doing this, we're talking about jail time.

However, we lack the oversight to detect shit happening in B), which is one of the reasons that I am convinced that it is happening. If there is no accountability, abuse is a given.

You should really, really try to live somewhere with mail-in ballots.

 

[Vincent294]

elhousehead[/url]":1r07bdop]"Speculating" - the forming of an opinion or theory without firm evidence.

"US officials have privately said" - what US official? Can you give us some names? How about a verified quote?

"Most-Likely" - seeming to be true but not factually proved.

Why perpetuate that Russian's are behind the hacks when we really don't know? The focus should be on why did the DNC allow itself to get hacked. Retail stores get hacked and the Stores are held accountable for not securing their data. The DNC gets hacked and they get a free pass (blame the Russians). Secure your network and this conversation never occurs.

Every time I see unverified conjecture that is posted as fact, I am reminded of "My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw Ferris pass out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious."

Obviously the DNC should've had better security (and better ethics too), but that doesn't give the perps a free pass, and evidence suggests it's the Russians.

 

[DiavoJinx]

Vincent294[/url]":6tv27edn]Corruption will never die, but I feel we can do better than today. Maybe the US and Russian governments will weaken each other?

You know... "The only winning move is not to play."

 

[Morley Dotes]

Hmm... I wonder if they were poking around in the DNC, and found someone else was already there...

We've already seen that the 3-letter agencies are more than willing to spy on the government (see Feinstein, et al).

You control their budget. You REALLY believe they won't spy on you?

The NSA may not have been quite as careful sweeping the breadcrumbs when hacking a US site as they would when hacking a foreign site.

Probably figured (correctly) that the DNC folks were so bad, they'd never figure it out.

However, I guess the NSA weren't the only ones playing in that sandbox...

 

[LeopardSeal]

Jackattak[/url]":24nwvwi6]

JustQuestions[/url]":24nwvwi6]

Novae DeArx[/url]":24nwvwi6]I think the most intriguing part of this is the implication that the NSA has been materially influencing elections... But it's an open question as to which elections, which countries, which years.

A quick Google tells me that a large number of major countries use some form of electronic voting; I can't help but imagine that they'd be bloody furious if there was proof we'd been directly forcing a vote for a desired candidate (although it would explain some of the countries where parties that nobody seemed to like got elected).

Not to put on the tinfoil hat, but I also distinctly remember how intensely the exit polling numbers in the Hillary vs Bernie varied from the actual results. Not saying anything, but it's interesting that this came to light right afterward.

A lot of us are convinced that election fraud has been happening in the USA for a long while.

There are two main genres of it:

A). The passive aggressive kind. This is like your 65 year old who has been a registered Democrat for 35 years and works at a voting booth during election season. They do everything they can to discourage the younger types from voting who may vote for Bernie. They hassle, they act like you shouldn't belong there, they mess up your stuff, read your information wrong, give you incorrect information, etc etc.

At a higher level, you could even talk about "trap" parties, like the American Independent registration debacle that happened in California.

Stuff in A) we can summarize as being in a legal gray area mostly. Some of it is legal, other stuff is only "slightly illegal." People get called out for stuff in A) every single election year, but nothing ever happens.

B). The direct kind. Miscounting votes, editing people's registration status, or direct hacking of results. This is the Serious Shit. If anybody gets outright caught doing this, we're talking about jail time.

However, we lack the oversight to detect shit happening in B), which is one of the reasons that I am convinced that it is happening. If there is no accountability, abuse is a given.

You should really, really try to live somewhere with mail-in ballots.

One of the reasons Oregon is an increasingly popular state to move to.

 

[nutela]

This triggers alert on my BS factor; why couldn't you disguise yourself better if you are good enough to get such high profile tools?

Surely someone is setting this up if by poor English skills "they must be Russians". Feels more like someone wants to blame Russia.

If I were to remain anonymous then the less data I leak about myself the better, esp. in diplomacy.

 

[SixDegrees]

nutela[/url]":3h5kbmuw]This triggers alert on my BS factor; why couldn't you disguise yourself better if you are good enough to get such high profile tools?

Surely someone is setting this up if by poor English skills "they must be Russians". Feels more like someone wants to blame Russia.

If I were to remain anonymous then the less data I leak about myself the better, esp. in diplomacy.

As noted in the article, it's quite likely they wanted us to know the Russians were behind it, as a warning not to escalate by way of, for instance, increased sanctions. It makes more sense as a shot across the bow, with a thin layer of script-kiddie-style braggadocio thrown in to obfuscate just enough.

 

[arcite]

Coriolanus[/url]":323ba18y]When the Russian government seems willing to interfere with US elections and to flaunt their ability to attack US agencies - I'm really left at a loss - what is the proportional response here? Clearly, economic sanctions haven't been all that terribly effective at deterring Russian malfeasance. What's left is there? Block Russian banks from the SWIFT interbank messaging system? That kind of response can have crippling ramification to the world economy.

The US is the sole superpower, no need to act petty. The US welcomes Russian oligarch billions, it's tax revenue after all. Sometimes they even acquire useful intellegence assets in exchange for offering refuge. Who knows, Snowden may become a bargaining chip before too long. The Clinton WH will be game.

At the end of the day, Russia needs oil at $100 a barrel to balance its budget. They're losing money every day, draining their $350 billion cash reserve just to keep the teeming masses supplicant toward the regime. Sit back and watch them flail.

For reference, Russia's GDP has now fallen to nearly on par with Mexico. Dark days ahead for them.

 

[DrCzcechyl]

Big Wang[/url]":36jffxyu]

Coriolanus[/url]":36jffxyu]When the Russian government seems willing to interfere with US elections and to flaunt their ability to attack US agencies - I'm really left at a loss - what is the proportional response here? Clearly, economic sanctions haven't been all that terribly effective at deterring Russian malfeasance. What's left is there? Block Russian banks from the SWIFT interbank messaging system? That kind of response can have crippling ramification to the world economy.

considering the record of American government regarding spying on foreign nationals and officials as well as interfering with internal politics of foreign countries, I'd say Russia still has a long way to go to catch up with us.

You are assuming that they have not been doing the same as the US. Knowing Putin, they probably been doing it for awhile and equal or greater measure. We cannot forget, he has absolute power in Russia.

 

[Xavin]

Careful what you say Snowden, you may find yourself persona non grata in Russia...

I doubt many Russians pay any attention to Snowden, even if they can understand English. Just having him pisses off the US government way more than any damage Snowden could do to the Russian government.

 

[Whiner42]

Wisetrader[/url]":3fhx8cfr]The media coverage (including Ars) seems biased as there is moral outrage that Russia would dare to cyber-interfere in US politics, yet at the same time the implication that US government itself, via the Equation Group, has been covertly doing exactly that in other nation's affairs, is pretty much glossed over

I think the "moral outrage" you hear is only coming from the affected organizations.

Yes, the revelations represent extreme abuses of privacy, but the fallout - apart from a few DNC staff resigning - has been nothing. Zero. Nada. If people are trying to influence the U.S. election, they're not doing a good job of it. The crys of "tampering" are nothing but political theater. This is why people are suggesting that the releases are only a "message" concerning god-knows-what.

What would be shattering is proof that Trump is a coke-head, or that Hillary has been having a decade-long affair. That would have an impact. But a good newspaper would do the same in a heartbeat if they stumbled on such juicy tidbits.

 

[Vincent294]

LeopardSeal[/url]":hktg4jnu]

Jackattak[/url]":hktg4jnu]

JustQuestions[/url]":hktg4jnu]

Novae DeArx[/url]":hktg4jnu]I think the most intriguing part of this is the implication that the NSA has been materially influencing elections... But it's an open question as to which elections, which countries, which years.

A quick Google tells me that a large number of major countries use some form of electronic voting; I can't help but imagine that they'd be bloody furious if there was proof we'd been directly forcing a vote for a desired candidate (although it would explain some of the countries where parties that nobody seemed to like got elected).

Not to put on the tinfoil hat, but I also distinctly remember how intensely the exit polling numbers in the Hillary vs Bernie varied from the actual results. Not saying anything, but it's interesting that this came to light right afterward.

A lot of us are convinced that election fraud has been happening in the USA for a long while.

There are two main genres of it:

A). The passive aggressive kind. This is like your 65 year old who has been a registered Democrat for 35 years and works at a voting booth during election season. They do everything they can to discourage the younger types from voting who may vote for Bernie. They hassle, they act like you shouldn't belong there, they mess up your stuff, read your information wrong, give you incorrect information, etc etc.

At a higher level, you could even talk about "trap" parties, like the American Independent registration debacle that happened in California.

Stuff in A) we can summarize as being in a legal gray area mostly. Some of it is legal, other stuff is only "slightly illegal." People get called out for stuff in A) every single election year, but nothing ever happens.

B). The direct kind. Miscounting votes, editing people's registration status, or direct hacking of results. This is the Serious Shit. If anybody gets outright caught doing this, we're talking about jail time.

However, we lack the oversight to detect shit happening in B), which is one of the reasons that I am convinced that it is happening. If there is no accountability, abuse is a given.

You should really, really try to live somewhere with mail-in ballots.

One of the reasons Oregon is an increasingly popular state to move to.

Go Senator Wyden!

 

[maksymko]

Coriolanus[/url]":3jcj2cro]When the Russian government seems willing to interfere with US elections and to flaunt their ability to attack US agencies - I'm really left at a loss - what is the proportional response here? Clearly, economic sanctions haven't been all that terribly effective at deterring Russian malfeasance. What's left is there? Block Russian banks from the SWIFT interbank messaging system? That kind of response can have crippling ramification to the world economy.

"Interfering with US elections" is just a side effect of them uncovering some dirty games US politicians play.

Personally, I have no problem with that.

 

[keithzg]

maksymko[/url]":3oa2p7df]

Coriolanus[/url]":3oa2p7df]When the Russian government seems willing to interfere with US elections and to flaunt their ability to attack US agencies - I'm really left at a loss - what is the proportional response here? Clearly, economic sanctions haven't been all that terribly effective at deterring Russian malfeasance. What's left is there? Block Russian banks from the SWIFT interbank messaging system? That kind of response can have crippling ramification to the world economy.

"Interfering with US elections" is just a side effect of them uncovering some dirty games US politicians play.

Personally, I have no problem with that.

Yeah, I have a bit of a hard time getting too worked up over leaks of private communications within an organization that makes up a half of the duopolistic power structure whose mouthpieces have been spouting "you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide". Don't get me wrong, I certainly don't trust the motives at work, but neither do I feel much sympathy for those in power that have now been affected by this. And yeah, there's more than a little schadenfreude at work here.

And I'd like to believe that they'd learn at least one or two correct lessons from this (my ideal pair would be that firstly, if you're an official vested with responsibility, don't pull shenanigans and expect to get away with it; secondly, that non-criminally-implicating information can still be quite damaging when the curtain of privacy is suddenly yanked back) but I'm sure instead they'll all just groupthink up a disastrous 'cybersecurity' bill or two that manages somehow to make everything worse in every respect.