Dan Goodin — Russia reportedly stole NSA secrets with help of Kaspersky—what we know now

The Wall Street Journal just published an incendiary article that says hackers working for the Russian government stole confidential material from an NSA contractor's home computer. The hackers did so, according to the WSJ, after identifying files though the contractor's use of antivirus software from Moscow-based Kaspersky Lab.

The report may well be true, but, for now, there's no way to independently confirm it. The report is based on unnamed people the publication says had knowledge of the matter, and it provides no evidence to support its claim. What's more, the lack of detail leaves open the possibility that, even if Kaspersky's AV did help Russia home in on the highly sensitive code and documents, the disclosure was the inadvertent result of a software bug and that no one from Kaspersky Lab cooperated with the attackers in any way. Also lost in the focus on Kaspersky Lab is the startling revelation that yet another NSA insider managed to sneak classified material outside of the NSA's network and put it on an unsecured computer. More of this analysis will follow.

First, here's a summary of what the WSJ reported.…

Another hit job?

Ars Technica
Russia reportedly stole NSA secrets with help of Kaspersky—what we know now
Dan Goodin

Congressman Dana Rohrbacker Cites Ex-Intel Report Denying Russian Hacking

Aug 3, 2017

Press Release
WASHINGTON – Rep. Dana Rohrabacher today drew the attention of members of Congress to a report of “major significance in the debate over Russia’s involvement in the last election.”

The report, drawn up by intelligence community veterans, concluded that the so-called hacking of the Democratic National Committee before last year’s elections could not have been done by Russians, but was instead an inside job made to look like Moscow’s handiwork.

The group, called Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), made up of former U.S. intelligence officials, believes the emails disclosed were taken from DNC computers, not by hacking but by downloading. VIPS sent the report to President Obama on January 17, three days prior to President Trump’s inauguration.

“The findings of these specialists destroy the credibility of the charges that Russia hacked the system, disclosed the emails, and thus greatly impacted the outcome of the last election,” said the congressman, who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging Threats.

“These bogus charges have done great damage to our ability to work with Russia and have distracted the American people from the real threat of radical Islamic terrorism. This phony campaign has been used to disrupt the right of our new president to accomplish his goals and set the policies approved by the American voters.”

Rohrabacher on Friday distributed the report to his colleagues. He is available for comment.

Congressman Dana Rohrbacker

Rohrabacher Cites Ex-Intel Report Denying Russian Hacking

Moon of Alabama — The Undeniable Pattern Of Russian Hacking

A wide review of news sources finds an undeniable patter of international "Russian hacking" claims:

• Many, if not all such accusation, are based on say-so by some anonymous "official" or self-promoting "expert".
• Many, if not all such accusation, are rebutted within a few days or weeks.
• News about any alleged "Russian hacking" is widely distributed and easy to find.
• News of the debunking of such claims is reported only sparsely (if at all) and more difficult to retrieve.

Moon of Alabama
The Undeniable Pattern Of Russian Hacking
b

Miami Herald — Were the hackers who broke into the DNC’s email really Russian?

Is the narrative breaking down owing to lack of evidence?

Miami Herald
Were the hackers who broke into the DNC’s email really Russian?
Glenn Garvin

Rush to Judgment— The evidence that the Russians hacked the DNC is collapsing

To begin with, Crowdstrike initially gauged its certainty as to the identity of the hackers with “medium confidence.” However, a later development, announced in late December and touted by the Washington Post, boosted this to “high confidence.” The reason for this newfound near-certainty was their discovery that “Fancy Bear” had also infected an application used by the Ukrainian military to target separatist artillery in the Ukrainian civil war.…

The definitive “evidence” cited by Alperovitch is now effectively debunked: indeed, it was debunked by Carr late last year, but that was ignored in the media’s rush to “prove” the Russians hacked the DNC in order to further Trump’s presidential ambitions. The exposure by the Voice of America of Crowdstrike’s falsification of Ukrainian battlefield losses – the supposedly solid “proof” of attributing the hack to the GRU – is the final nail in Crowdstrike’s coffin. They didn’t bother to verify their analysis of IISS’s data with IISS – they simply took as gospel the allegations of a pro-Russian blogger. They didn’t contact the Ukrainian military, either: instead, their confirmation bias dictated that they shaped the “facts” to fit their predetermined conclusion.

Now why do you suppose that is? Why were they married so early – after a single day – to the conclusion that it was the Russians who were behind the hacking of the DNC?...

Crowdstrike founder Alperovitch is a Nonresident Senior Fellow of the Atlantic Council, and head honcho of its “Cyber Statecraft Initiative” – of which his role in promoting the “Putin did it” scenario is a Exhibit A. James Carden, writing in The Nation, makes the trenchant point that “The connection between Alperovitch and the Atlantic Council has gone largely unremarked upon, but it is relevant given that the Atlantic Council – which is funded in part by the US State Department, NATO, the governments of Latvia and Lithuania, the Ukrainian World Congress, and the Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk – has been among the loudest voices calling for a new Cold War with Russia.” Adam Johnson, writing on the FAIR blog, adds to our knowledge by noting that the Council’s budget is also supplemented by “a consortium of Western corporations (Qualcomm, Coca-Cola, The Blackstone Group), including weapons manufacturers (Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman) and oil companies (ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP).”

Johnson also notes that CrowdStrike currently has a $150,000 / year, no-bid contract with the FBI for “systems analysis.”...

AnitWar

Rush to Judgment— The evidence that the Russians hacked the DNC is collapsing
Justin Raimondo

Moon of Alabama — Fool Me Once ... - Crowdstrike Claimed Two Cases Of "Russian Hacking" - One Has Been Proven Wrong

The cyber-security company Crowdstrike claimed that the "Russia" hacked the Democratic National Committee. It also claimed that "Russia" hacked artillery units of the Ukrainian army. The second claim has now be found to be completely baseless. That same is probably the case with its claims related to the DNC.

Much of this has already been posted here previously, but b pulls it together. Moreover, it is relevant now owing to the recent testimony of FBI chief James Comey that the agency never actually investigated the alleged DNC "hack" forensically and there is good reason to think that it was actually a leak rather than a hack.

There are some good comments, too.

Internet security is highly important, of course, but without oversight it can lead to government management of the national and global information systems.

In this case Congress seems to be bent on a witch hunt rather than a real investigation.

Moon of Alabama
Fool Me Once ... - Crowdstrike Claimed Two Cases Of "Russian Hacking" - One Has Been Proven Wrong

b

Ray McGovern — German Intel Clears Russia on Interference

Mainstream U.S. media only wants stories of Russian perfidy, so when German intelligence cleared Moscow of suspected subversion of German democracy, the silence was deafening, says ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern

Consortium News
German Intel Clears Russia on Interference
Ray McGovern

Meanwhile the New York Times and the Washington Post are calling for investigation of Trump's "Russian ties."

The NYT and WaPo are inside the bubble media. They are widely regarded in the rest of the country as establishment mouthpieces and on the right they are regarded as the liberal "lamestream media." 

This is a huge plus for Trump, in that their opposition is an indication to his base that he is doing the right thing. Trump strategist Steve Bannon is well aware of this and welcomes the opposition as free publicity for his team.

Quinnipiac University Poll January 30, 2017 - American Voters Say Russia Interfered In Election; Most Support Sanctions And Many Want More

American public been out drinkin' the Kool-Aid again.

American voters believe 53 - 39 percent that the Russian government interfered with the 2016 presidential election and support 56 - 30 percent the sanctions imposed on Russia by the Obama Administration, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today. In fact, 76 percent of those who support existing sanctions want tougher sanctions.

Russia is an adversary of the U.S., 46 percent of American voters say, while 9 percent say Russia is an ally and 41 percent say it is neither an ally nor an adversary, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll finds.

A total of 67 percent of American voters say alleged Russian interference is a "very important" or "somewhat important" issue, and 68 percent want the matter investigated.

In a separate question, voters support 62 - 32 percent investigations into potential links between President Donald Trump's campaign advisors and the Russian government.

President Trump is "too friendly" towards Russia, 49 percent of voters say, while 3 percent say he is "too unfriendly" and 43 percent say he has the right attitude towards Russia.

Voters trust Congress more than Trump 60 - 29 percent to handle America's policy towards Russia.

"Beware the Russian Bear, say American voters, most of whom believe the Kremlin meddled in the U.S. presidential election," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll. "President Donald Trump is too friendly with Russia and voters say 2-1 they would rather have Congress, not the president, handle future relations with Russia.

"Should we let bygones be bygones? Absolutely not, say Americans, who want an investigation - and tougher sanctions."

American voters have a 70 - 9 percent unfavorable opinion of Russian President Vladimir Putin and say 78 - 8 percent that he is not democratically elected.

Trump and his team have an uphill battle in avoiding confrontation with Russia. Propaganda working.

Quinnipiac University Poll
January 30, 2017 - American Voters Say Russia Interfered In Election, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Most Support Sanctions And Many Want More

Brian Krebs — A Shakeup in Russia’s Top Cybercrime Unit

Update in the cyber situation in Russia. There has been some more information coming out but the translations from Russian have been rough, so I haven't put it up. This is an American cyber security guy familiar with the situation. It's the most comprehensive report available so far.

Warning. It's Byzantine and still a labyrinth. Not clear yet what is going on.

Krebs on Security
A Shakeup in Russia’s Top Cybercrime Unit

Brian Krebs, Krebs Security

The Moscow Times — Second FSB Agent Arrested for Treason Revealed as Notorious Hacker

More information developing on arrest of hackers in Russia. The FSB is the Russian government internal security service, which comparable to the FBI in the US.

More information than before, but the picture is still unclear and the Russian authorities have not clarified yet.

The Moscow Times in an English language paper, but the translation from Russian of the second seems to be originated by machine rather than the work of a competent human translator. 

The Moscow Times
Second FSB Agent Arrested for Treason Revealed as Notorious Hacker

5 Hot News
Hacker in uniform: the famous third defendant in the case of treason to the FSB

Jeremy Scahill — Seymour Hersh Blasts Media For Uncritically Promoting Russian Hacking Story

Pulitzer Prize-Winning journalist Seymour Hersh said in an interview that he does not believe the U.S. intelligence community proved its case that President Vladimir Putin directed a hacking campaign aimed at securing the election of Donald Trump. He blasted news organizations for lazily broadcasting the assertions of U.S. intelligence officials as established facts.

Hersh denounced news organizations as “crazy town” for their uncritical promotion of the pronouncements of the director of national intelligence and the CIA, given their track records of lying and misleading the public.

“The way they behaved on the Russia stuff was outrageous,” Hersh said when I sat down with him at his home in Washington, D.C., two days after Trump was inaugurated. “They were just so willing to believe stuff. And when the heads of intelligence give them that summary of the allegations, instead of attacking the CIA for doing that, which is what I would have done,” they reported it as fact. Hersh said most news organizations missed an important component of the story: “the extent to which the White House was going and permitting the agency to go public with the assessment.”….

“It’s high camp stuff,” Hersh told The Intercept. “What does an assessment mean? It’s not a national intelligence estimate. If you had a real estimate, you would have five or six dissents. One time they said 17 agencies all agreed. Oh really? The Coast Guard and the Air Force — they all agreed on it? And it was outrageous and nobody did that story. An assessment is simply an opinion. If they had a fact, they’d give it to you. An assessment is just that. It’s a belief. And they’ve done it many times.”

Should add, "through anonymous sources without attribution." Sure sign of fixing the policy.

Cui bono?

1. The Never-Trumpers

2. Hillary Clinton and the Democratic establishment

3. The advocates of regime change in Russia.

Doh.

The Intercept
Seymour Hersh Blasts Media For Uncritically Promoting Russian Hacking Story

Jeremy Scahill

McClatchy — FBI, 5 other agencies probe possible covert Kremlin aid to Trump

Happy Inauguration Day.

Why makes this story so bizarre is that the suspected Russian "interference" in the US election pales against the pattern of documented US interference in foreign elections for decades at least, with a well established structure for doing so and using a variety of agencies and operations. both direct and indirect. 

McClatchyDC
FBI, 5 other agencies probe possible covert Kremlin aid to Trump
Peter Stone and Greg Gordon, McClatchy Washington Bureau

UPDATE:

All anonymous, of course.

Crroks & Liars
Report: Investigators Intercepted Russian Communications With Trump Associates
Karoli Kuns

Sputnik International
US Media Speculation on Trump Assassination 'Pure Insane Talk'

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity — A Demand for Russian ‘Hacking’ Proof

MEMORANDUM FOR: President Barack Obama

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT: A Key Issue That Still Needs to be Resolved

Where's the evidence, or is this all inference?

Consortium News
A Demand for Russian ‘Hacking’ Proof

George Eliason — Indict Clinton For the Russian DNC Hack

More on the Ukrainian connection. For previous posts on this, search on "George Eliason" on this blog.

The Ukrainian connection actually extends far beyond the alleged Russian hacking. Ukrainian views including Ukrainian intel services have been stovepiped into US policy making since the Maidan coup d'etat.

Washington's Blog
Indict Clinton For the Russian DNC Hack
George Eliason

Gregory Elich — Did the Russians Really Hack the DNC?

Detailed and documented analysis of the US intelligence services' account of alleged Russian hacking ordered by President Putin. Fail.

Counterpunch
Did the Russians Really Hack the DNC?

Gregory Elich | member of the Board of Directors of the Jasenovac Research Institute and the Advisory Board of the Korea Policy Institute

Paul Robinson — Fact and comment

Paul Robinson examines the US intelligence report on alleged Russian hacking "ordered by President Putin" and finds it unsubstantiated.

None of the above in any way proves that the assessments in the American report are false. It is quite possible that that they are entirely correct. My point is that the assessments are not supported by the information which the report provides. Those inclined to suspect the Russians of the worst and to trust the US intelligence community will take the report at face value, while those inclined to favour Russia and to distrust US intelligence will notice the lack of hard facts and conclude that the report’s assessments are unjustified. One must assume that those issuing the report hoped that it would influence public opinion. Given the lack of solid evidence offered, it is unlikely to change anyone’s mind.

Irrussianality
Fact and comment
Paul Robinson | Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa

also

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is reshuffling his cabinet today, and the CBC reports that he will appoint Chrystia Freeland as Foreign Minister. Freeland was placed on a sanctions list by Russia in 2014. Canada, therefore, will now have a Foreign Minister who is prohibited from entering the Russian Federation. This must be a first in international politics.

Diplomacy from a distance.

Reading Professor Robinson's post, one wonders whether Justin Trudeau has lost his mind or is just clueless about the real Chrystia Freeland.

Irrussianality
A bad sign
Paul Robinson | Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa

Oliver Stone — The Russians Are Coming

Summary of the crazy. 

Stone doesn't mention the method in the madness though, which is at least in part feeding the military-industrial complex. 

Another part is promoting the power structure, which is under populist attack and wobbling on its feet after the electoral blow struck by Donald Trump. 

A third is maintaining global hegemony in accordance Wolfowitz Doctrine. 

A fourth is imposing liberal globalization in accordance with the Washington Consensus. 

The Very Serious People are struggling to look serious.

Includes links to supporting material.

Oliver Stone at Medium
The Russians Are Coming
Oliver Stone

Robert Parry — US Report Still Lacks Proof on Russia ‘Hack’

Long in inference and conjecture, short on evidence, as it none provided. Just more of the same. Same as "the Russians did it" on other incident like the downing of MH17 and the alleged "invasion" of eastern Ukraine. This doesn't like like making a case but like manufacturing consent for a fixed policy, specifically setting up the new president to be subservient to the deep state, molding public opinion against the new administration, and delegitimizing the incoming president. 

If that is the case, and many professional intelligence people think it is*, then this is real subversion of the democratic process and liberal governance.

Since the "evidence" is sealed behind a security wall, the public will never know the facts, and it will remain a matter of who one chooses to believe. Another breakdown of trust in the society.

Repeating an accusation over and over again is not evidence that the accused is guilty, no matter how much “confidence” the accuser asserts about the conclusion. Nor is it evidence just to suggest that someone has a motive for doing something. Many conspiracy theories are built on the notion of “cui bono” – who benefits – without following up the supposed motive with facts.

But that is essentially what the U.S. intelligence community has done regarding the dangerous accusation that Russian President Vladimir Putin orchestrated a covert information campaign to influence the outcome of the Nov. 8 U.S. presidential election in favor of Republican Donald Trump.

Just a day after Director of National Intelligence James Clapper vowed to go to the greatest possible lengths to supply the public with the evidence behind the accusations, his office released a 25-page report that contained no direct evidence that Russia delivered hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta to WikiLeaks.

The DNI report amounted to a compendium of reasons to suspect that Russia was the source of the information – built largely on the argument that Russia had a motive for doing so because of its disdain for Democratic nominee Clinton and the potential for friendlier relations with Republican nominee Trump.

But the case, as presented, is one-sided and lacks any actual proof. Further, the continued use of the word “assesses” – as in the U.S. intelligence community “assesses” that Russia is guilty – suggests that the underlying classified information also may be less than conclusive because, in intelligence-world-speak, “assesses” often means “guesses.”

Consortium News
US Report Still Lacks Proof on Russia ‘Hack’

Robert Parry

*William Binney, Larry Johnson, Patrick Lang, Ray McGovern have spoken out about US intelligence politicization.

emptywheel — The Declassified Russian Hack Report

Marcy Wheeler assesses the unclassified report in some detail and finds it wanting.

A key piece, however, is the finding that

Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries.

Significantly, this is contrary to the claims of the Clinton campaign and principal spokespeople.

emptywheel
The Declassified Russian Hack Report
emptywheel (Marcy Wheeler)

Zero Hedge is harsher.

The farce is complete.

Zero Hedge
Here Is The US Intel Report Accusing Putin Of Helping Trump Win The Election By "Discrediting" Hillary Clinton

Tyler Durden

John Aravosis — Trump and Russians use same talking point to disparage CIA, Congress over hacks

In an interview with the New York Times this morning, Trump called the investigation of the Russia hack “a witch hunt.” That’s the same phrase used this morning by Russia Today, aka RT, a Russian state propaganda organ.

It’s no coincidence that Trump and the Russian government are using the exact same new talking point at the exact same moment in time. Either Trump’s team coordinated with the Russians, or at the very least, Trump saw the Russian report and decided to parrot it. 

Which raises the question of why Team Trump continues to use Russian government sources to inform their campaign and now transition. This isn’t the first time that Team Trump has been caught using Russian talking points.

The narrative on the left that Trump is PUtin's stooge, or at least they are coordinating.

Remember how Obama was the "Manchurian candidate" for the right?

Remember how the left all but accused the right of treason in trying to delegitimize Obama, or HRC condemning Trump for not saying he would automatically accept the election results?

The more things change, the more they remain the same. Politicians will be politicians, and partisans will always be partisans.

America Blog
Trump and Russians use same talking point to disparage CIA, Congress over hacks

John Aravosis