Home Tags Secretary of State

Tag: Secretary of State

North Korea tests missile in what may be step toward mobile...

Next up appears to be another nuclear test.

Secretary of State Tillerson used e-mail alias as Exxon CEO

Climate change investigation leads New York AG to request “Wayne Tracker” e-mails.

Magnetic storage reaches the atomic level

The magnetic field of a single atom is read and written, but it's not very stable.

Mike Pence used an AOL e-mail account for state business and...

As a candidate, Trump VP castigated Clinton for use of a private e-mail server.

Relaxing coal pollution, methane flaring rules: This week in Congress

A busy start to the 115th Congress with the use of the Congressional Review Act.

Tweet this: Trump White House potential info-security woes abound

An insecure phone, a press secretary posting his password, and private e-mail—really?

DOJ probing FBI’s pre-election handling of Clinton e-mail scandal

Enlarge / FBI Director James Comey testifies Tuesday before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill.Joe Raedle, Getty Images reader comments 17 Share this story It's been a head-scratching few months for FBI Director James Comey.
It all started last July, when Comey said Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton should not be prosecuted in connection to her use of a private e-mail server during her tenure as secretary of state. He next spoke about the situation on October 28—less than two weeks before the election—saying that the bureau discovered more e-mails relevant to the criminal inquiry that needed to be examined. Days later, on November 6—just two days before the election—Comey announced that everything was hunky dory and the newly discovered e-mail was unrelated to the Clinton investigation from July. The whole situation prompted many after the election to conclude that Comey's actions helped thwart Clinton's chances of winning the presidency. Now, the entire Comey saga will be investigated by the Department of Justice's inspector general, and his investigation will conclude well after Donald Trump assumes the presidency on January 20. Inspector General Michael Horowitz said the main purpose of his examination is to investigate "[a]llegations that Department or FBI policies or procedures were not followed in connection with, or in actions leading up to or related to, the FBI Director’s public announcement on July 5, 2016, and the Director’s letters to Congress on October 28 and November 6, 2016, and that certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations." Despite the new investigation, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) was quick to point out that nothing the FBI or Comey did can be undone. The review will not substitute the OIG’s judgment for the judgments made by the FBI or the Department regarding the substantive merits of investigative or prosecutive decisions.

Finally, if circumstances warrant, the OIG will consider including other issues that may arise during the course of the review. The probe, the agency said, was in response to calls from members of Congress, "various organizations," and the public. Clinton campaign press secretary Brian Fallon said, "My reaction is that it's entirely appropriate and very necessary but also not surprising." The White House said it didn't press for the inquiry. "This administration has assiduously protected the independence of inspectors general, so we wouldn't weigh in publicly or privately," press secretary Josh Earnest said. Eleven days before last fall's election, Comey spun heads when he forwarded a letter to congressional leaders, saying the bureau had renewed its investigation into Clinton's use of a private e-mail server.

Again, just months earlier in July, Comey announced that Clinton was "extremely careless," but he chose to recommend that Clinton not be prosecuted. Comey had said he was obligated to tell Congress in October about the renewed e-mail inquiry because he had publicly stated months before that the investigation was over. Trump seized on the October 28 letter, using it as fodder for his "crooked Hillary" campaign.

All the while, some members of Congress urged Comey to resign while others said the director may have broken laws designed to prevent federal employees from influencing elections. In addition to Comey's situation, the inspector general's inquiry will also investigate the timing, just days before the election, of a DOJ Twitter account that began dumping Freedom of Information Act files in connection to the Clinton e-mail investigation.

The inspector announced Thursday that it will examine if "allegations regarding the timing of the FBI's release of certain Freedom of Information ACT (FOIA) documents on October 30 and November 1, 2016, and the use of a Twitter account to publicize same, were influenced by improper considerations." Our story about that Twitter mishandling was titled "Rogue FBI Twitter Bot dumps months of FOIAs, causing controversy." According to the report: On Oct. 30, a long-quiet FBI Twitter account began releasing a torrent of links to documents on the bureau’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) library server.

Among the documents were several from the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server and a decade-old investigation into the Clinton Foundation over a pardon given by President Bill Clinton at the end of his term.

According to an FBI official, the flood of tweets occurred because of a backlog of updates dating to June.

The logjam finally broke when a content management system software patch was installed last week. Horowitz, the inspector general, did not say when he would issue his findings. President-Elect Trump did not immediately comment on the developments. While he doesn't have the power to scuttle the probe, he does have the authority to name or fire inspectors general.

Trump: It was probably Russia that hacked the DNC, Clinton campaign

Russia was likely behind the hacks of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has finally acknowledged. In his first news conference in about six months, Trump also said Wednesday that cybersecurity will be a top priority for his administration. He wants proposals on new hacking defenses within 90 days. “We get hacked by everybody,” he said. Trump’s new found belief that Russia was responsible for cyberattacks during the presidential campaign comes after months of doubting U.S. intelligence reports that blamed Russia.

But Trump also suggested U.S. intelligence may have leaked a 35-page dossier that accuses his campaign of working with Russian intelligence. “As far as hacking, I think it was Russia,” Trump said in his first press conference in about six months. “But I think we also get hacked by other countries and other people.” Russia “shouldn’t have done it; they won’t be doing it,” Trump added. “Russia will have far greater respect for us when I’m running the country.” Trump’s statements about Russian hacking during the press conference are the closest he’s come to agreeing with U.S. intelligence assessments that Russian hacked the DNC and the Clinton campaign in an effort to sway voters toward Trump. Trump’s press conference came less than a day after news reports saying U.S. intelligence officials have briefed him last Friday about Russian intelligence claims that it has compromising professional and personal intelligence about him. Trump and spokesman Sean Spicer slammed those news reports, with Spicer calling the publication of an unverified 35-page dossier on Trump’s relationship with Russian officials “irresponsible” and “salacious.” The unverified report, allegedly prepared by a former U.K. intelligence official, suggests the Trump campaign worked with Russian intelligence to smear presidential rival Clinton.
It also claims Russia taped Trump sexual liaisons while he was in the country. Trump on Wednesday declined to comment on the briefing from U.S. intelligence officials last Friday, saying the contents of that briefing are “classified.” Trump called the release of the 35-page report a “disgrace,” and he suggested that U.S. intelligence officials may have leaked it. Many news organizations refused to publish that “nonsense released by, maybe intelligence agencies, which would be a tremendous blot on their record, if they, in fact, did that.” Trump said he has reviewed that report outside of his briefing with U.S. intelligence officials.

The report was prepared by political opponents, he said. “It’s all fake news,” he said. “It’s phony stuff.
It didn’t happen.” Trump dismissed the report’s suggestion that the Russians have videotape of him in compromising positions. “When I leave the country, I’m extremely careful,” he said. Earlier on Wednesday, Rex Tillerson, Trump’s nominee for secretary of state, said he was concerned about Russian hacking. U.S. intelligence reports of Russian election hacking are “troubling,” Tillerson told a U.S.
Senate committee. Asked if he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the election hacks, Tillerson said: “I think that’s a fair assumption.”

Obama tosses 35 Russians out of US, sanctions others for election...

Enlarge / Obama just left Donald Trump a nice little inauguration present—a fresh pack of sanctions against Russia and evidence of Russian interference in the presidential election.Win McNamee/Getty Images reader comments 44 Share this story In an executive order issued today, President Barack Obama used his emergency powers to impose sanctions on a number of Russian military and intelligence officials and also to eject 35 Russians labeled by the administration as intelligence operatives. The order was issued as a response to the breach of the Democratic National Committee's network and the targeted intrusion into e-mail accounts belonging to members of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. Obama made the sanctions an extension of an April 2015 executive order "to take additional steps to deal with the national emergency with respect to significant malicious cyber-enabled activities." The order is being accompanied by the publication of data from US intelligence communities bolstering findings that the breaches were part of an information operation to manipulate the results of the US presidential election. The data, released by the Department of Homeland Security and Federal Bureau of Investigation as a Joint Analysis Report (JAR), contains "declassified technical information on Russian civilian and military intelligence services’ malicious cyber activity, to better help network defenders in the United States and abroad identify, detect, and disrupt Russia’s global campaign of malicious cyber activities," according to an Obama administration statement. "The JAR includes information on computers around the world that Russian intelligence services have co-opted without the knowledge of their owners in order to conduct their malicious activity in a way that makes it difficult to trace back to Russia." Some of the data had been previously published by cyber-security firms, but in some cases the data is newly declassified government data. The JAR (full text available here) includes information that will allow security firms and companies to identify and block malware used by Russian intelligence services, along with a breakdown of the Russian malware operators' standard methods and tactics. DHS has added these "indicators of compromise" to their Automated Indicator Sharing service. The executive order singles out the GRU (Russia's Main Intelligence Directorate), the FSB (Federal Security Service, the successor to the KGB), Esage Lab (a Web development arm of the Russian information security company Zorsecurity), the St. Petersburg-based firm Special Technology Center, and Russia's Professional Association of Designers of Data Processing Systems. It also names four individuals: GRU chief General-Lieutenant Igor Korobov, GRU Deputy Chief and Head of Signals Intelligence Sergey Aleksandrovich Gizunov, and GRU First Deputy Chiefs Igor Olegovich Kostyukov and Vladimir Stepanovich Alexseyev. The 35 Russians ejected from the US—individuals identified as intelligence operatives working out of the Russian embassy in Washington and Russia's consulate in San Francisco—were ejected not in response to the DNC and Clinton campaign hacks, but in response to "harassment of our diplomatic personnel in Russia by security personnel and police," according to a White House fact sheet issued on the executive order. In addition to those explicitly named by the order, Obama's order applies to: …any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have engaged in, directly or indirectly, cyberenabled activities originating from, or directed by persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States that are reasonably likely to result in, or have materially contributed to, a significant threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economic health or financial stability of the United States and that have the purpose or effect of … tampering with, altering, or causing a misappropriation of information with the purpose or effect of interfering with or undermining election processes or institutions. That could, if pressed aggressively, apply to a very large swath of individuals, including operators of "fake news" sites and others involved tangentially in the distribution of information that may be seen as intended to interfere with elections—including the still-unidentified individuals involved in hacking two state election commission websites. But many of the organizations in Russia that might fall under this banner are already under US sanctions. Just how aggressively these measures will be pressed will be left largely to the incoming Trump administration. President-elect Trump will find himself in a position of having to outright dismiss the evidence presented by the FBI and DHS in order to rescind the sanctions entirely. But Trump has already shrugged off "the cyber" on several occasions during the transition. On December 28, Trump responded to a question about possible sanctions over the hacking: I think we ought to get on with our lives. I think that computers have complicated lives very greatly. The whole age of computer has made it where nobody knows exactly what is going on. We have speed, we have a lot of other things, but I’m not sure we have the kind, the security we need.

White House Announces Retaliatory Measures For Russian Election-Related Hacking

35 Russian intelligence operatives ejected from the US, and two of the "Cyber Most Wanted" are frozen out by Treasury Department. UPDATED 4:00 PM E.T.

THURSDAY -- The US, today, formally ejected 35 Russian intelligence operatives from the United States and imposed sanctions on nine entities and individuals: Russia's two leading intelligence services (the G.R.U. and the F.S.B.), four individual GRU officers, and three other organizations.

The actions are the Obama administration's response to a Russian hacking and disinformation campaign used to interfere in the American election process. The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security also released new declassified technical information on Russian civilian and military intelligence service cyber activity, in an effort to help network defenders protect against these threats. Further, the State Department is shutting down two Russian compounds, in Maryland and New York, used by Russian personnel for intelligence-related purposes. Plus, the US Department of Treasury sanctioned two members of the FBI's Cyber Most Wanted List, Evgeniy Mikhailovich Bogachev and Aleksey Alekseyevich Belan.
Infosec pros will recognize Bogachev especially as the alleged head of the GameOver Zeus botnet.

A $3 million reward for info leading to his arrest has been available for some time. Treasury sanctioned Bogachev and Belan "for their activities related to the significant misappropriation of funds or economic resources, trade secrets, personal identifiers, or financial information for private financial gain.

As a result of today’s action, any property or interests in property of [Bogachev and Belan] within U.S. jurisdiction must be blocked and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them." This is the first time sanctions are being issued under an Executive Order first signed by President Obama in April 2015, and expanded today.

The original executive Order, gives the president authorization to impose some sort of retribution or response to cyberattacks and also allows the Secretary of Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and Secretary of State, to institute sanctions against entities behind cybercrime, cyber espionage, and other damaging cyberattacks.

That includes freezing the assets of attackers. The sanctions announced today are not expected to be the Obama administration's complete response to the Russian operations.
In a statement, the president said "These actions are not the sum total of our response to Russia’s aggressive activities. We will continue to take a variety of actions at a time and place of our choosing, some of which will not be publicized." The moves will put pressure on president-elect Donald Trump to either support or attempt to lift the sanctions on Russian officials and entities.

Trump has expressed skepticism at the validity of American intelligence agencies' assertions that such a campaign occurred at all. When asked by reporters Wednesday night about the fact that these sanctions were set to be announced, Trump said, “I think we ought to get on with our lives.
I think that computers have complicated lives very greatly.

The whole age of computer has made it where nobody knows exactly what is going on.  The NY Times reported today that immediate sanctions are being imposed on four Russian intelligence officials: Igor Valentinovich Korobov, the current chief of the G.R.U., as well as three deputies: Sergey Aleksandrovich Gizunov, the deputy chief of the G.R.U.; Igor Olegovich Kostyukov, a first deputy chief, and Vladimir Stepanovich Alekseyev, also a first deputy chief of the G.R.U. From the Times: The administration also put sanctions on three companies and organizations that it said supported the hacking operations: the Special Technologies Center, a signals intelligence operation in St. Petersburg; a firm called Zor Security that is also known as Esage Lab; and the Autonomous Non-commercial Organization Professional Association of Designers of Data Processing Systems, whose lengthy name, American officials said, was cover for a group that provided special training for the hacking. Wednesday, The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs' official representative, Maria Zakharova, said in a statement on the ministry's website: "If Washington really does take new hostile steps, they will be answered ... any action against Russian diplomatic missions in the US will immediately bounce back on US diplomats in Russia." 'Proportional' response The news comes after President Obama stated in October that the US would issue a "proportional" response to Russian cyber attacks on the Democratic National Committee.  The administration has used the word "proportional" when discussing cyber attacks before.
In December 2014, while officially naming North Korea as the culprit behind the attacks at Sony Pictures Entertainment, President Obama said the US would "respond proportionately." That attack was against one entertainment company, however, and not a nation's election system, so the proportions are surely different. "We have never been here before," said security expert Cris Thomas, aka Space Rogue, in a Dark Reading interview in October. "No one really knows what is socially acceptable and what is not when it comes to cyber. We have no 'Geneva Convention' for cyber."  According to Reuters reports, "One decision that has been made, [officials] said, speaking on the condition of anonymity, is to avoid any moves that exceed the Russian election hacking and risk an escalating cyber conflict." As Christopher Porter, manager of the Horizons team at FireEye explained in a Dark Reading interview in October, Russian doctrine supports escalation as a way to de-escalate tensions or conflict. "If the US administration puts in place a proportional response, Moscow could do something even worse to stop a future response … I think that is very dangerous." "The administration, fellow lawmakers and general public must understand the potentially catastrophic consequences of a digital cyber conflict escalating into a kinetic, conventional shooting-war," said Intel Security CTO Steve Grobman, in a statement. "While offensive cyber operations can be highly precise munitions, in that they can be directed to only impact specific targets, the global and interconnected nature of computing systems can lead to unintended consequences.
Impacting digital infrastructure beyond the intended target opens the door to draw additional nation states into a conflict.

This increases risk to civilian populations as countries see the need to retaliate or escalate." ORIGINAL STORY: Officials stated Wednesday that the White House will announce, as early as today, a series of measures the US will use to respond to Russian interference in the American election process.

The news comes after President Obama stated in October that the US would issue a "proportional" response to Russian cyber attacks on the Democratic National Committee.  Not all the measures will be announced publicly.

According to CNN, "The federal government plans some unannounced actions taken through covert means at a time of its choosing." Wednesday, CNN reported that as part of the public response, the administration is expected to name names -- specifically, individuals associated with a Russian disinformation operation against the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. The actions announced are expected to include expanded sanctions and diplomatic actions. Reuters reported Wednesday that "targeted economic sanctions, indictments, leaking information to embarrass Russian officials or oligarchs, and restrictions on Russian diplomats in the United States are among steps that have been discussed." In April 2015, President Obama signed an Executive Order, which gives the president authorization to impose some sort of retribution or response to cyberattacks.

The EO has not yet been used.
It allows the Secretary of Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and Secretary of State, to institute sanctions against entities behind cybercrime, cyber espionage, and other damaging cyberattacks.

That includes freezing the assets of attackers. The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs' official representative, Maria Zakharova, said in a statement on the ministry's website: "If Washington really does take new hostile steps, they will be answered ... any action against Russian diplomatic missions in the US will immediately bounce back on US diplomats in Russia." 'Proportional' response The administration has used the word "proportional" when discussing cyber attacks before.
In December 2014, while officially naming North Korea as the culprit behind the attacks at Sony Pictures Entertainment, President Obama said the US would "respond proportionately." That attack was against one entertainment company, however, and not a nation's election system, so the proportions are surely different. "We have never been here before," said security expert Cris Thomas, aka Space Rogue, in a Dark Reading interview in October. "No one really knows what is socially acceptable and what is not when it comes to cyber. We have no 'Geneva Convention' for cyber."  According to Reuters reports, "One decision that has been made, [officials] said, speaking on the condition of anonymity, is to avoid any moves that exceed the Russian election hacking and risk an escalating cyber conflict." As Christopher Porter, manager of the Horizons team at FireEye explained in a Dark Reading interview in October, Russian doctrine supports escalation as a way to de-escalate tensions or conflict. "If the US administration puts in place a proportional response, Moscow could do something even worse to stop a future response … I think that is very dangerous." "The administration, fellow lawmakers and general public must understand the potentially catastrophic consequences of a digital cyber conflict escalating into a kinetic, conventional shooting-war," said Intel Security CTO Steve Grobman, in a statement. "While offensive cyber operations can be highly precise munitions, in that they can be directed to only impact specific targets, the global and interconnected nature of computing systems can lead to unintended consequences.
Impacting digital infrastructure beyond the intended target opens the door to draw additional nation states into a conflict.

This increases risk to civilian populations as countries see the need to retaliate or escalate." Related Content:   Sara Peters is Senior Editor at Dark Reading and formerly the editor-in-chief of Enterprise Efficiency. Prior that she was senior editor for the Computer Security Institute, writing and speaking about virtualization, identity management, cybersecurity law, and a myriad ...
View Full Bio More Insights

US reportedly plans retaliation against Russian election hacks soon

Enlarge / Will Barack Obama order a major cyber-reprisal against Russia for election hacks before he leaves office? A CNN report suggests the response will be a softball.Photo by Carsten Koall/Getty Images reader comments 28 Share this story According to a CNN report, officials within the Obama administration have said that retaliatory measures against Russia for interference in the US election will happen very soon—perhaps as early as today.

But the response is expected to be "proportional" and include diplomatic measures and sanctions.
It's not clear whether there will be any sort of response in kind against the Russian leadership's computer systems and data. A proportional response, however, likely won't do anything to deter future efforts to use hacking and information campaigns to affect US politics or other aspects of government.

That's according to Dave Aitel, the founder of the security firm Immunity and a former NSA research scientist.
In a recent interview with Ars, Aitel said he believed that the US would take some sort of retaliatory action in the final weeks of Obama's presidency. "We're in a unique position where [President Barack] Obama can lay a haymaker down," he said, "and then Trump has to stand up.

And Obama has nothing to restrain him." Aitel predicted that the US response "will be big enough that it intimidates a nation-state.
It's like we are the only nuclear power." And he said the US response needs to be substantial, because the methods used to hack the DNC and John Podesta and the related information operations used to disrupt the campaign of Hillary Clinton are within the skill set of a team of penetration testers or anyone else with a moderate amount of technical skill. "Anybody could have done this," Aitel said. "That's the more concerning factor—it's less about what Russia did and more about, have we built a fragile democracy?" The US' judicial system, he noted, is particularly vulnerable as well. "Someone could start messing with court cases very easily.
It could be a billion-dollar problem." Go big or go... nowhere? Launching the sort of "big" response Aitel advocates for, however, would require acting in a way that doesn't escalate beyond the digital.

As Aitel himself pointed out, "Our [the US'] specialty is the hard stuff"—things like Stuxnet.

But much of what the US could do—or the National Security Agency, in particular—is in the realm of the cyber-physical, as in disabling infrastructure—actions that could be seen as too drastic or as an act of war. Early leaks from the Obama administration claim the CIA was planning some sort of "covert" operation against Russia (though not terribly covert, as information on the planned operation was given to NBC News).
It now seems like those operations have either been sidelined or have failed outright.
So President Obama's options at this point may be extremely limited. The measures that CNN reports are in the works are expected to include naming individuals involved in information operations, including the hacking and leaking of the e-mails of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton presidential campaign chairman John Podesta—the same sort of "name and shame" approach the US took with China over hacking by members of the People's Liberation Army.

The US response will not likely include indictments, but direct financial sanctions may be involved. The reports of the White House plan drew a response yesterday from Russia's Foreign Ministry.

Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova said, "The outgoing US administration has not given up on its hope of dealing one last blow to relations with Russia, which it has already destroyed. Using obviously inspired leaks in the US media, it is trying to threaten us again with expansion of anti-Russian sanctions, 'diplomatic' measures, and even subversion of our computer systems." Zakharova claimed that the Department of Homeland Security's alleged port scan of the systems of the Georgia secretary of state were evidence of a "White House-orchestrated provocation" trying to shift blame to Russia.
She added, "We can only add that if Washington takes new hostile steps, it will receive an answer.

This applies to any actions against Russian diplomatic missions in the United States, which will immediately backfire at US diplomats in Russia."

White House Set To Announce Retaliatory Measures For Russian Election Hacking

US expected to name and sanction some individuals involved in disinformation campaign as early as today, and conduct other covert responses at a time of its choosing. Officials stated Wednesday that the White House will announce, as early as today, a series of measures the US will use to respond to Russian interference in the American election process.

The news comes after President Obama stated in October that the US would issue a "proportional" response to Russian cyber attacks on the Democratic National Committee.  Not all the measures will be announced publicly.

According to CNN, "The federal government plans some unannounced actions taken through covert means at a time of its choosing." Wednesday, CNN reported that as part of the public response, the administration is expected to name names -- specifically, individuals associated with a Russian disinformation operation against the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. The actions announced are expected to include expanded sanctions and diplomatic actions. Reuters reported Wednesday that "targeted economic sanctions, indictments, leaking information to embarrass Russian officials or oligarchs, and restrictions on Russian diplomats in the United States are among steps that have been discussed." In April 2015, President Obama signed an Executive Order, which gives the president authorization to impose some sort of retribution or response to cyberattacks.

The EO has not yet been used.
It allows the Secretary of Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and Secretary of State, to institute sanctions against entities behind cybercrime, cyber espionage, and other damaging cyberattacks.

That includes freezing the assets of attackers. The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs' official representative, Maria Zakharova, said in a statement on the ministry's website: "If Washington really does take new hostile steps, they will be answered ... any action against Russian diplomatic missions in the US will immediately bounce back on US diplomats in Russia." 'Proportional' response The administration has used the word "proportional" when discussing cyber attacks before.
In December 2014, while officially naming North Korea as the culprit behind the attacks at Sony Pictures Entertainment, President Obama said the US would "respond proportionately." That attack was against one entertainment company, however, and not a nation's election system, so the proportions are surely different. "We have never been here before," said security expert Cris Thomas, aka Space Rogue, in a Dark Reading interview in October. "No one really knows what is socially acceptable and what is not when it comes to cyber. We have no 'Geneva Convention' for cyber."  According to Reuters reports, "One decision that has been made, [officials] said, speaking on the condition of anonymity, is to avoid any moves that exceed the Russian election hacking and risk an escalating cyber conflict." As Christopher Porter, manager of the Horizons team at FireEye explained in a Dark Reading interview in October, Russian doctrine supports escalation as a way to de-escalate tensions or conflict. "If the US administration puts in place a proportional response, Moscow could do something even worse to stop a future response … I think that is very dangerous." "The administration, fellow lawmakers and general public must understand the potentially catastrophic consequences of a digital cyber conflict escalating into a kinetic, conventional shooting-war," said Intel Security CTO Steve Grobman, in a statement. "While offensive cyber operations can be highly precise munitions, in that they can be directed to only impact specific targets, the global and interconnected nature of computing systems can lead to unintended consequences.
Impacting digital infrastructure beyond the intended target opens the door to draw additional nation states into a conflict.

This increases risk to civilian populations as countries see the need to retaliate or escalate." Related Content:   Sara Peters is Senior Editor at Dark Reading and formerly the editor-in-chief of Enterprise Efficiency. Prior that she was senior editor for the Computer Security Institute, writing and speaking about virtualization, identity management, cybersecurity law, and a myriad ...
View Full Bio More Insights