11–20 of 56 posts
He could have made it all up and the article would have looked the same.
If your response to every bit of news that contradicts your worldview is a reflexive "it's made up", then reality has come apart at the seams and nothing is real.
He could have made it all up and the article would have looked the same.
I wonder why that never reached the same amount of outcry when Obama won.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your response to every bit of news that contradicts your worldview is a reflexive "it's made up", then reality has come apart at the seams and nothing is real.
That's not my response to every bit of news, but this article is about as content free as it gets. A bit of substantiation would go a long way towards covering the 'reveal' in the title, as it is not much of anything is revealed.
(Starts at 15m 24s)
I think the press should do a better job distinguishing between hacking attempts and phishing attempts. Phishing attempts are largely avoidable and it would serve not just the politicians but the public to be educated on best practices to avoid being phished. At my previous company we were tested once a month to learn how to identify suspicious landing pages or links/domains.
I don't know anybody who specializes professionally in phishing that believes this. What I hear from those kinds of people, and many others, is the opposite: that especially when you're trying to secure an organization, the one attack you feel helpless to prevent is targeted phishing. Technologists in particular are apparently easy to victimize; they underestimate how malleable the medium is, and how well sophisticat…
I know this is about congressional campaigns, but does anyone remember this from 2008? https://www.theguardian.com/global/2008/nov/07/obama-white-h... I wonder why that never reached the same amount of outcry when Obama won.
Probably because it wasnt one foreign hostile power directing attempting to sway one specific candidate. Or perhaps because there was no evidence or allegations against Obama or his circle was involved in treasonous activity with said hostile power.
I think the press should do a better job distinguishing between hacking attempts and phishing attempts. Phishing attempts are largely avoidable and it would serve not just the politicians but the public to be educated on best practices to avoid being phished. At my previous company we were tested once a month to learn how to identify suspicious landing pages or links/domains.
Couldn't disagree more. Generic phishing attempts are. Specific others aren't.
I used to get regularly tested at previous companies and failed a number of them where they were highly contextual e.g. emails were spoofed from real, internal emails asking you to check if a website was available e.g. JIRA, Confluence which have roughly standard website subdomains.
I know this is about congressional campaigns, but does anyone remember this from 2008? https://www.theguardian.com/global/2008/nov/07/obama-white-h... I wonder why that never reached the same amount of outcry when Obama won.
The 2016 US Presidential election, by contrast, was quite close: the winning candidate carried only 304 electoral votes, and lost the popular vote (which went by roughly 2 percentage points to the losing candidate). Several analyses have shown that even very small shifts in a couple of states would have sent the election the other way.
In general, people don't get worked up about landslide elections when the popular support for the landslide winner is incredibly obvious. They do worry about signs of interference in close ones, though.
This is, incidentally, what a number of liberal activists have been suggesting as a plan for this year's midterm elections, and the 2020 presidential election: in a close race, a small amount of meddling/outside influence can change the outcome. But a high-turnout race with a significant majority turning out to vote as a bloc is much harder to corrupt, or at least to corrupt in a suitably deniable way.
He could have made it all up and the article would have looked the same.
I don't understand. Is the 'he' in this case Eric Geller or Tom Burt? Does your post mean that you suspect the reporting doesn't go far enough to verify Microsoft's claims or that Microsoft is falsifying their report?
I don't 'suspect' that, it's plain obvious there is nothing to verify.
The article does not even give enough information to verify the magnitude of the claim it makes, whether or not it succeeded and so on, so we can take it as a fact that this happened but it would certainly help if there was some more substance.
Either this is an ongoing investigation or there isn't much substance here.
He could have made it all up and the article would have looked the same.
Come on man.. there's mountains of evidence and countless stories indicating foreign involvement to help R's in our election system. Your logic could have held some circumstantial weight if there was one, maybe two stories but its countless. It can't be all "fake"