US Cyber Command Operations During the 2022 Midterm Elections

The head of both US Cyber Command and the NSA, Gen. Paul Nakasone, broadly discussed that first organization’s offensive cyber operations during the runup to the 2022 midterm elections. He didn’t name names, of course:

We did conduct operations persistently to make sure that our foreign adversaries couldn’t utilize infrastructure to impact us,” said Nakasone. “We understood how foreign adversaries utilize infrastructure throughout the world. We had that mapped pretty well. And we wanted to make sure that we took it down at key times.”

Nakasone noted that Cybercom’s national mission force, aided by NSA, followed a “campaign plan” to deprive the hackers of their tools and networks. “Rest assured,” he said. “We were doing operations well before the midterms began, and we were doing operations likely on the day of the midterms.” And they continued until the elections were certified, he said.

We know Cybercom did similar things in 2018 and 2020, and presumably will again in two years.

Tags: cyberattack, cybersecurity, hacking, national security policy, voting

Posted on January 25, 2023 at 7:00 AM • 5 Comments

Comments

Winter • January 25, 2023 7:15 AM

He didn’t name names, of course:

This reminds me of the Y2K “problem”. Then, and now, many people did not believe Y2K was a thing. And when nothing happened, they all claimed “See, nothing happened, this was all a hoax for doing $EVIL”. However, I have seen in person that people had to work hard to avoid it’s problems.

Now, with elections, it is the same, except now smooth running elections are seen as evidence for $THEM subverting (stealing) the elections.

No amount of work done to secure the elections will ever convince those who do not want to be convinced.

However, not naming names prevents the rest of the public from learning who it is that is threatening us.

Clive Robinson • January 25, 2023 8:35 AM

@ Winter, ALL,

Re : Proving a negative effect fron positive action conundrum.

“And when nothing happened, they all claimed “See, nothing happened, this was all a hoax for doing $EVIL”.”

It’s sometimes called,

“The Defence spending paradox”

In that you never know when you have spent “to much” where as “to little” tends to become both obvious and very costly as you get attacked. Something some at the far East of Europe are finding out, and other Eastern edged EU nations are currently re-evaluating.

Clive Robinson • January 25, 2023 9:00 AM

@ ALL,

Read this with “extreme care”,

“We did conduct operations persistently to make sure that our foreign adversaries couldn’t utilize infrastructure to impact us,” said Nakasone. “We understood how foreign adversaries utilize infrastructure throughout the world. We had that mapped pretty well. And we wanted to make sure that we took it down at key times.””

That “couldn’t utilize infrastructure to impact us” has more than one meaning,

1, adverserial prevention.
2, adverserial counter-action.

The first is effectively “gaging the adversary” so they can not get their message out.

The second can also be called reverse-propaganda where what ever message the adversary puts out you put out one to negate it thus supposadly cancelling it’s effects.

With the likes of the Internet the first aproach will inevitably fail for the same reason terrorists succeed from time to time. They as the attackers only have to get past your defence once, where as you as a defender have to catch every single attempt they make. So if a terrorist group makes ten attempts with one success the odds from their point of view are 1 in 10. But as a defender your probability of catching them all is 2^10 or around 1 in a thousand.

So it’s very likely that a major part of the defence was “reverse propaganda”. The problem with this is it “never balances” therefore as a defender you lay-down way more propaganda than the adversary can.

Of course this “excess” in propaganda can be as disadvantageous as the potential adveserial propaganda…

For many years it was illegal for the US to use propaganda against it’s citizens, but a couple of legislators slipped in a few lines to make it legal again…

And now the US appears to be in an “authoritarian mess”. I can not say it’s not a case of “cause and effect” but there is no way I’m going to rule it out without quite a bit of hard evidence to that effect, with all that implies.

Ted • January 25, 2023 10:16 AM

“Hartman said any attempt to physically tamper with U.S. election infrastructure – rather than seek to sway voter opinions – would likely cross a red line for the U.S., without explaining what those consequences might be.”

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/u-s-brings-back-cyber-team-to-combat-possible-election-meddling-1.1762167

"hold yOurs" • January 25, 2023 9:32 PM

@January:

I was alive during the Y2K scare and there were some reports of nuclear power reactor stations experiencing specific Y2K difficulties in Asian countries. But American journalism has a habit of ignoring the losses (or near losses) of “ethnic” peoples.

For example, when Ruth Bader Ginsberg died it was a huge spectacle nationally. However, when several hundreds of people died in tsunamis or sinkholes or hurricanes in Asian areas, nobody puts the US flags at half mast in certain urban that really ought to.

I personally put flags at half mast sometimes when nobody else will. A flag at half mast shows some kind of empathy, even to our (not-really-enemies) supposedly non-ally neighbors in this world.

In my view, anybody who isn’t an adversary, is by default an ally. Otherwise the whole world would be dead and gone due to militant adversarial abuse causing WWIII of everyone.

So anyway, the Y2K thing could have been as serious as the Fukushima reactors issues (which happened in later years).

Thanks for reading this.
Sincerely, “hold yOurs” (abcdeghijklmnopqrstuuvxz)

P.S. = https://youtu.be/t7STD2ESmWg?t=817

Schneier on Security

US Cyber Command Operations During the 2022 Midterm Elections

Comments

Leave a comment Cancel reply