Mediaboss Marketing

The U.S. government has not figured out how to deter the Russians from meddling in democratic processes, and stopping their interference in elections, both here and in Europe, is a pressing problem, the top civilian leader of the National Security Agency said.

The NSA was among the intelligence agencies that concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a cyber-enabled influence campaign in 2016 aimed at undermining confidence in the election, harming Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and helping elect GOP nominee Donald Trump.

This is a challenge to the foundations of our democracy, said NSA Deputy Director Richard Ledgett, 58, who is retiring at the end of April, in an interview at Fort Meade, Md., the agencys headquarters. Its the sanctity of our process, of evaluating and looking at candidates, and having accurate information about the candidates. So the idea that another nation state is [interfering with that] is a pretty big deal and something we need to figure out. How do we counter that? How do we identify that its happening in real time as opposed to after the fact? And what do we do as a nation to make it stop?

The lack of answers, he said, as an American citizen ... gives me a lot of heartburn.

Ledgett, known as a straight-shooting, unflappable intelligence professional, began his NSA career in 1988 teaching cryptanalysis how to crack codes and rose to become the agencys top civilian leader . The NSA, with 35,000 civilian and military employees, gathers intelligence on foreign targets overseas through wiretaps and increasingly by cyberhacking. Its other mission is to secure the government computers that handle classified information and other data critical to military and intelligence activities.

Asked whether the NSA had any inkling that the Kremlin was going to orchestrate the release of hacked Democratic National Committee emails last July, he demurred. I actually dont want to talk about that.

At the same time, he said, what Moscow did was no strategic surprise. Rather, what may have been a tactical surprise was that they would do it the way they did.

Campaigns of propaganda and disinformation, dating back to the Soviet Union, have long been a staple of the Kremlins foreign policy. Now, however, it is making effective use of its hacking prowess to weaponize information and combine it with its influence operations, or what intelligence officials call active measures.

In general, if youre responding to nation-state actions like that, you have to find out what are the levers that will move the nation-state actors and are you able and willing to pull those levers? said Ledgett when asked how the United States should respond.

The Obama administration slapped economic sanctions on two Russian spy agencies involved in hacking the DNC, three companies believed to have provided support for government cyber operations, and four Russian cyber officials. The administration also ordered 35 Russian operatives to leave the United States and shut down Russian-owned facilities on Marylands Eastern Shore and on Long Island believed to have been used for intelligence purposes.

Yet, intelligence officials including NSA Director Michael S. Rogers and FBI Director James B. Comey said on Monday that they believe Moscow will strike again in 2020, if not in 2018.

[FBI Director Comey confirms probe of possible coordination between Kremlin and Trump campaign]

So should the government mull other options, such as hacking Russian officials emails or financial records and releasing them in a bid to embarrass or show corruption? I think every element of national power is something we should consider, he said. That would probably fall under something like a covert action. But if thats the right answer, thats the right answer.

Ledgett is probably most well known for leading the agency task force that handled the fallout from the leaks of classified information by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden in 2013. The disclosures prompted a national and global debate about the proper scope of government surveillance and led Congress to pass some reforms, including the outlawing of bulk collection of Americans phone metadata.

But the disclosures also caused great upheaval in NSAs collection efforts, hurt morale, and damaged relations with allies and with tech firms that enable court-ordered surveillance, Ledgett said. It was a terrible time for the agency, he said.

He oversaw the probe of the internal breach; relations with Congress, the White House, foreign governments and the press; and the effort to prevent a recurrence. There was a bit of a narrative on the outside about this evil agency that hoovered up all the communications in the world and rooted through them for things that were interesting, and that wasnt actually true.

The operational hit was significant, he said. More than 1,000 foreign targets whether a person or a group or an organization altered or attempted to alter their means of communications as a result of the disclosures, he said. They tried with varying degrees of success to remove themselves from our ability to see what they were doing, he said.

The agency, which has some 200 stations worldwide, reworked capabilities including virtually all of its hacking tools. In some cases, we had to do things very differently to gather the same foreign intelligence as before.

Raj De, a former NSA general counsel, said Ledgett was relied on heavily by both Rogers and Rogerss predecessor, Keith B. Alexander. He has really been a source of steadiness for the agency, said De, now head of the Cybersecurity & Data Privacy practice at Mayer Brown, a global law firm. What is particularly notable about Rick is his willingness to engage with all types of people, to keep an open mind.

In December 2013, Alexander, when he was the NSA director, said that Snowden should be given no amnesty. But Ledgett told CBSs 60 Minutes then that my personal view is yes, its worth having a conversation about.

In his interview earlier this week, however, he said what he meant was that by engaging Snowden in conversation, the agency might have been able to learn what material had not been released and where it was.

Today, he said, there is no longer any need to talk to Snowden. Hes past his usefulness to us. Snowden, who is living in Moscow under a grant of asylum, has been charged with violating the Espionage Act, and Ledgett said he should not be pardoned. Ive always been of the idea that Hey, I think he needs to face the music for what he did.

Julie Tate contributed to this report.

Original post:
US needs to stop Russian electoral interference, NSA's top civilian leader says - Washington Post

Donald Trump could be forced to leave office overthe investigations into his administrations links with Russia, a former national NationalSecurityAgency (NSA) analysthas warned.

John Schindler, a security expert and former counterintelligence officer, said that if the US President was to face an indictment over allegations hiscampaign team colluded with Russia to disrupt the presidential election, it could put an end to his presidency.

Speaking to CBC radio, Mr Schindler said: If, not just people around him, but the president himself is facing possible indictment down the road, that could be a game changer. He could be removed from office for that, whether he wants to be or not."

Mr Schindler said that with the FBI investigation, actions by Congress and a possible independent inquiry, Mr Trump and his teams alleged ties to Russia would"inevitably" be made public.

The administration isnt getting away from this story, he said.

It comes after FBI director James Comey's confirmed the Bureau was looking into both Russias alleged interference with the 2016 election and also possible links between Moscow and members of Mr Trumps campaign team.

Other congressional committees also are investigating a possible Russian connection mostly behind closed doors.

Republican says there is 'more than circumstantial evidence' of Trump-Russia collusion

But there havealso been suggestionsthe investigation could lead nowhere.

Carl Bernstein, one of the journalists who broke the Watergate scandal, claimed the US President was involved in a cover up to hide connections between members of his campaign team and Russia.

Responding to these concerns, Mr Schindler said it was possible the investigation could come to a dead end and added: Trump, by inclination, doubles down, triples down, quintuples down at every opportunity.

Mr Trumps formerelection campaign manager, Paul Manafort, who was accused of once working to further the interests ofRussian President Vladimir Putin,is nowa leading focus of the investigation by American intelligence.

Mr Manafort volunteered to testify as part of the investigation and he is expected to be interviewed by the House Intelligence Committee, the panels chairman has said.

For Mr Schindler, the fact Mr Manafort is willing to testify showshe knows he is facing some very serious federal charges and wants to clear the air.

He said: It tells me that Trump's whole defence is one member of his inner circle away from turning state's evidence and spilling some beans and it starts to be all over. We're not there yet. But I think that day's coming."

See the rest here:
Donald Trump's presidency could be finished by Russia investigations, former NSA analyst says - The Independent

Foreign Policy (blog)

NSA Official Suggests North Korea Was Culprit in Bangladesh Bank Heist Foreign Policy (blog) While the NSA, America's premier spy agency, has far greater insight into North Korean cyber operations than private security firms, Ledgett's remarks studiously avoided any reference to what evidence the agency has collected on the Bangladeshi heist. Top NSA official suggests North Korea behind Bangladesh Bank heistDhaka Tribune US Preparing Cases Linking North Korea to Theft at NY FedWall Street Journal all 29 news articles »

Go here to read the rest:
NSA Official Suggests North Korea Was Culprit in Bangladesh Bank Heist - Foreign Policy (blog)

This report originally appeared on CyberScoop.

The way that U.S. government agencies respond to cyberattacks against the private sector from nation-state or other high-level adversaries is fundamentally flawedand needs to change, outgoing NSA Deputy Director Rick Ledgett said Tuesday.

Ledgett, the latest additionto a growing list of cybersecurity officials and former officialswho have called for the nations cyber responses to be overhauled, mocked existing response plansat an Aspen Institute luncheon roundtable hosted by former Justice Department senior official John Carlin.

The analogy a colleague of mine uses, Ledgett explained, is if your house catches on fire, you have to call the mayor to see if hell let you call the water department to ask them to turn the water on. And then you call the city council to see if you can get funding for the fire department to send a truck. And by the time thats all happened, your cyber house has burned to the ground.

Ledgett, who announced his upcoming retirement earlier this year, described how, under current law, wheneverthe technical expertise of NSA personnel is is needed outside of the military and intelligence agency networks it normally protects, there is an involved legal process.

Every study weve ever done of governments response in cyber says we need two things: integration and agility, he said. I think you can make a pretty compelling case that the current way we do that has neither of those.

Currently, Ledgett continued, The largest cadre of cybersecurity knowledge in the U.S. government is within the Department of Defense NSA and Cyber Command and its really difficult to apply that to the private sector or to critical infrastructure.

Any solution that doesnt let that happen with some degree of agility while still respecting the appropriate [restrictions on the] role of the intelligence community and the role of the military in my mind is fundamentally flawed.

The process requires a legal document called a request for technical assistance, he said, which has to go up the chain of command in the civilian agency requesting the help normally the Department for Homeland Security and across to[the Department of Defense] and then down to the NSA.

Our adversaries are moving at cyber speed, were moving at policy speed, he said.

Theres lots of time spent moving paper around between lawyers which could be more profitably spent onsite working the intrusions, hesaid. Absent heroic efforts by those involved, that model clearly is not one thats going to be successful going forward and we need something different, he concluded.

Moderating the lively discussion, Carlin who recently left the post of assistant attorney general for national security at the Justice Department asked whether Britains decision to create what he called a one-stop shop for cyber defense, could be a model.

I think we should look at that model and consider it and learn from our close partners in the U.K., saidPaul Abbate, the head of the FBIs Criminal, Cyber, Response and Services Branch. Its something we might want to move towards.

A single voice from the government for the private sector, said Ledgett, helps with the agility of defensive responses.

I think the idea of an entity that has people who can leverage all the different authorities of the different components of the government and can apply those authorities without having to go back to headquarters for a mother-may-I within some kind of constraints has merit, he added.

Carlin, now an attorney in private practice, said he did not think that Ledgett was alone in his critique.

I hear the same thing again and again [from private sector] they dont feel right now the government has the resources to [give them] the help they need, Carlin said.

Read more from the original source:
NSA deputy says US cyberattack responses must improve - FedScoop

Whether the topic is ex-national security adviser Michael Flynn's leaked contacts with Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak, Trump's unsubstantiated claim that former President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower or House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes' recent pronouncement that some of Trump's communications may have been swept up, to understand the story, one must understand the terms involved.

The National Security Agency, or NSA, is a US intelligence organization primarily tasked with the collection and analysis of foreign signals intelligence -- communications, generally through electronic means, be it a phone call, an email or something else entirely. This can also include metadata -- the information about the communications themselves -- like when, where and to whom a message is sent or received.

The NSA's mandate is to deal with foreign intelligence targets, like militants overseas or members of another government.

It is headquartered in Maryland, but its presence is felt globally, scooping up and processing information from people located virtually anywhere.

Its activities are covert, wide-ranging and linked to any number of US security efforts.

NSA has wide discretion to conduct surveillance on people outside of the US, but there are supposed to be legal barriers to snooping on US citizens. If the NSA picks up communications from a US citizen in the course of monitoring a foreign national, it is practice to "mask" the identity of the US person. Additionally, the identification of a US citizen mentioned in discussions between two foreign nationals is supposed to be masked.

But if the NSA or another agency with which NSA is sharing the information, like the FBI, wants to identify the person, it can do so if it believes it's necessary in the course of investigations or have probable cause to indicate there may be criminal conduct involved. Rogers said the number of people who have unmasking authority was limited in the NSA to about 20 people, while FBI Director James Comey said there were necessarily many more in the FBI who could do so because the agency's work involves domestic affairs.

Nunes said Trump's communications and those of people involved in his campaign may have been collected by the government through "incidental collection."

That means that in the course of monitoring for foreign intelligence purposes, the government may have caught the private communications of then President-elect Trump. But as noted later Wednesday by Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, incidental collection could refer simply to the mention of a US citizen, not that their communications were collected.

"If we are listening to two foreign spies, for example, talking to each other on foreign soil or two representatives of a foreign government, and they mention a US person -- that is incidental collection," Schiff said.

Passed alongside nine other amendments together known as the Bill of Rights, the Fourth Amendment is meant to curtail "unreasonable" searches from the government and require warrants based on probable cause for searches.

It is the main constitutional right that the US surveillance state butts against.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 established the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), a secretive court that can approve or disapprove spying requests. Its authority grew following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked documents in 2013 exposing US surveillance activities and techniques, leading to the passage of the USA Freedom Act in 2015. The law implemented a set of reforms to FISC, which as of 2016 had rarely turned down requests from the government.

Additionally, FISA is often used not just to refer to the law itself but authorized surveillance under it. Similarly, the terms FISA orders, FISA warrants, etc. are used regularly.

In order to invade a US citizen's privacy for a search or seizure, law enforcement is legally required to have a warrant.

Laws passed following the revelation have attempted to narrow the scope of warrantless wiretaps.

Section 702 of FISA is set to expire at the end of this year unless Congress votes to renew it and Trump signs that renewal into law.

It was one of the changes to FISA introduced in 2008 and establishes rules for the Justice Department and the director of national intelligence together target people located outside the US.

Government Communications Headquarters is essentially the equivalent to the NSA in the United Kingdom.

The United States has an intelligence alliance with four other English-speaking nations: The United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

The five nations share intimate intelligence as part of what they call the "Five Eyes" agreement.

In his appearance before the House Intelligence Committee on Monday, Rogers said asking GCHQ to wiretap Trump would be at odds with the Five Eyes agreement.

Continue reading here:
'Unmasking,' FISA and other terms to help you understand the wiretapping story - CNN