Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Republicans Security AT&T Businesses Communications Government Microsoft Network Networking Operating Systems Privacy Software The Internet United States News IT Politics

RNC Is Preparing For Cyberattacks (cnbc.com) 96

Posted by BeauHD from the are-your-battle-stations dept.
An anonymous reader writes from a report via CNBC: The Republican National Convention will be a popular target for cyberattacks. An official in charge of securing the network has said the RNC already had to fend off a wave of cyberattacks before the convention opened. Many more attacks are expected throughout the convention ranging from "nation-states hunting for intelligence or protesters trying to disrupt the network at the convention," said the consulting chief information officer for the RNC, Max Everett. Donald Trump's campaign appears to only fuel attackers, security experts said. The convention opens Monday afternoon and will attract roughly 50,000 people in addition to a global audience watching from afar. "A successful attack could impact physical security on the ground, for example, by taking connected security scanners offline. It could also affect online activity, for example, by hijacking the livestream and derailing the GOP's message," reports CNBC. The Secret Service has designated the conventions "national special security events." Everett and his team of 70 IT specialists will be using Microsoft and ForeScout software to monitor the network in real time, working with ATT and Cisco on securing external access to the network and a firm called Dark Cubed to share real-time threat information among the firms trying to defend against cyberattacks.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RNC Is Preparing For Cyberattacks More

RNC Is Preparing For Cyberattacks

Comments Filter:

  • I'm going to be surprised if they find any.

  • Cripes, it's an open carry state, with an open carry believers, for a candidate that encouraged his followers to beat up protestors.

    If some one doesn't take a shot at them, then they will take a shot at the protestors.

    I would offer odds, 2:1 that someone attending the convention or a protesting against the convention will end up trying to shoot someone

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Archangel Michael ( 180766 )

      Yeah, because people with OPEN carry shoot others all the time for no reason. Meanwhile, anti-cop racist assholes have killed and shot over a dozen cops in the last couple weeks, and you're scared about Trump supporters? Yeah, Liberalism has no bias at all. SMH

      • Re:Should be worried about gunfire (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Fire_Wraith ( 1460385 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @04:24PM (#52536893)
        I'm not sure why you seem to think that a volatile high stress situation like this, with lots of firearms thrown into the mix, somehow isn't a situation where someone is likely to get shot, one way or another. The GP even noted that it could occur on either side. I'd hate to be a cop in that mix, or a protester, nevermind some poor jerk just trying to go to my regular job.

        I'm just glad I'm not anywhere near there, but it sure must suck to be those people.

        • I'm not sure why you seem to think that a volatile high stress situation like this, with lots of firearms thrown into the mix, somehow isn't a situation where someone is likely to get shot, one way or another. The GP even noted that it could occur on either side. I'd hate to be a cop in that mix, or a protester, nevermind some poor jerk just trying to go to my regular job.

          I'm just glad I'm not anywhere near there, but it sure must suck to be those people.

          Apparently people with tennis balls can overpower and kill people with guns, because while guns are going to be permitted, tennis balls are considered too dangerous.

          I guess the old adage is true; never take a gun to a tennis ball fight.

      • Re:Should be worried about gunfire (Score:5, Interesting)

        by OzPeter ( 195038 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @04:30PM (#52536929)

        Meanwhile, anti-cop racist assholes have killed and shot over a dozen cops in the last couple weeks,

        You could just have easily said returned Vets have shot up over a dozen cops in the last couple of weeks.

        • Re:Should be worried about gunfire (Score:5, Informative)

          by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @04:52PM (#52537103) Journal

          You could just have easily said returned Vets have shot up over a dozen cops in the last couple of weeks.

          ...except for the fact that their social media pages were packed to the rafters with anti-cop racist spew (and not, say, pro-military veteran spew).

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by OzPeter ( 195038 )

            You could just have easily said returned Vets have shot up over a dozen cops in the last couple of weeks.

            ...except for the fact that their social media pages were packed to the rafters with anti-cop racist spew (and not, say, pro-military veteran spew).

            And you say this knowing how poor the state of returned Vet mental health services are? Even the unhinged Vietnam vet is a well known stereotype 40 years later.

      • Re:Should be worried about gunfire (Score:4, Insightful)

        by fiannaFailMan ( 702447 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @04:48PM (#52537061) Journal

        anti-cop racist assholes have killed and shot over a dozen cops in the last couple weeks,

        Or as conservatives would call it, "exercising Second Amendment rights to resist a tyrannical government." Well? That's what insurrectionist gun lobbyists and militias want, isn't it? If using force of arms to resist a tyrannical government doesn't involve pointing guns at people and shooting them, what does it involve?

        Or is it different when Cliven Bundy types point their rifles at federal agents or illegally occupy federal buildings? Or in the case of the Timothy McVeigh types, blow them to kingdom come?

        Yeah, conservatism has no bias at all. SMH.

        • Re:Should be worried about gunfire (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @04:54PM (#52537125) Journal

          Or is it different when Cliven Bundy types point their rifles at federal agents or illegally occupy federal buildings?

          ...small difference: Bundy didn;t ambush or snipe at the aforementioned agents. Dallas? Not so much.

           

          Or in the case of the Timothy McVeigh types...

          McVeigh was executed to the relief and morbid delight of both sides of the aisle, if memory serves.

          • Actually, if you watch that video, it is clear that there was an ambush. Watch the video again, and ask yourself, where the guy came from that shot him. IT wasn't from a vehicle on the road, it was from 50 yards off in the forest.

          • McVeigh also attacked a "government" building. So, if the Parent to your post is insinuating that killing cops is equal to McVeigh rebelling against the government, then by all means he does have a point. Chances are, he views McVeigh with more disdain than the cop killers.

      • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        ... anti-cop racist assholes have killed and shot over a dozen cops ...

        Hey, hang on: Your usual whine is 'eveel gubbermint' and 'I can do whatever I want' but now you're bleeding for them? You didn't worry about all those homosexuals who got shot last month: I'm guessing they didn't fit into your 'capitalism first' brand of gun-toting libertarian-ism.

        It's easy to say the poor, the jobless, the ex-convicts, the mentally ill are less important, have fewer rights. That creates a different class structure in society; possibly a more egalitarian society than one created by weal

    • Do you have a problem with followers of a candidate beating up protesters? If so, you're really complaining about the wrong candidate.

    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      by wyHunter ( 4241347 )
      Given that the left is filled with violence loving wing nuts, I agree with you.

    • Re:Should be worried about gunfire (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Nkwe ( 604125 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @04:16PM (#52536839)

      Cripes, it's an open carry state, with an open carry believers, for a candidate that encouraged his followers to beat up protestors.

      If some one doesn't take a shot at them, then they will take a shot at the protestors.

      I would offer odds, 2:1 that someone attending the convention or a protesting against the convention will end up trying to shoot someone

      I would be more worried about those unlawfully carrying than those who are legally open carrying or those who are legally carrying concealed (with a permit). My guess is that most folks who are open carrying are doing so to promote / exercise their rights and are being responsible about it. The last thing folks emphasizing their rights want to do is perform an action (shoot someone in this case) that has the effect of generating negative public opinion.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by OzPeter ( 195038 )

        My guess is that most folks who are open carrying are doing so to promote / exercise their rights and are being responsible about it.

        Its not the "most" folks you have to worry about, concealed permit or not. The bell curve is a real thing as shown by idiots shooting up the wrong people all the time.

      • Re:Should be worried about gunfire (Score:4, Insightful)

        by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @05:22PM (#52537331)

        Cripes, it's an open carry state, with an open carry believers, for a candidate that encouraged his followers to beat up protestors.

        If some one doesn't take a shot at them, then they will take a shot at the protestors.

        I would offer odds, 2:1 that someone attending the convention or a protesting against the convention will end up trying to shoot someone

        I would be more worried about those unlawfully carrying than those who are legally open carrying or those who are legally carrying concealed (with a permit). My guess is that most folks who are open carrying are doing so to promote / exercise their rights and are being responsible about it. The last thing folks emphasizing their rights want to do is perform an action (shoot someone in this case) that has the effect of generating negative public opinion.

        A big subtext of open carry is they think they look really cool, authoritative, and intimidating with their big guns. On their own you can just kind of ignore them and let them do their thing, but they're walking into a scenario where there's a lot of people on both sides who are brimming for a fight and trying to show they won't back down.

        All you need is a few open carry folks who really want to show they're in charge, some protesters who want to call their bluff, and things escalating into violence. It might not happen, but there's an unusual number of bad factors at work.

        • All you need is a few open carry folks who really want to show they're in charge, some protesters who want to call their bluff, and things escalating into violence.

          I'm not advocating for violence in Cleveland, but if things really escalate, it could tie up a lot of loose ends for the rest of us.

          But it would be wrong.

    • Cripes, it's an open carry state, with an open carry believers, for a candidate that encouraged his followers to beat up protestors.

      If some one doesn't take a shot at them, then they will take a shot at the protestors.

      I would offer odds, 2:1 that someone attending the convention or a protesting against the convention will end up trying to shoot someone

      All it will take is one person firing one shot.

      Then everyone else with their guns will all start shooting and there will be a major bloodbath.

      Thats what makes 'Murca great.

  • You've already lost (Score:5, Funny)

    by Drunkulus ( 920976 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @04:07PM (#52536781)
    I wish you hackers the best of luck, but the GOP has already been totally defaced. Rumor has it that it was an inside job.

  • Is this democracy in progress? (Score:3)

    by magarity ( 164372 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @04:11PM (#52536801)

    hijacking the livestream and derailing the GOP's message

    Ah yes, the good old "if I disagree with them, I'll just shut them up" tactic. Works wonders in banana republics, let's do it in the US. The ends justify the means, the proles can't be trusted to judge for themselves, and all that. Everyone on either side needs to decide if this is really how they want their democracy to function before taking such actions.

    • You do realize that fear of The Other, induced by drama- (and eyeball-) seeking media, amped further by both sides to near-historic levels, is going to produce at least one whack-job on the scene with full homicidal intent, right?

      Ditto for the DNC convention, come to think of it.

      Kind of amazing how many people can be so easily manipulated by a mass media that largely doesn't even realize what kind of power they have. I find it interesting that they waste it on getting ratings (and thus advertiser dollars),

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      I don't condone such mischief, but if by chance something went wrong to foul up Trump's self-aggrandizing rants, I'd play a violin so small that Intel would beg to license its miniaturization technology.

      • ... so small that Intel would beg to license its miniaturization technology.

        Of all the days to not have mod points. I like that statement much like this one I saw years ago:

        ... sucks harder than a black hole with daddy issues.

  • If Trump's campaign fuels attacks, then why haven't they been owned as thoroughly as the DNC? Guccifer 2.0, whoever that might be, has leaked numerous DNCs docs at this point, and I believe more are in the pipeline. At the time of this writing, nothing comparable has happened to the RNC.

Slashdot Top Deals

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Close